James

Love you in your loving head, lovehead.

Well, I should be there. Hopefully I'll have the DLC, too.

I love awful GIFs. I also love how the ad looks like it's going to beat you up until you buy something. FUCK YOU, BUY OUR STUFF.

Am I alone in being really surprised that Killzone 2 didn't do this? The whole presentation seems quite gritty and "realistic" ("realism" in this instance being a style rather than actual closeness to reality); all of the presentation seems geared towards making you feel (buzz-word alert) immersed in this whole urban combat situation. Having disembodied observers for cutscenes seems at odds with all this, and makes it all seem a bit cheesy. Then again, the dialogue is pretty cheesy, too. I guess the trailers left me expecting something a bit different. Oh, it also bothers me a little that some of the interactions with the environment snap you into place for the animation. I found it to be actually quite noticeable in the demo (when you press the button in the lift, for example. I understand that making these animations match up properly is a challenge, but third person games seem to be managing it quite well these days, so I'd have thought a first person game could do a bit better, particularly when there's been so much emphasis on its visual presentation. I would have thought it'd be comparatively simple to slide the view over a few inches and degrees to make things line up properly isn't a huge deal. Then again, I have no experience of such endeavours, so perhaps there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for it.

Imagine Good video games

In the early days of his business, my boss did pretty much everything himself. This included editing the photos of the products he was selling. When I joined the company, we were still selling some items with rainbow gradient backgrounds. I simply don't accept that anyone above the age of eight doesn't realize how horrendously tacky that is. Yet I have seen otherwise. The contradiction might well destroy me.

Yeah, having four players is definitely more conducive to the optimum level of mayhem. Also, it offers more distraction from my appalling performance. We should do it again sometime. WITH OTHERS.

I don't think I've ever made a conscious effort to mislead anyone with my behaviour online, short of perhaps trying to sound more eloquent than I am in person. Communicating textually will inevitably have some influence on how you come across, and, perhaps more importantly, the absence of immediacy and proximity has quite a marked psychological effect. It's easier to act in certain ways; to be a bit colder, perhaps, or a bit bolder. I don't think I'm a particularly extreme example of this, but I suppose we all view ourselves through distorted lenses. What I can say, though, is that on first meeting in person a friend I'd known online for several years, I was told that I wasn't really any different at all. And neither was he. I think that as much of that was in our learning how to read each other online as any change in the nature in which we spoke to one another; what I mean is that if you know a person, you can get an idea of what the nuances and implications behind the words they're using are. I think, if anything, I probably come across as quite cold and possibly a little grumpy in some of my online communication, partially because of my refusal to use smilies and the like. I actually laugh quite a lot in reality, even if things aren't really very funny (you can thank my fear of awkwardness for that). It's an interesting subject, anyway. I'm sure a lot of the way the Internet is is due to the way it alters how people feel able to conduct themselves. Much of it isn't too attractive, I have to say. I just used a lot of words to say barely anything. I do that in reality, too.

I generally go to the cinema on Friday evenings, so tomorrow would probably be better for me.

So ... are we going to make some sort of plan, or do I have to be in a state of perpetual LittleBigReadiness, kind of like those elite military units who have to be within 30 minutes of action readiness at any time, or whatever?

I know next to nothing about graphic design, but it continually astounds me that an apparently large number of people still think that the atrocious clip-arty stuff they put in their adverts is at all appealing. You have my uninformed sympathy.

I didn't understand it either, but it sounded dramatic.

Beautoful? Games design?

[quote name=Wrestlevania;104199 Clearly, I am thick. [/quote] Sounds like you had the right idea, but failed to pull it off. So it's less a matter of being thick and more a matter of lacking skill. The solution is to suck less at games. TURN DOWN THE SUCK KNOB. Just to be clear: I'm only joking. I just like saying dumb stuff like that.

I went with Play.com's Killzone wallpaper, because I prefer my free gifts to be intangible and fleeting. Also, as nice as tin boxes look alone, I think I prefer most of my game boxes to be made of the same stuff. It's some sort of pathetic sense of satisfaction I get from them all lined up in a row. But Rainbow Six Vegas 2 is buggering that up on the PS3 front. If they were all made of tin, that'd be pretty cool. Blimey!

YEAH!

Probably.

A friend of mine wants me to get Empire because he likes easy competition. I'm terrible at normal dumb RTSes, so I can only imagine I'd be appalling at the Total War series. I've only really tried one battle, I think. I'd like to be good, but the problem is my lack of a mighty tactical intellect, or something. Perhaps I just need practice. Or an attention span.

Cool. Now I'm going to look up mod_security. Oh, an Apache thing. Yeah, I don't know too much about that sort of thing at all. Maybe one day I'll properly learn some stuff.

Yeah, that's kind of what I was guessing in the Fallout thread where this came up. It seems weird that not only are the contents of the post not properly sanitized, they're also executed. Then again, I don't know much beyond the basics of web development. Or programming in general.

Yeah, that was the most glaringly weird karma thing for me so far.

You'd hope that that would return something other than a server error. Besides, the following are all fine: /k /kil /killing I'm pretty sure it's a specific keyword.

Oh crap, I just posted my thoughts on the matter in the Fallout thread. Looks like vBulletin parses some commands preceded by a slash or something. The "bargain" bit is irrelevant. However, observe: /kill? /kill

Looks like /kill is interpreted as some sort of command. I was originally going to post an inquisitive "bargain/kill?" which was allowed, presumably because of the question mark. It's weird that the contents of posts is parsed like that. You'd think vBulletin would filter for that kind of stuff.