Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 4/11/10 08:12 PM, Toax-Eye wrote:

you also need to be :
a good listener

im not interested in her thoughts about the kitchen

a person who can talk about anything that she is intreseted in

I have a loud voice that can order her to cook. Its a given.

a person who stays loyal to her

As long as she makes excellent Italian food, im in.

a person who dosn't watch porn

Thats right, i fuck her too often to have time to watch porn.

a person who can cook

Its a little redundant to have 2 people cooking.

a person with high standarts of hygiëne

If you mean keeping her pussy clean, then yes, i can do that with efficiency

and mostly you have to be strong so no fat

Im a fucking beast, its a given.

also you need to say she looks pretty always and you need to say it very seriously

I can just say that the bitch looks fine. Which i will say often and with enthusiasm.

We must heed the wise words of the great Bo Burnham:

"Women are like squaring numbers. If she is under 13 just do in in your head"

At 4/11/10 07:57 PM, BoobyDaBunny wrote: Well, thats wrong. If you want America's standard of living to increase you just need more productive people... not dead ones.

Killing unproductive people means we can take the resources they consume and spread it around to the rest of productive society.

Definitely not me

At 4/11/10 06:56 PM, Archon68 wrote:

At 4/11/10 06:52 PM, zero-gravity wrote: Well, anyone want to volunteer?

As you are an enlightened thinker, and since morals or self worth play no role in decisions, you should volunteer yourself to better the American standard of living by .0000000001%.

Well you see sir, i come from a middle class family and have high academic test standards, putting me at the bottom of the killing pile. Think about it, England shipped out all of its homeless and criminals to Australia and they economically prospered for it. No longer are there any unclaimed lands so i guess we will just have to resort to killing them...... or sending them to Antarctica. xD

I made this topic to simply prove that what is economically beneficial is not always ethically right and vice-versa.

At 4/11/10 06:52 PM, HibiscusKazeneko wrote:

Too much to quote

Your conspiracy theories and skews of numbers are hilarious. The vaccine has saved people from the swine flu more than have died. 2 people dying is nothing, it can be justified by the many saved.

This is hilarious, i suppose you think the Kennedy assassination is involved also? haha

Malthusian economics. The more of you scummy unproductive bastards i can kill the better the living conditions of Americans as a whole are. There are no morals, only facts and statistics. Logically and statistically i am correct.

Well, anyone want to volunteer?

At 4/11/10 06:44 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote:

well then you wouldnt mind if i went to your house and dragged my ball sack across all your counters.

Not at all. In fact that would be quite kinky. I would give props for originality and determination.

At 4/11/10 06:15 PM, stick101 wrote:

FF characters are 12 year olds with over developed bodies. No one wants them on this list

You are on the internet, this statement contradicts itself.

Point besides, i disagree. Do you want them to have acne and armpit hair or something?

I noticed that there was no "Riku", "Yuffie", or any other FF character on this list

I am disappoint

The new #5

5. Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law.

At 4/11/10 05:44 PM, Running-Water wrote: What's the difference between 3 and 5? Anyways, I choose them.

whoops, 3 and 5 are repeats. just discard one of them.

for those of you who know the mechanics of this test, i please ask you to not give away the various rankings. I'm rather interested to see what the average rank of moral development is here on newgrounds. here is a question popularly posed. I will give you 12 answers and i ask you to honestly quote the answer you agree with most and if you want expound apon that.

A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

1. Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband.

2. Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right.

3. Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.

4. Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would probably languish over a jail cell more than his wife's death.

5. Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.

6. Heinz should not steal the medicine because he would consequently be put in prison, which would mean he is a bad person.

7. Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person

8. Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal

9. Heinz should steal the medicine because it is only worth $200, not how much the druggist wanted for it. Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.

10. Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he tried to do everything he could without breaking the law, you cannot blame him.

11. Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence

12. Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.

Assuming we are taking this at face value and not speculating bullshit like "the angel is satin" or "its a test from god to see if you are good" and shit like that , i would have to go with the option of killing them.

