Superbus

Put it this way: I am aware enough to base my purchasing decisions to some degree on weather or not I like a developer. Notice I do not own Fez, or anything from the Itagaki Team Ninja years.

The last thing you ever want to do is sit around, ten years after the fact, saying "what if". Take it, and then run towards it. Do not look back. Live on your instincts, and you won't regret what happens.

MOST games are designed with the mindset of having to take the mooks out first, as they either buff or heal the main boss and can cause a lot of damage by themselves. That's the classic mindset, anyway; things change depending on circumstances. Also, fuck Nocturne.

I have a Livestream in archive that proves I definitely cannot beat that score. I sounded like the Angry Gamer Nerd playing this thing. Loved every minute.

Let's consider our source here. Marcus Beer is to video game journalism what Hip Hop Gamer is to games journalism; they're not journalists, they're professional dung throwers with an audience that doesn't mind getting covered in poop. With that said, I find it hard to sympathize with Phil. He brings his problems onto himself. Granted, most gamers are whiny, entitled brats, but I'd be more disturbed if this was, say, Jonathan Blow.

Ultimately, it's not about what the fastest game is, it's about how fast you *feel* you're going. The number on the speedometer can say whatever it wants; it can say you're going Tittyfuck KP/h for all you care. You're still looking at a two dimensional image that is trying to inadequately simulate the illusion of speed. In that sense, yeah, something something F-Zero. EDIT: Fucking A, Zera. Great minds and all that.

I'll go one step further: it's about the chilling effect of having to call another human being and put in a stated request to allow pornography into their house. "You want to watch porn? Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with you?

And yet earlier in your original post, you note that they seem to be whittling away their time until they die. Dangerous combination.Here's the problem: any parent worth their salt - I am unsure if your parents are or not, and won't learn enough in a thread to determine that - want their children to be better than they are. If you and your sister are "all they have to live for", then you *HAVE* to get out of that environment. That includes getting a job - a mundane one, if necessary, whatever gives you a foothold - and not making any *permanent* mistakes, such as a criminal record or a child. If all they have to live for is your COMPANY... well, they've made it this far; if you're out of high school, they're either 60 or past that, so even if it's from a phone or something along those lines, you simply must get away from that environment, or you *will* be trapped. It sounds like you feel trapped, but I assure you of this, with no indignation: you're making a lot of excuses for yourself, and setting yourself up for failure before you even get started. You can try to explain the whos and whys all you want, and frankly, they have no affect on my life, much like my problems don't affect yours. The ultimate question you have to ask yourself is this: how much do you want to improve your life? How much do you want to break out of this cycle of depression that you and your sister are in at the moment? The answer to that question will guide your life. Despite being American by way of Canada, I have some base knowledge of what life is like in NSW because I have friends in that area, friends I met in this fandom almost a decade ago. I get it. It's depressing. But I didn't really learn how to live in my area until I left and came back. I dread to think of what my life would be like if I stayed here the entire time; the thought of it is chilling. Go and get some perspective, and don't let your roots become anchors. You simply don't have a choice in this matter if you want to live happily.

So what defines a "slut"? Is it someone who has a lot of sex (as a woman; obviously, men don't count here, right?), or is it just someone who dresses in a provocative manner? Also, what about this makes it "bad"? If a so-called "slut" is using protection and enjoying herself like a guy is in a similar scenario, is it truly bad? What makes it bad, other than societal constructs based around religion and fear of biology?

If you're looking at statistics that show just that - that highly educated people, especially women, are having children at a lower rate than less educated people - then yes. That's exactly what statistics - like, numbers - are saying, This has been a trend for decades. The potential reasons for this are varied - be it because of better sex education leading to lower unintentional pregnancies, or because of career advancement being a priority for women in their 20s, or due to budgeting concerns by people who can actually balance a budget - but the stats are indisputable. The science has so far shown biases - gay people are more likely to be left-handed, etc. - but no scientific answer - like a gay gene - but that's still a better record than people trying to prove that homosexuality has nothing to do with genetics or biology. And by scientific, I don't mean World Nut Daily.

There's a lot of ad-hominem here but no basis in fact. First off, the birth rate in developed countries is already dropping. Higher emphasis on education, higher emphasis on women being breadwinners, lower emphasis on being fruitful just for the sake of Jesus Says So, etc. If that's your concern, your enemy isn't gay marriage, it's a combination of progressive policies, better education, and liberal interpretations of societal norms. Secondly, you talk as if homosexuality - or bisexuality - is a choice. As if people wake up and go "hey, you know what? I think I want to suck a dick today!" Picture having sex with another person of your gender. Does that make you physically ill? That's how gay people think when they think of having heterosexual intercourse; i know a few who had it when they were closeted and got legitimately sick afterwards.It's not a choice, it's biological. But without reading thirteen pages of the same old debate, I'm sure others have broached that. Finally, there are no statistics that I know of - and you reference none - stating that male partners of gay relationships are more promiscuous than lesbians. It seems like you're running off of third-hand anecdotal (read: stereotypical) evidence here, which honestly, seems to be your entire problem. You simply don't know what you're talking about, and I say that with no malice.

In cases like this, I figure I can come in and give my sage, saintly (read: I'm fucking old) experience, and talk about my experiences over X amount of years. But then I realize that I don't want to sound like a putz who sits on his porch and gives out Werthers' Originals. Long story short: it's not as bad as you think, and everyone will eventually figure this shit out.

What I meant was, the graphics are good to the point where 1) they seem antiquated and are no longer impressive, and 2) people can attack the game figuring that the graphics blinded everyone to what they believe is a substandard game.

