James

I don't know, it was funnier this way. I remember playing Quake 3 Arena on ... I guess it must have been the Dreamcast (it was some console, anyway) at a friend's house. Split-screen capture the flag didn't work because two people isn't really a team. Unless you're doing something tailored for it, I guess, like that mode in Gears 2 that I haven't played because I haven't played any of the competitive multiplayer.

I quite like deathmatch. Most of the other modes I like are the ones where you're being given PvE style co-op missions and they don't vary enough to keep them fresh, sadly. For example, I really like the one where you have to rescue the mafia boss from the airport, but it's not too tough to beat and it never changes (unless you decide to take some other route or something). The team mission stuff in TLAD seemed like it might be good at first, and then it turned out to be not so much. I've still not tried Chopper vs Chopper.

It depends what you mean by "genius". It looks a little insulting and idiotic, but that doesn't mean it can't be fun.

I find that the only way to get my 360 to work with my two-router (well, I guess one is technically acting as a switch or something) setup is to give it a static IP at the router end but set it to dynamic IP at the 360 end. This generally stops working after a while (as in after one or two connected sessions), which can be remedied by restarting my secondary router. Presumably the 360 is trying to pick an IP other than the one which has been assigned to it. I don't know why it doesn't work when I just tell it what IP it should be using. I think I managed to get it to a point where I didn't need to do that, but somehow I lost all my settings (I forget what exactly happened) and now I can't be bothered to fiddle about working out what exactly it was that I did. I'm pretty sure it was. You'd lost a fair chunk of health when the cop car caught up with you guys, and I was lucky enough to lock on to you rather than Wrestle when I realized you had a getaway vehicle (otherwise I would have jumped off after you). I was so glad I got you, though. It had been the most epic on-foot chase ever. Are you sure that was me? I don't remember being in any huge fucking buses. I would like to add to toblix's list the Cops & Crooks round in which I was the boss. The cops had crashed just as they reached us, and managed to completely fail in catching up with our surprisingly fast car. We reached the getaway vehicle, which was a helicopter. I was tempted to stand around and taunt the opposition, but the rest of my team (ysbreaker and Grippage, if I remember correctly) seemed eager to go. So we took off, and started making our way across the water. Suddenly, I see ysbreaker plummet. "He must have decided that his services are no longer required, and decided to sacrifice his life to comedy," I thought. "Good show." Then I saw Grippage follow him. Since I was not piloting, this was a rather less expected occurrence. The helicopter started to spin out of control, so I leapt safely into the water. At this stage, I was informed that I had to return to the getaway vehicle in order to win the round. Shortly thereafter, the getaway vehicle sunk, and we lost. He had heroically snatched defeat from the jaws of resounding victory. It was hilarious, even if I was a tiny bit miffed that I'd been so betrayed by my incompetent lackeys. PRO TIP: Getaway helicopters need pilots

I completely forgot on Sunday until it was too late. The thing that annoys me the most about the AI is how it insists on getting right up to you before doing anything about special infected. On many occasions I've been caught by a hunter with my lone human team-mate has been otherwise engaged, and the AI characters, both of whom have a clear line of sight, completely neglect to shoot him off me, instead electing to saunter over at their leisure, completely failing to reach me before a whole mob of zombies have gathered to join in, who they handle with gentle nudges. Well, that's how it seems, anyway.

MAYbe.

My first thought was that it was just the idiotic language of trailers that was making it seem more ridiculous than it was, but then it turned out it really was that stupid after all. I'll probably end up seeing it anyway, though. Will there be any Kabbalah? Or did he leave that with his ex-wife?

So, I tried the demo. Movement was a bit fiddly at times (particularly when the guy decided he'd rather grab onto a ledge than a ladder), and aiming wasn't as precise as I'd have liked (I expected it to be imprecise, too . . . actually, I suppose you can be precise, but it's kind of tricky when what you're shooting is a projectile larger than your hand and the reticule is a big circle without a dot in the middle). Other than that, it seems pretty good to me. I think I'm more into wandering the city than fighting, though.

Isn't this game meant to be some kind of huge step forward in interactive storytelling or something? If so, why is the content like something from a dumb action-thriller film? I don't have any particular vendetta against dumb action-thrillers, but after all the fuss about how believable the characters were meant to be and how it would convey real emotion, I'd expect it to tell a story where that sort of thing actually matters. It's also pretty weird that for all the focus they've put on the characters and lack of uncanny valley, the faces are significantly less impressive than those in numerous other games. On the plus side, I do quite like what they've done with the quick time events (which has also been in previous trailers). Obviously whether such a thing should be used is a matter of contention, but if you are going to have the player stare at a portion of the screen in anticipation of a button prompt, it's much better to have it be the focus of the action, rather than a portion of the screen which is deliberately avoided by the action. It rewards the player for paying attention to the content of the cutscene rather than deliberately ignoring it. There are some interesting ideas in the game. There's a certain appeal to not having any game over circumstances (they are doing that, right?), leaving it a near-continuous experience. However, considering that a large portion of the thing is made up of sequences of branching cutscenes, the transitions seem rather poor. The guy barely seems to be struck before he's already waking from his unconsciousness; later, as he's escaping, one moment you see his hands reaching out, then suddenly he's standing on the car. I don't know, I may be being overly picky. I don't even know how near the game is to completion. Those are just my thoughts on that footage.