Why?

Simple. If they are innocent, they are going to heaven, so i just got myself and them to paradise faster than they normally would. If they weren't, well i just administered great justice. If life is nothing more than a passing dream of a greater reality, than i dont see the harm in simply waking these people up. There are no long term detriments that matter, so therefore its indifferent to me whether i kill them or not.

Not to drop in and put out the fire that started here, but let me cool your tongues with some facts. My friend read through the whole thing (thats right, the WHOLE THING) and said (he is credible at least by my standards) that this bill really doesn't change anything in the slightest. Its not universal healthcare, its not an overhaul of the healthcare already in place; Its just further regulation on the one that already exists and quite frankly Im disappointed.

If you are all talking about socialized healthcare in general, you have to take into account everything else in that country. You just cant throw together piecemeal policies and hope they all interact with each other well. You need just the right recipe of policies to get something to work, so to argue arbitrarily if socialized healthcare is better than privatized healthcare without setting any sort of ramifications like the cultural/economic/political climate of a country is just silly. Socialized healthcare works if the system in general is socialized. Thats why it works so well in the Scandinavian countries, but might not work in some incredibly capitalist country (which America is not, we are a piecemeal hybrid, which is why we have a lot of ideological conflicts). Conversely, if you were to start a free market system in the Scandinavian countries, i fear it wouldn't stand so well.

AKA stop arguing about what doesn't exist with bullshit generalities because in the end it just comes down to preference of ideologies rather than economic effectiveness.

Not much of an ambush if we all know its coming eh?

Let me list off some games i found enjoyable

Devil May cry 1,3, and 4: Very Linear mission based, set in a creepy castle like setting except for 4 which is more modern day but in the wilderness. Interesting control scheme. Compelling story.

Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2: Semi-linear but still gives gamer some breathing room. Cartoonish setting. Simple control scheme. Semi-compelling story.

Pretty much any Final Fantasy game except FFXI and FFXIII: Great games, nuff said.

Fallout 3, Oblivion: Insanely open. The former is futuristic, the later is medevil.

God of War 1,2,3: Linear, Hack and slash gameplay. Ok Story. Ancient greece setting

Jack 1,2,3: Good balance of linear and open. somewhat simplistic gameplay. Great story. Dystopia futuristic setting

Ratchet and clank any of them: Futuristic setting. Simplistic gameplay. Good balance of linear and open. Ok story.

At 4/10/10 10:52 PM, Ragnarokia wrote: I got to Orphan then just lost interest I will try finishing it soon maybe.

Orphan is fairly easy assuming you have everyone at max crystarium. You dont even need to worry about gear or weapons. Hell, you could go through the whole game with tier 1, non upgraded weapons and shitty beginning game gear.

At 4/10/10 09:42 PM, 36Holla wrote: What bothered me about 12 was that there wasn't a clear main character. Vaan couldn't be it because he was just along for the ride. Ashe or Balthier fit the role better imo. The license grid was also a pain because even though it's nice that you could make a character into any type of fighter you wanted, they still should have had some kind of guidance to show you what role each character would be best at. That and they were trying to make the main game on an MMO fighting system.

To me the last great FF was 9 with its mix of story, battle system, and equipment upgrade system. 10 was ok but too linear and bad voice acting, though you can forgive them because it was their first try at it.

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about 13? Oh well.

IX is my favorite final fantasy. Yea, square enix is having a problem of establishing a main character and/or plot. In FFXIII it was even worse, because non of the characters interacted with each other or contributed anything that meant anything important to the main plot except for maybe one or two comments by Lightning or Snow. On top of this, the game was anything bug linear. At least FFX and FFXII can be given props that FFX was linear and it was meant to be linear, FFXII was more open and it was meant to be open, but FFXIII just takes the opposite extremes and creates some sort of insane stagnation of gameplay that literally leaves me sitting there like "wtf did i just play?" For the first half of the game, it was like Nazi Germany linear where you were only given ONE choice at doing anything. Then you hit the second half of the game and its like a hippie paradise because 4 hours later i totally forgot there was a main story line i was supposed to be doing and instead had myself running around a seemingly insanely large map doing nothing. It was like taking a giant 12 ft long anti-climatic sword to the gut of the game.

