Sure, I've noticed plenty of people cheating. I've also made thousands of dollars helping people cheat. Needless to say, I would never report anyone.
Icemael's forum posts
For RE6, diving into prone usually didn't serve much practical purpose besides to make you look cool
You regenerate stamina much faster when lying down, which is very useful considering any decent play will involve a lot of stamina-consuming moves like tackles, kicks, quick-shots etc.
I feel like most of the complaints about RE6's mechanics come from people who have no understanding whatsoever of the systems and controls. The game's certainly no masterpiece (Leon's campaign is the only I could whole-heartedly recommend), but once you get used to the controls and get a feel for what you can do the combat is fast-paced, intense and usually quite a bit of fun. It's certainly far quicker, deeper and more interesting than the combat in, say, Uncharted or other third-person shooters with similarly bland combat systems.
In a way, it tries to do for RE4 and RE5's melee-focused combat what Vanquish did for cover shooting: more speed, more mobility, more potential for cool technical play. Now, it's not nearly as successful as Vanquish, but it's certainly not bad, and a lot of the people who dismiss it seem to do so for the same reason a lot of people dismissed Vanquish as nothing but a mediocre Gears of War clone: a complete inability to learn and adapt when presented with systems that deviate from the norm.
Never. Unless you have a really poor diet or some specific medical reason it's a complete waste of money.
To me, a 4/10 game is something that is not functional, something that is so trite and broken that you cannot possibly play through it without some kind of forcing of the will.
If a 4/10 is broken and unplayable, what the hell is a 3/10, 2/10 or a 1/10? A game that burns your house down and gives you pancreatic cancer? On a scale of 10, provided it it properly used, surely the range 4-6 must represent degrees of mediocrity and not outright awfulness?
I don't share people's disappointment with the main Resident Evil series. I avoided playing Resident Evil 6 until a couple of weeks ago, partly because I didn't like the demo and partly because everyone said it was a massive piece of shit, and I ended up enjoying it quite a bit. The combat system is great and Leon's campaign is excellent in nearly every regard (the others aren't quite so good, but still enjoyable). I don't know why everyone said they turned it into a cover shooter -- it's not a cover shooter, it's RE4's melee-focused combat system except faster and with far more options for movement and evasion. You're not supposed to play it like Gears of War, you're supposed to run around tackling, punching, kicking and stomping heads, taking cover only occasionally to recover stamina or to shield yourself from fire for a second while deciding who to suplex next. No wonder everyone had a terrible time when they can't handle any combat system that's the least bit unconventional.
(Ironically, if they had designed it as a cover shooter, it would probably be more well-received, since that would mean the controls, level design and enemy design would actually have been suited to that style of play.)
Primordia is an indie-developed post-apocalyptic robot adventure game. Doesn't exactly have technically impressive graphics though.
I guess I'll be playing this game offline. I was invaded three times in Demon's Souls, after which I staid in soul form for the rest of the game (and for all of Dark Souls). It wasn't even fun the one time I won -- everything was laggy as shit so there wasn't really any sense of accomplishment (did I win because I was a better player or because the lag meant it all came down to luck?) -- and it sure as hell wasn't fun when some guy ran in with some late-game weapon that broke my guard and took off all my health with a single hit. If I want a one-on-one multiplayer action challenge I'll play a fucking fighting game, where every system and mechanic is designed solely for that kind of face-off, and where the difference between two players is always one of skill rather than stats or equipment.
@mrpandaman: @alexw00d: In my eyes, snapping a couple of shots at big family occasions like birthdays and weddings or writing short entries in a private diary at the end of the day to keep track of important stuff and/or vent emotions and thoughts is quite different from obsessively photo-documenting everything that happens in your life and publishing it online for people to "like". Consider how much Facebook activity would drop if you couldn't get feedback on your entries in the form of "likes" and one-word comments.
I guess I am the sort that has the mindset of not feeling anyone needs to know a thing about me more than I directly tell them.
I have this, too. The only information available on my Facebook account is my name and my school (the latter being visible only to friends). No pictures, no interests, never "liked" anything. If you don't know me well enough in real life to know what I look like or what things I like, then why should you know those things? Why do you want to?
I really don't understand this desire to have everything you do, see, feel or think at any given movement be publicly available. It's like people have become incapable of enjoying a sunset, a vacation or a nice evening out with friends for what it actually is -- experiences are only real and important if you immortalize them with your cell phone camera, upload them to Facebook and tag them with the locations and the people present. Then, later on, you can look back at those entries and feel reassured in the fact that not only did you have a good time (you know this because you are smiling in the photographs you took), but all of your friends cared that you had a good time (you know this because the "likes" are right there -- if you want to, you can even count them to get the exact mathematical value of how much they care).