Geek S**T

Off Topic
1167

[quote]Vash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Marvel Comic Shit

Who were the first Avengers (the one with Black Panther)?

Which “first” Avengers? If I recall, by the time T’Challa was avenging whatever it is they venge, they had uber-membership.[/quote]

I got that New Avengers dvd (the one with the kids that I thought was going to be pure crap but was done in a way that actually impressed me a little and seems like a great way to get kids who didn’t know who these guys were to understand what they were about)…and they had the original membership as; Cap America, Black Widow, Thor, Black Panther, Iron Man, Giant Man, and the Archer (can’t remember his name but they called him that).

I was just unsure because I thought Quicksilver and his sister were members also.

I didn’t have the comics growing up so I didn’t know what version they may be pushing for in the upcoming movies.

They had The Hulk as a main character but not a part of the actual Avengers.

1168

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Marvel Comic Shit

Who were the first Avengers (the one with Black Panther)?

Which “first” Avengers? If I recall, by the time T’Challa was avenging whatever it is they venge, they had uber-membership.

I got that New Avengers dvd (the one with the kids that I thought was going to be pure crap but was done in a way that actually impressed me a little and seems like a great way to get kids who didn’t know who these guys were to understand what they were about)…and they had the original membership as; Cap America, Black Widow, Thor, Black Panther, Iron Man, Giant Man, and the Archer (can’t remember his name but they called him that).

I was just unsure because I thought Quicksilver and his sister were members also.

I didn’t have the comics growing up so I didn’t know what version they may be pushing for in the upcoming movies.

They had The Hulk as a main character but not a part of the actual Avengers.[/quote]

I know Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch have been members, but I’m pretty sure they weren’t originals.

For what it’s worth:

1169

I still play JK 1 and 2 and even JA. I still have X-Wing through X-Wing Alliance there are no better games than thouse6 + the expiation balance of power for XWvTF and Mysteries of the Sith for DR2JK and thats is why I plan on a full all out crack fest with the Force Unleashed b/c its as much about the characters and the story as it is the game play and graphics. If you didnt play JK2 and JA online then you dint play them at all

1170

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Marvel Comic Shit

Who were the first Avengers (the one with Black Panther)?

Which “first” Avengers? If I recall, by the time T’Challa was avenging whatever it is they venge, they had uber-membership.

I got that New Avengers dvd (the one with the kids that I thought was going to be pure crap but was done in a way that actually impressed me a little and seems like a great way to get kids who didn’t know who these guys were to understand what they were about)…and they had the original membership as; Cap America, Black Widow, Thor, Black Panther, Iron Man, Giant Man, and the Archer (can’t remember his name but they called him that).

I was just unsure because I thought Quicksilver and his sister were members also.

I didn’t have the comics growing up so I didn’t know what version they may be pushing for in the upcoming movies.

They had The Hulk as a main character but not a part of the actual Avengers.[/quote]

Original line-up:

Hulk (by accident of being too awesome)
Thor
Wasp
Giant-Man
Iron Man

Cap. America would ultimately make it to the team the following year, as would Hawkeye (poor-man’s Green Arrow), Black Panther, and most of the Marel U.

Except for like three books, Marvel blows.

1171

I’ve had the Force Unleashed since Saturday and it’s kinda…

…meh.

The powers were handled really well, but after like the 3rd level pretty much all of the enemies will be immune to your powers, and this is where the lightsaber comes in and this it where it kinda fails.

In Ninja Gaiden animations are not set in stone, meaning you can do a combo halfway, see an enemy coming, move out of the combo and vice versa, the same thing with blocks too. In TFU there isn’t this kinda responsiveness, you get stuck in the animation leaving yourself open to all kinds of blaster fire doing the more elaborate combos. The targeting issues also got kinda wonky during boss battles. There were also times where Starkiller was kinda unresponsive, i.e. a 1 or 2 second delay from when I pressed a button to initiation. This is also the first game I’ve played where gameplay stuttered and it crashed twice already.

It is very short too, I beat it in a little under 8 hours.

There are some redeeming qualities though.

It’s still a blast to play, although on some levels (keep in mind on played on the Sith Lord difficulty which is pretty hard) it tends to get monotonous.

I thought the part where you pull down the Star Destroyer was very well executed.

Oh, and when you’re about to beat it you’ll get a choice between two paths, CHOOSE THE DARK SIDE! The ending was AWESOME!

Guess I’ll be looking forward to Fallout 3 and GOW2.

1172

I’m not really interested in some of these games - like Ninja Gaiden and TFU.

Fallout I am however looking forward to, used to play 1 & 2 when I was younger. Prince of Persia looks good as well.

