I'm pretty much where Jeff is. I know exactly what my bad habits are and know when I'm doing dumb things as I do them, yet I do them anyway because I don't know what I should do instead. It's pretty crazy, getting into your own head like that. I personally just have really poor fundamentals, and Street Fighter really amplifies it because of how simplistic it ultimately is (compared to other fighting games).
Yeah, I'm with you. I'm at the same spot right now too and it's a really tiring experience.
Good UPF. Tim's a really cool guest, even though he seems to be a bit insane, like Jason (sorry Jason), for moving to the same city Dan lives in again.
Also stop talking about Mario Party 6 so much if you don't actually plan on doing MPP6 any time soon.
Superman took off the way he did not only because he was the first, but for several reasons: He is the ultimate power fantasy (escapism at it's best), he always does what's right/is a total goody-two-shoes (he is very family friendly) and even other heroes look up to him (he is the defacto leader of all DC heroes, not only the JLA), he always stood for "the American way" of life more than any other hero (good for very patriotic people), etc.
A few of his villains are cool also aside from Luthor (Metallo, Parasite, Doomsday (if you want to count him)), but yeah, overall he has a rather weak villains gallery. Batman has the best and also up there are Flash's, Spider-Man's and the X-Men's.
Wait! If the game has an actual end, what does a leaderboard based on how long you survive make when you're comparing the time between those who beat it? Sure, there probably just going to be a very small percentage of the players actually beating it, but still. Let's say ten people beat it, who do you consider being the better player?
Unless the game just loops and keeps the timer timer going. That would be the only logical solution in my opinion.
Enemies always spawn at the same times, but it would still take people different amounts of time killing bosses (specifically the last boss), so there would always be some difference.
Sure, I get that. That's not my point. My point is if the game ends after the last boss, would it be more rewarding to just circle strafe the last boss without killing it for as long as possible, since the the longer you survive the higher you rank?
Okay, assuming they haven't thought of that and implemented an "you took too long, you get obliterated" thing (akin to what happened to Dan when the game glitched out on him), that would seem like a good tactic. So you are right, that's weird.
Wait! If the game has an actual end, what does a leaderboard based on how long you survive make when you're comparing the time between those who beat it? Sure, there probably just going to be a very small percentage of the players actually beating it, but still. Let's say ten people beat it, who do you consider being the better player?
Unless the game just loops and keeps the timer timer going. That would be the only logical solution in my opinion.
Enemies always spawn at the same times, but it would still take people different amounts of time killing bosses (specifically the last boss), so there would always be some difference.
I burned out really hard on Far Cry after 4, so even though I think the setting is cool, I think I'll pass on this one.
Also, I agree that the language is terrible mostly because of the super simple grammar. Even if the had a simplistic language, it wouldn't sound like that to them, since they wouldn't have any other point of reference. It's dumb.
Sessh's comments