clush's forum posts

#1 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

@drzing said:

Without some RNG the game would become as boring as chess.

Lol, just throw that in there like it's an established simile...

I like your point, though. Dealing with the RNG should be considered a skill in and of itself.

#2 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

where the hell did you even find this thread? more than 4 years since the last comment, and just carry on the conversation like nothing happened... that's just weird.

#4 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

@horseman6: risking 3 points to potentially score 7 isn't the same as risking the game to potentially get the exact same result you could if you hadn't risked it. Nevermind there being an entire half left to play after that. Also I think literally nobody would've questioned a call to let Lynch do his thing, even if that wouldn't have worked either.

People act like everything that has 2 possible outcomes is therefore a 50/50 shot, something either works or doesn't. That's not how it works.

#5 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

@nightriff: I disagree. If running it doesn't work you can always try a pass on 4th down. And if they really can't get a run in, the story would be how Lynch couldn't deliver when it mattered. Chances are he could have, though.

#6 Edited by clush (452 posts) -

@nightriff said:

The final Seahawks play was a fine call. It is one of those calls that if it succeeds, no one is going to talk about it being a "bad call" still, rather they would be praising them for tricking the pats into thinking a run is coming but pass instead. That play was way more of a great defensive effort from one player than the Seahawks shitting the bed. Move on media.

Nah man, it really wasn't. We were talking about how unnecessarily risky a passing play would be before it happened. It was just a bad call, especially on first second down (I thought it was first... that makes it slightly less bad). The thing is the Seahawks put the Patriots in a position where a great defensive effort like that would all but end the game, and there was zero need for that.

#7 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

Wow. Just wow. How does a play like that even happen? Take a risk on 4th down: sure. On first? Just... Wow.

Good job Patriots for making them pay for it, though. Butler must be the happiest kid on earth right now.

#8 Edited by clush (452 posts) -

@onemanarmyy: yeah there were actual games first. It's the 'old redcat' they talk about here

#9 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

Also since i'm dutch, i played a ton of games by the dutch dev Davilex.

Amsterdoom and A2 racer were probably the highlights , but i also had numorous educational 'red cat' games.

Ah yes, A2 Racer... I played way too much of that game for how bad it was. I think the original RedCat wasn't particularly educational, just a decent platformer. I remember being extremely bummed out by the educational nature of the games that came after that. "Hey, RedCat! I kinda liked that ga... oh wait what's this. Oh no. No no no no no no."

#10 Posted by clush (452 posts) -

Codename: Outbreak

This came out in 2000, so I was 15 years old. I loved shooters, and had never played a game that I thought was bad. Of course I played some bad games, but up until that point I thought they were either simply not my cup of tea or I didn't totally understand them (probably due to the language barrier... by 15, that quickly stopped being an issue). I thought there was no such thing as poorly made games... this changed that. OH MY LORD WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT. The game even, quite literally, looked like shit. It wasn't particularly buggy or broken, just bland and boring as hell. Especially compared to its peers back in the day. I think this is the only game I ever returned to the shop.