Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I always try to play the game as the character would. In Deus Ex I am stealthy and rarely, if ever kill, while on the other hand in Space Marine, I run in with a Bolt Pistol and Power Axe. Online on CoD or Battlefield I tend to go for the powerful SMG's, like the UMP.45. And RPG's, I am normally a stealthy archer, or an axe wielding meathead, depending on my mood.

Machinima usually bores me. Yogscast is much more funny and entertaining.

At 9/16/11 06:15 PM, Boss wrote:

At 9/16/11 06:10 PM, Teddyriffic wrote: Why would you use a bus ? Homeless people live there !

they have a very flourished and extravagant culture you fuck!!!

Someone's got sand in their vagina.

Tomorrow night she'll tell you she's a transexual.

Yeah, I bought it yesterday and it's awesome. Much better than I thought it would be. The multiplayer is amazing, and all the Chapter's together look pretty cool.

Terrible idea. Castle Crashers is great as it is. Making an MMORPG would ruin it.

Does anyone else have this game, and what do you think of it?

I fucking hate things like this. Makes the write sound like a pompous asshole.

Why would you post this...it's pretty obvious what everyone would say.

The animals killed were bred for that purpose. We shouldn't feel bad.

I don't mind some people watching with me. Just don't like people who talk through every second of the fucking movie asking what's going on.

I like the fries.

Mountain Dew looks like acid/green piss.

I woke up in a Japanese families wreck room, and they would not stop screaming.

Obviously, but like it's never mentioned, with the release of the 3DS.

Does anyone actually still play on the DSi or DS Lite? I only ever play Mario and Pokemon.

That I am, my man, that I am.

I liked the battle with all the cities in The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. That was pretty badass.

I think there is a lot you can do with the LOTR world. An open world RPG would be cool, before or after Sauron. Or before Sauron came to Mordor and crafted the rings. A game featuring the Númenóreans or Dunedain would be pretty badass as well.

I would make a game where the campaign sucks and everything's about the multiplayer. Then after less than a year I would shut the server down. Remind you of anyone?

I like my women like I like my wine, 12 years old and locked in the cellar.

Yeah. I mean, it's one thing shutting down the servers, but another to not tell the companies that sell there games, as I was told that LOTR Conquest was multiplayer enabled.

I see what you mean. I found out that LOTR Conquest peaked at 0.3% of EA games online or something. Just find it a bit silly really, as the multiplayer was quite good for it.

Well I picked up LOTR Conquest and then found out that the server had been shut down. True, I should have checked, but I still payed for half a game. Just think it's a bit stupid, they could have kept only a few up.

Does anyone else dislike the fact that EA shut down servers for games?

At 8/2/11 06:03 AM, FairSquare wrote: So, this is like.. the General forum inside the General forum?

INCEPTION.

At 8/1/11 07:39 PM, IAmNotDead wrote:

At 8/1/11 07:36 PM, UnderTheAnchor wrote: I've got both my ears to 10mm...

But if you wanna take 'em out your just going to be left with two massive holes in your ears

Nope, they shrink down. If you go past 12-14mm it's permanent, that's why I only went to 10mm.

I've got both my ears to 10mm...

At 8/1/11 02:36 PM, Makeshift wrote:

At 8/1/11 02:33 PM, UnderTheAnchor wrote: Silly me, I forgot it's completely realistic that a country would Tactical Nuke an area based on 25 kill by it's squad, and killing all their own men in the process.

Read my post where I quoted you. I post good shit sometimes. When I don't get quoted on the good shit I post, I get aaangry.

But how is that a good thing? It may be a good thing because you like realism in the games you play, but it's not a point to be used that isn't based on opinion. You can dislike realism. If you really want to say one is better than the other you need a point which is impossible to find that no one can disagree with.

I do agree that it is my opinion, as I much prefer realism in games. I do also realise though that CoD appeals to a huge amount of people, way more than Battlefield. People can think what they like, I'm just gigving my opinion. (:

At 8/1/11 02:21 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 8/1/11 02:15 PM, UnderTheAnchor wrote: Can you get a satisfying Demolish kill by firing a shell from a tank into a building on CoD? Didn't think so.

Can you get a super-satisfying Tactical Nuke and blow the whole fucking map to smithereens in mere seconds in Battlefield? Didn't think so.

Silly me, I forgot it's completely realistic that a country would Tactical Nuke an area based on 25 kill by it's squad, and killing all their own men in the process.