What the hell happened to all the fighting games? There used to be so many. Can’t wait till MK vs DC comes out.

Does anyone know of any good games that support more than 2 players on 1 console?

1173

[quote]RSGZ wrote:
I’m not really interested in some of these games - like Ninja Gaiden and TFU.

Fallout I am however looking forward to, used to play 1 & 2 when I was younger. Prince of Persia looks good as well.

What the hell happened to all the fighting games? There used to be so many. Can’t wait till MK vs DC comes out.

Does anyone know of any good games that support more than 2 players on 1 console? [/quote]

Fallout eh? Good times man, good times…
I’d prefer them to stay on path with the fluff, though. Last time I checked, everyone was pissed about the way they made the BoS act and all that kinda stuff.

Well, ok, so “last time I checked” was about a year ago… Any good links ?

1174

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
The world of Jedi Knight was what really impressed me. Don’t think I ever beat the game.

Syndicate Wars stands as my favorite PC game of all time, right next to Duke 3D, Half Life, and Prince of Persia 2. Throw in Wing Commander and Comanche. Mid to late 90s was the Golden Era of PC gaming. Even Starcraft came out in 1998 and people still play it.

What happened to video games? All about the best graphics and balls out action, no more emphasis on world-immersion and character intimacy.

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.[/quote]

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

1175

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Syndicate Wars stands as my favorite PC game of all time, right next to Duke 3D, Half Life, and Prince of Persia 2. Throw in Wing Commander and Comanche. Mid to late 90s was the Golden Era of PC gaming. Even Starcraft came out in 1998 and people still play it.

What happened to video games? All about the best graphics and balls out action, no more emphasis on world-immersion and character intimacy.

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.[/quote]

Syndicate Wars for PS1 was killer. I never knew there was a PC version.

I remember spending all night playing the shareware version of Half-Life. That game was just stupid awesome. To this day whenever I’m in an office I expect those little face monster things to come through the ceiling.

1176

[quote]analog_kid wrote:
Syndicate Wars for PS1 was killer. I never knew there was a PC version.
[/quote]

This is what I used to play on PC, fucking awesome game and the music was great too.

1177

[quote]RSGZ wrote:
analog_kid wrote:
Syndicate Wars for PS1 was killer. I never knew there was a PC version.

This is what I used to play on PC, fucking awesome game and the music was great too.

- YouTube [/quote]

Yep, that was it! Looks a lot cleaner than the PS1 version from what I remember.

1178

Ok, I bought Force Unleashed because you geeks wouldn’t shut up about it.

I hope it is worth the 60 bucks.

1179

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

[/quote]

Are you implying that HL took you less than 8 hours to beat?

The story line, the sequences, the WORLD that Valve created…fucking masterpiece.

Not a knock on your tastes, just saying.

1180

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

Are you implying that HL took you less than 8 hours to beat?

The story line, the sequences, the WORLD that Valve created…fucking masterpiece.

Not a knock on your tastes, just saying.[/quote]

The second half of HL was brutally, eat your babies hard.

1181

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Ok, I bought Force Unleashed because you geeks wouldn’t shut up about it.

I hope it is worth the 60 bucks.[/quote]

You won’t be disappointed. It’s like God of War meets Star Wars.

1182

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

Are you implying that HL took you less than 8 hours to beat?

The story line, the sequences, the WORLD that Valve created…fucking masterpiece.

Not a knock on your tastes, just saying.[/quote]

Sorry, it’s just my English… The second sentence wasn’t related to the first in any way.

I liked HL, but somehow not to the extent that most seem to.

The modern games remark was more about stuff like COD4… A great game, actually (played it on a friend’s 360, not the PC version), but JUST TOO FUCKING SHORT.
At least it has a nice multiplayer mode… Many other newer (and less new) games don’t even have that and are even shorter…

Oh yeah, HL really made quick-save junkies out of me and my friends… The function was available before HL, but somehow that game really brought it to the forefront. I remember saving, entering a room, noting where all the slaves would spawn… Redid the whole thing about 5 or 6 times until I managed to headshot each of them with the magnum right after they spawned.
Good times… :wink:

1183

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

Are you implying that HL took you less than 8 hours to beat?

The story line, the sequences, the WORLD that Valve created…fucking masterpiece.

Not a knock on your tastes, just saying.

Sorry, it’s just my English… The second sentence wasn’t related to the first in any way.

I liked HL, but somehow not to the extent that most seem to.