The logic is that by altering the recording automatically like that, it's violating the company's copyright, which can state that the program must be complete. If a company can mandate that, they can mandate that you can't, for example, change the bits of a program, which is what Galoob v. Nintendo addressed. However, Shiek linked the example I was trying to use, I just couldn't remember the exact court case.

Anyone who lives around southern CT/Eastern NY state should look at a company called Retro Games Plus, in Westport CT.

I'll raise you a law that likely overruled Galoob v. Nintendo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Entertainment_and_Copyright_Act My question is in reference to both, actually. Right now, if I want to download one of my purchased games on my XBox 360 - for the sake of argument, we'll say Minecraft 360 - I have to download it from XBox Live Arcade. That will be rendered moot on the One; 360 games aren't playable. So eventually, the 360 is going to slide into greater irrelevance just due to the passing of time. However, my other consoles have been "irrelevant" for a long time, and yet I can still play every game I want on them. Eventually, it will become inconvenient or expensive to run the servers that allow us to download 360 content from the Live Arcade/Indie Games stores. Will Microsoft shut them down, making it so that if I lose my data, I lose my games, permanently, forever?

This feeling has kind of dissipated due to age, time and other Metroidvania games coming after the fact, but there was a sense of discovery with this game that sticks with me to this day. Discovering a corner of the mansion that you can't get past, then beating a boss to get an ability, and going back to discover even more. It's still as fun sixteen years later.

1) Chrono Trigger. Arguably the greatest RPG of all time. 2) Super Metroid. Still the best fusion of adventure gaming, action gaming and storytelling, and it's twenty bloody years old. 3) Donkey Kong Country. People hit on this game as being overrated all the time, but I think this is just hatred for the graphics. 4) Final Fantasy VI. Still an epic. 5) The Legend of Zelda; A Link to the Past. The best 2D Zelda game ever, behind only Ocarina of Time.

I just want to state that I basically tore through Madoka Magica in two days; impressive considering the fact that I don't really have that level of free time. It might be the best bit of anime storytelling I've ever seen.

Technically, it's right and wrong. It's technically wrong because the First Sale Doctrine in the United States gives resellable rights to any product that is purchased; it's why the car industry can't stop you from listing your car on Craigslist. However, those rights are forfeited with digital games, which are really nothing more than code. When you acquiesce to their terms, you acquiesce to the license, and all of the bugbears - the lack of rights to resell, the lack of rights in some cases to litigate on a class-action level, and the right for the company in question to revoke the license at any time for any reason - that come with it. Here's my question: Live Arcade and Indie games, basically every single 360 game out there now that is purchased digitally, won't be able to be played on the One. Here's my question: at what point does Microsoft cut off access to that store, leaving all of those customers in the lurch?

But it's not a gaming console. It's an entertainment console that can play video games. There's a huge difference there, and really, Microsoft has been setting themselves up for that with their 360 updates for some time, deemphasizing Arcade and Indie games on the dashboard in favour of more advertisements, bringing in more entertainment options (ESPN3, Netflix, MLBAB, etc.), and generally relying on a few heavy hitting AAAs and buying their way to exclusivity in regards to those (see: CoD map packs, FIFA Ultimate Team). That's why they don't let anyone self-publish; they want to make sure everything on their system is a heavy hitter with CoD or Halo like potential. In terms of the Wii U: Don't rule this system out yet. They're becoming a lot more indie friendly because the AAAs are bailing ship, and the best Nintendo franchises are still coming. Don't listen to Michael Pachter, basically. And I guarantee they will have a price cut before autumn.

The $900 figure is pulled completely out of thin air. It's bullshit. Nothing's been discussed price-wise, and the somewhat credible rumours regarding it have it as being a two-tiered plan: X for a base system (like $500) or another set price, but two years of XBox Live subscriptions necessary after that fact. As for the XBox reveal, I already wrote what I have to say in a 1,000 word article (http://www.gamingbus.com/2013/05/21/xbox-one-and-marginalizing-the-gamer/), so I won't repeat myself here. But basically, the XBox One isn't for us, the gamers. Microsoft isn't aiming at us, they're aiming at our families, who will be blinded by all the cool things the system can do, while figuring we'll put our pride in our hands once we get a few games that we can't get anywhere else. Sports gamers in particular will be the first ones to fall.

1) Suikoden II. This isn't just the greatest PlayStation game of all time, it might be the greatest RPG of all time. It's on the shortlist. 2) Gran Turismo II. Even without proper crash physics (which they never did get right...), GTII was so far ahead of its time it's sickening. Still highly playable today. 3) Metal Gear Solid. Younger gamers probably can't understand just how much of a *massive* step up this was in interactive storytelling. We're talking night and day. 4) Grandia. I love playing Grandia today not just because of what it was (great battle system, great characters) but what it's not. There's no pretension, and no unnecessary angst. Just a fun story about kids going on adventures and coming of age. 5) Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. And to think this almost didn't get released because it wasn't in 3D. This list doesn't even go into the amazing JRPGs that aren't Suikoden. Jesus, when the best Final Fantasy (IX) might be the fifth or sixth best JRPG on the system, you've got an amazing system for that medium. And don't forget FF Tactics, though the PSP version is preferable. EDIT: HEY WHERE THE HELL DID MY AVATAR GO D:

There are people who dislike SOTN and Super Castlevania IV? I've always been partial to the older games, for obvious reasons (read: I'm fucking OLD), but Dracula's Curse is something else for me. Rondo of Blood is also outstanding; I was emulating it in Magic Engine long before the PSP version came out (which is, in itself, a must-own). The Metroidvania games are all pretty similar in how they come together, but Circle of the Moon is my favourite of that bunch; I'm shocked that people dislike that game. For some reason, I hated Portrait of Ruin. The less said about the 3D games, the better.