Sympathies all round. Sorry, I don't have a more eloquent or expressive way of putting it.

DAY

Pre-ordered; excited.

I've often wondered why the people marketing the film Seven stopped at one numeral: (Excuse the sub-optimal typeface choice -- I'm at work.) It may be made up, but it's not new: a friend of took to using "touché ... douché" a few years back, because we thought it was very funny, because we are dumb.

I found your citations most illuminating, Toblix. That's pretty good in a nerve-racking kind of way. It made me keep thinking people had died, though. It'd be good if it indicated when an enemy was close without giving the actual location. Unfortunately the game occasionally has a habit of dropping you too far from the action regardless of the blip setting. I guess it's easier to find your way back when they're set to "all", but it's still a matter of having to wander the streets for rather too long. I saw that. It was pretty hilarious. Wasn't your truck on its side at the time, too? If only I hadn't been on the wrong side of it, I'd have captured the culprit. It's so satisfying when it pays off, which is barely ever. 2gMdWzJwh44

I think you might have. We actually teamed up on at least a couple of occasions (didn't you knock someone down before I finished them off?), now that I think about it. Does this mean we're getting married soon? Or are we just a crime-fighting duo, except what we're fighting isn't crime? And also I fight you? Yeah, Grand Thumb Auto is pretty great.

I was disappointed that I didn't get a chance to pull off my pinning manoeuvre (though I came close a couple of times), but there was a sufficient degree of harassment to make it all worthwhile.

It certainly looks cool, but I'm inclined with my colleague who, on seeing the trailer, commented that he prefers giant pseudo-mechanical beasts over plain old huge animals. I really liked the mysterious air of distance and ancientness the colossi had about them. I guess you get some of that from the environment, but attaching it to some a living (or apparently living) thing gave it a kind of mournful quality that was really appealing; perhaps it was that they are a more direct connection to a dead civilization than mere architecture can provide or something. That said, they don't seem like the kind of developer to go for straight sequels, and I never expected SoC2. Also, it may not be real AND SO ON. If it is, I'm sure it'll be awesome in its own way and that way will be entirely sufficient.

I wouldn't actually mind. I'm just saying that it never ever happens.

I AM POSTING WHILE PLAYING I AM SO AWESOME

Not amusing or a favourite, but for the latter quarter of HL2E2 the game kept reminding me how to sprint. It made me really paranoid that something was about to start chasing me.

a) I don't mean to be a dick about this I might not actually be correct c) Whether or not this matters is completely up to you d) I'm only even saying this as a weak attempt at imparting a tiny bit of knowledge Bearing all of the above in mind, shouldn't the title read "I hate Games for Windows Live and consequently Microsoft"? As I understand it, "subsequently" refers to a thing being subsequent to another (following it in sequence), whereas "consequently" refers to a thing being a consequence of another (being caused by it). Whilst it may actually be true that your hatred for Microsoft emerged after your hatred for Games for Windows Live, I think it's more pertinent that it happened because of it. Again, I'm not trying to call you out or anything; I'm just hoping you're of the "we learn from our mistakes" school of thought. Not that this is much of a mistake at all. OH I DON'T KNOW, I JUST HAD TO SAY IT. I'M SORRY.

Yeah, go ahead and add me, too. I won't interact with you at all outside of the GTA games, which I never initiate anyway, but it'll make us both feel more popular. (That's not sarcastic, by the way. I just work on the assumption that everyone else is busy unless they specifically contact me.)

Sorry to quote an old post (I only just read it, see?), but was nobody else bothered by how fascinated the costume designer and cameraman seemed to be with Dakota Fanning's thighs? My friends and I all thought it was uncomfortably pervy at times, so unless we all have some pretty worrying problems, there's something up with that film. I mean, not to go all morally indignant and "ban this filth" or anything -- I'm not generally that puritanical about that sort of thing -- I just found it a rather depressing example of how pretty much anyone, especially anyone female, is prone to being sexualized by the media and our culture. On the other hand, that one screaming guy was hilarious. And the film itself was pretty daft but in an entertaining way.

I might not be able to make it this week either, depending on whether I decide I value friends I've had since school over some morons I kind of know over the Internet. So it's pretty much 50/50. Hey, it wasn't until yesterday that I realized this week's outcome was pretty much the opposite of last week's.