Kazona's forum posts

#1 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

This game is old as fuck, so if you haven't played it by now, spoilers are your own concern: 
In Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, there were two moments that really made me go, "fuck yes!" 
One is when Farah dies, and he turns around and has that look in his eyes that says, "I am gonna kill you all." 
And the second one is the cut scene in which he says, "live forever, and those I loved death, and I to blame? I choose death!"  

#2 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

I wasn't going to reply to this at first, since I figured it's no one's bussiness, but I really want to give my two cents about long distance relationships since I am in one myself. 
Let's first make one thing very clear: it is hard. At times almost unbearably so. I live in Europe, while she lives in the US. This means I only get to see her once or twice a year, and leaving becomes harder every single time. It also doesn't help that I want to get a visa, but we keep coming accross speedbumbs that hinder that goal. If it were any other person, I would have thrown in the towel a year ago. 
But it's not any other person. She is the one I want to spend the rest of my life with. And if it means going through hell to get to that point, then so be it. Some may call me stupid, or claim that I am clinging on to false hope, but there is no doubt in my mind that she is the one, and I will fight tooth-and-nail to get that visa, marry her, and live my life with her until I die. 
The point I'm trying to make is, it all depends on how strongly you feel about the person. If you are absolutely sure about your relationship, and are without doubt about wanting to be with that person, then you absolutely can overcome all the hardships that come with it. If there is doubt, or your feelings for each other just aren't strong enough, then it will ultimately fail. But personally, I think that in that case the relationship would fail even if the relationship wasn't long distance. 
In my case, failure is not an option. 

#3 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

Are headshots ruining games? I wouldn't say so. But what I do believe is that in terms of realism, the headshot is the only part about shooters that matches reality. At least for the most part. There've been plenty of times where a person got shot in the head, and survived without any brain damage. But that nitpick aside, I often do feel like shooters don't portray getting shot realistically, unless it's a headshot. In real life, it doesn't take several shots to the chest to kill someone; a well placed shot at the heart will almost always be a killing shot. Similarly, if you shoot someone in the leg, there's no way they will continue to run around as if nothing happened. When it comes to games, however, only the ultra-realistic shooters acurately represent this.  
But think about it for a moment. Do you really want this level of realism in all your games? Would you enjoy a Call of Duty game if getting shot in the leg meant your movement speed was reduced to a hobble? Or if a shot to the arm meant you no longer had a steady aim? Personally, I can't see that as being much fun. Then again, I could be wrong, and the result might make for far more interesting multiplayer matches.  
You know, on second thought, I wouldn't mind a CoD game with accurate damage models. It could even the playing field, and I think it might be fun to shoot your opponent in the foot and watch them try to get around afterwards. We could even have interesting challenges like, "feet fetish!" 
But long story made short: headshot aren't ruining games, the innacurate damage models on the rest of characters' bodies are. 

#4 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

I'd give myself a 6. I do workout, but I still have the bad habit of skipping workouts (like today)

#5 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -
#6 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

No matter the changes they're making, I am still going to suck ass at this game. 

#7 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

Just curious how everyone groups their units. Do you create groups with multiple units, seperate groups for each unit type, or simply not use grouping at all?

#8 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

CTRL-Click  a Stalker, then press CTRL+1 
CTRL-Click a Zealot, then press CTRL+2 
Voila, group split

#9 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

It used to be on the left side of my desk, but I've just moved it to the right side. Why? Fuck if I know. 

#10 Posted by Kazona (3248 posts) -

Why can't we say something about a game unless we've played it? If we honestly shouldn't give our opinion on something unless we've played it, then these forums would be a very quiet place.  
If 90% of people who played the game say, "it takes a long time to really get going," then, hey, the game probably takes a while to really get going. I don't need to have played the game to come to that conclusion. It's simple logic. If you don't care that it takes several hours before it gets to the really awesome stuff (which is pretty subjective), then that probably won't deter you from playing it. If it does bother you, then you probably shouldn't buy the game.  
Personally, I don't like games that take a long time to get to the good stuff, so this game isn't for me. And I see nothing wrong with voicing my opinion about that.  
I mean, come on, isn't the point of reviews so people can make an informed decision about games without having to buy every single one of them?