The modern games remark was more about stuff like COD4… A great game, actually (played it on a friend’s 360, not the PC version), but JUST TOO FUCKING SHORT.
At least it has a nice multiplayer mode… Many other newer (and less new) games don’t even have that and are even shorter…

Oh yeah, HL really made quick-save junkies out of me and my friends… The function was available before HL, but somehow that game really brought it to the forefront. I remember saving, entering a room, noting where all the slaves would spawn… Redid the whole thing about 5 or 6 times until I managed to headshot each of them with the magnum right after they spawned.
Good times… :wink: [/quote]

Back in the day I played demos that lasted longer than some of today’s games. Doom 2 was 32 levels of awesome that(if you didn’t cheat)would take you at least a week and a half to complete.

Descent 2 took me ages to beat. That later stages were insanely hard, but the fact that the game overall was so polished(awesome music, well thought out level design, intriguing enemies, tons of weapons to use(lasers, missles, mines, bombs, holograms, bots)never left you with an “Ahhh…fuck it!” feeling. You just wanted to keep playing.

What’s the average length for a game these days? 12 hours of game play? If I beat Sonic 2 in 12 hours I would have felt ripped off.

1184

Anyone who likes sports games needs to check out NHL 09. Game is tight, and Be A Pro mode (you control one guy, and only one guy on the ice and try and work your way up from the minors to the NHL) is the best addition to the hockey genre in a long time.

1185

[quote]analog_kid wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

I was actually ‘moved’ when I played Half Life. I remember that shit like the finest points of my adolescence. Crazy.

True, though I wasn’t quite as impressed with HL as everyone else.
Modern games are all eye-candy and 4-8 hours playing time…

Are you implying that HL took you less than 8 hours to beat?

The story line, the sequences, the WORLD that Valve created…fucking masterpiece.

Not a knock on your tastes, just saying.

Sorry, it’s just my English… The second sentence wasn’t related to the first in any way.

I liked HL, but somehow not to the extent that most seem to.

The modern games remark was more about stuff like COD4… A great game, actually (played it on a friend’s 360, not the PC version), but JUST TOO FUCKING SHORT.
At least it has a nice multiplayer mode… Many other newer (and less new) games don’t even have that and are even shorter…

Oh yeah, HL really made quick-save junkies out of me and my friends… The function was available before HL, but somehow that game really brought it to the forefront. I remember saving, entering a room, noting where all the slaves would spawn… Redid the whole thing about 5 or 6 times until I managed to headshot each of them with the magnum right after they spawned.
Good times… :wink:

Back in the day I played demos that lasted longer than some of today’s games. Doom 2 was 32 levels of awesome that(if you didn’t cheat)would take you at least a week and a half to complete.

Descent 2 took me ages to beat. That later stages were insanely hard, but the fact that the game overall was so polished(awesome music, well thought out level design, intriguing enemies, tons of weapons to use(lasers, missles, mines, bombs, holograms, bots)never left you with an “Ahhh…fuck it!” feeling. You just wanted to keep playing.

What’s the average length for a game these days? 12 hours of game play? If I beat Sonic 2 in 12 hours I would have felt ripped off.

[/quote]

Good point. Outside of RPGs, it seems like most games are way too short. Games like Tie Fighter took weeks for me to finish. Plus, there was value in replaying these games so you really got your money’s worth.

I can think of quite a few newer games that you could start playing in the afternoon and have it beat by the time you go to bed. Once you beat them, do you ever want to play the game again? Sometimes, but for me, most of the time I’m done with it.

Granted, if the gameplay isn’t all that great, then sometimes it’s a good thing that the game isn’t too long.

1186

[quote]AngryVader wrote:

Good point. Outside of RPGs, it seems like most games are way too short. Games like Tie Fighter took weeks for me to finish. Plus, there was value in replaying these games so you really got your money’s worth.

I can think of quite a few newer games that you could start playing in the afternoon and have it beat by the time you go to bed. Once you beat them, do you ever want to play the game again? Sometimes, but for me, most of the time I’m done with it.

Granted, if the gameplay isn’t all that great, then sometimes it’s a good thing that the game isn’t too long.[/quote]

Well, realistically, how many games could even be made that not only take forever to finish but are actually interesting enough for you to play them that long?

I think I beat Spiderman 3 in a weekend. I keep playing it though because swinging around a very realistic version of New York is fun for me.

God of War takes a while to finish but if it were really a whole lot longer, it probably wouldn’t have the following that it does.

Games like San Andreas can last forever because you can literally spend weeks avoiding any of the missions and just feeling out the environment.

That means your best bet for really long game play are free roaming games with a virtual reality world that you can fuck around in for days without following the game plan…that and shooter games (sports games too) that you can just keep playing over and over online with other people.