I think Basch or Ashe were the best lead characters of FFXII, Balthier... well... i dont even know what he was doing there. They had him loosely connected to the main plot at the beginning but by the end of the game i forgot why he is even still there.

At 4/10/10 09:19 PM, 36Holla wrote: It's hard to rank it in its mediocrity. Is it better or worse than 12 for instance which to me was the epitome of mediocre. The visuals and battle system are great, but the bad story telling and poorly thought out concept really take it down among one of the least enjoyable FF games I've played, and I still haven't finished it (and I at least have to do that) I really hope "Versus" makes up for it.

12 could have been one of the greatest RPGs of all time but got slaughtered because of the early release of the Xbox 360 which caused Square Enix to release FFXII early as well, but i digress. I actually hope they adopt the concept they were aiming for in FFXII and use the strengths of next gen consoles to really build apon it. If you took the gameplay of FFXIII, the sphere grid and gear system of FFX, and pretty much everything else from FFXII (i thought the storyline and map were phenomenal), you would have yourself an amazing game.

At 4/10/10 09:00 PM, CompleteDouche wrote: Yeah, I felt the same way.
I felt that Square Enix pushed too far for the graphics push than anything.
I know it does take a long time especially now, to make a Huge RPG with HD graphics.
Even so, FFX graphics are good enough for me, even though they came out in 01.
I think they will need to just stop for the Graphics push and keep the game at a respectable look.

Agreed, and i felt they could have done more with the visuals. For example, look at Lightnings special attack "Army of One". If they could do that with the battle system and graphics with that one attack, think of how they could have expanded and built apon that, but didn't.

Its fucking FFXII all over again.

We all know that when Scotland breaks free from the UK that since the Scottish National party and the Scottish liberals would be pulling out of the UK government that it would leave the UK government incredibly conservative causing all of the northern British pissed off causing huge civil unrest and political clash in the country, much like what we are seeing in the US at the moment. As for the UK elections? I hope the liberal party, for the sake of the political climate of the UK when this does happen.

Tl;dr:

It was an average game that i was not impressed with and felt it didn't live up to the standards ive come to hold for Final Fantasy games.

Discuss

Yea...... so i got FFXIII a few days ago, beat it and got most of the unlockables, missions, etc. and well, i cant honestly say Im too impressed.

The first and foremost thing that must be adressed when assessing this game is an obvious objective that Square Enix was shooting for when they created this game: A fusion between FFX and FFXII. Almost every aspect of this game is some fusion between FFX and FFXII from the plotline to the gameplay.

The Pros:

1. The battle style was more interactive than it has been in the past. Characters moving around the field in a semi-turn-by-turn system base. Made battles and gameplay more interesting

2. Strategy. Lets face it, much of the final fantasy gameply in the past included mashing "x" (playstation) and watching your enemies and characters move back and forth across the screen until the enemy was dead. FFXII was even worse in the fact that you could go through the whole game moving your analog stick and accomplish the same thing. Buffs were rather useless and debilitations were laughable. Eventually you found yourself in a familiar routine that allowed you to progress through the game with not a care in the world. The paradigm system TOTALLY changed that, allowing there to be a considerable amount of strategy to be introduced into battle. Now one had to switch back and forth between configurations depending on the flow of the battle. Debilitations and buffs and EXTREMELY helpful.

The Cons:

1. Storyline was flat and characters were rather melodramatic. When ive played Final Fantasy games in the past, i usually relish the incredible storyline that goes with it (save FFX, the ending was just weird as hell, but good non-the-less). The storyline this time was well, rather disappointing. Parts of it were hard to follow and it just wasn't well crafted. Take FFX for example: You had multiple plots and subplots that intertwined in various instances and there were twists and turns that affected those plot lines in a way that left the gamer more interested in the game. That didn't happen this time. This time, Square Enix laid the whole plot down at the beginning of the game and told the player to finish it. There was no plot development. It was if though i went to work and my boss told me to file papers, i already know how it ends and i already know what im going to do. Thats how i felt with this game. I take that back, thats how the last half of the game was. The first half was very thrilling and kept me hooked. But once you hit chapter 11, it got really dull, really fast. On top of this you had characters who Square Enix tried to make memorable but failed miserably. They were melodramatic and i swear to god every cutscene was them talking about their feelings: Square Enix, Im a gamer, not a hippie. What made it worse was that not only did you have the melodramatic characters possibly fitting well into the story at the beginning when everything was gun ho, but then when the story abruptly stopped at chapter 11, and the characters continued to be melodramatic, that just pissed me off more than anything. Finally, the ending sucked, face it, it did.

2. The gameplay (other than battle system) was dull. The map was rather limiting as a player couldn't retrace his steps to where he had been in earlier chapters, but on top of this the map the player is given at chapter 11 is in of itself rather limited in comparison to the maps of other Final Fantasies. On top of this, there were virtually no side quests except for cieth stone missions which were just knock offs of the hunts of FFXII. The leveling system was a knockoff of the sphere grid from FFX but failed epically as it restricted the freedom of the player to a huge degree. The beauty of the sphere grid of FFX was that the player was allowed to develop their character however they wanted in their own unique fashion, but that limited in FFXIII. The gear system was rather simplistic and dull. Unlike other FF games where i would have to go on rather lengthy, interesting, self-invented sidequests to get weapons/gear or to the materials for that gear, now i just take anything i can get and use it to upgrade gear which almost all of it is available at the shops. I mean at least there was less grinding, but there was less gameplay in general as well. Even the cieth stone missions were dull and the hardest boss in the game was less difficult than some enemies (mission 64 mark in comparison to the shaolong gui). Finally, the game stopped once you beat it. I beat the game, and i just felt as if though there was really nothing else i could do in the game. I could go complete the cieth stone missions but thats just more mindless battling and grinding.

Solid game overall, but nothing impressive: 3.5/5

Better than last year: Poogrounds

Year before that was good with Newgrounds as communist china

The best will always be everyone was an admin or lvl 30

Epic Fail

At 3/30/10 01:48 AM, EvilerBowser1001 wrote: This thread combines two things that make General users fucktarded: politics and anime.

This thread's gonna be a perfect shitstorm.

Senator's an idiot, and most people here are idiots.

Except there hasn't been a shitstorm, good try though. Lets just oppress anybodies right to speech if we don't agree with what they say? Oh and good job being condescending, really helps the credibility you know. People make jokes like this all the time, who gives a flying fuck if the guy is a senator.

So I suppose this man has no freedom of speech rights to make a joke that very well can and probably has been made by individuals like you and me? HMMMMMMMMMM?

At 3/30/10 01:23 AM, EvilerBowser1001 wrote: White people still bought slaves, you ignorant fuck.

That's like saying that white people aren't responsible for drugs.
Who the fuck you think pays for this shit?

Except why not blame the Columbians who grow the crack in the first........ oh wait.... we already do that.

Just ignore black history month, you stupid racist teenage dicksmoker.

I will, instead i will dedicate that month to the Armenians who had almost their ENTIRE RACE WIPED OUT by the fucking Ottoman empire. I believe it would be for a better cause.

I know during the merry month of February where we celebrate the history, or lack there of, of black people, somebody always brings up the issue of slavery somewhere along the line. Its like Godwin's law. So here I am to set the record straight about slavery for next year as future reference.

THE WHITES DIDN'T GO OUT AND CAPTURE SOVEREIGN PEOPLE AND MAKE THEM SLAVES

That statement is factually correct. In fact, the African warlords sold slaves to the Europeaners who brought them back to the Americas or Europe. So before you go out of your way to punch a white guy in the face to blame him for slavery, punch a black man instead.