 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31/08/2011 01:27 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> It's not new. Remember the time when you were accused of raping Bill's
> entire family?
Ah yes, now I remember...
Really weird times, eh? In fact, I almost wonder if that was just some
delusion my sleep-deprived mind conjured up.
...damnit, I knew I shouldn't have watched Inception! >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> The game features, in no particular order:
>> - A telekinetic bear.
>> - A dentist who harvests brains.
>> - A trench-coated government agent who disguises himself as a housewife
>> by brandishing a rolling pin and talking disjointedly about pies.
>> - A level where you rampage around Godzilla-style, terrorising a city of
>> talking fish.
>>
>> To say that it's "imaginative" is an understatement...
>
> And you say dreaming of flying pandas is weird? :-)
Oh hell, Psychonauts is weirder than anything I'd ever dream up!
(Well... except that in dreams, things can happen which are literally
impossible. Like things moving towards you but never getting any closer.)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/31/2011 9:59, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> (Well... except that in dreams, things can happen which are literally
> impossible. Like things moving towards you but never getting any closer.)
Yeah, because there wasn't *anything* in Psychonauts that wasn't literally
impossible. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31/08/2011 06:12 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 8/31/2011 9:59, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> (Well... except that in dreams, things can happen which are literally
>> impossible. Like things moving towards you but never getting any closer.)
>
> Yeah, because there wasn't *anything* in Psychonauts that wasn't
> literally impossible. ;-)
You know what I meant. You can imagine physical sensations which are
impossible to create with a physical stimulus. :-P
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/08/2011 04:20 PM, Invisible wrote:
> Bastion doesn't have tedious jumping puzzles. Indeed, you can't actually
> jump!
Wrong. The last 20 minutes of the game is nothing /but/ jumping puzzles!
> For the most part, the game seems to involve casually strolling around
> picking up items and exploring the world. Usually hostiles come in ones
> and twos. Occasionally a whole bunch of them jump you at once, and then
> things get kinda frantic.
The last 20 minutes of the game is basically being rushed by wave after
wave of very difficult hostiles, all at once. And after you've spent the
whole game collecting muskets and carbines and pistols and energy
cannons, you fight the final few battles using the most powerful weapon
in the game: a large stone pillar. :-?
> Then again, I'll let you know after I've /completed/ the thing. ;-) I
> don't know how long it actually is, nor how hard it gets. My impression
> is that I'm still quite near the beginning, but I don't know for certain.
I completed the game in 12 hours, including doing a whole bunch of
optional challenges. Turns out I was actually about half way through
when I wrote my original reply. So the game isn't as big as I'd
imagined. It's still not exactly /small/ though...
The last mission isn't very fun. The ending has no sense of closure. But
right up until then, I was really enjoying the game. And I'm very likely
to continue playing it tonight, just to see if I can beat some of the
optional challenges. If it was a bad game, I wouldn't be bothering. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks to everyone for all the input. If ONLY there were a way to play online
Scrabble that disallowed the use of anagram software (and used a decent
dictionary like the OE instead of that Hasbro atrocity) that's all I'd really
need. ;-)
Best Regards,
Mike C.
BTW, I /DO/ realize that any actual attempt to restrict what other software a
person can run while playing a game will invariably result in a cure that's
worse than the disease. Also, the anagram software could just as easily be run
on another device such as a phone.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/30/2011 10:59 PM, Warp wrote:
> In the second case I was in a game store, and there was a "buy 3, pay 2"
> offer. I had two games selected and was looking for a third one. There was
> nothing that looked good, except for Lord of the Rings Conquest, which I
> knew nothing about, but which looked interesting. The back cover mentioned
> a single-player mode, again in very vague terms. I even asked the store
> clerk if the game has a single-player mode, and he said yes.
>
> Again, it was a mistake. The game is basically Team Fortress set in the
> Lord of the Rings universe. The "single-player" mode is just the multiplayer
> mode with bots, nothing else.
>
> What a waste of money. This should be illegal.
>
Shadowrun for the old Nintendo, I think it was, was an RPG. For the
XBox... it was a "Team Fortress" clone. So, yeah, been there, done that. lol
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31/08/2011 06:59 AM, Warp wrote:
> What a waste of money. This should be illegal.
Blatantly misleading advertising? Yeah, I was under the impression it
*is* illegal...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> On 31/08/2011 06:59 AM, Warp wrote:
> > What a waste of money. This should be illegal.
> Blatantly misleading advertising? Yeah, I was under the impression it
> *is* illegal...
Well, technically speaking there *is* a single-player mode, and when
the back cover description is vague enough and doesn't explicitly mention
anything resembling a normal single-player story mode...
Even a "requires an internet connection to play" isn't enough because
many single-player games (even ones with no multiplayer option at all)
have that requirement nowadays.
What I would like, however, is if they passed a law that said that
games have to *clearly* express if they are online multiplayer games with
no actual single-player story mode, or whether the online multiplayer mode
is just an extra on top of the actual single-player story mode.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> What a waste of money. This should be illegal.
>
>> Blatantly misleading advertising? Yeah, I was under the impression it
>> *is* illegal...
>
> Well, technically speaking there *is* a single-player mode, and when
> the back cover description is vague enough and doesn't explicitly mention
> anything resembling a normal single-player story mode...
This is what annoys me about a lot of advertising today. They make a
whole bunch of statements, which clearly leaves the average person with
the impression that "they said X". But if you examine the individual
sentences with a fine tooth comb, it turns out they only actually said
"Y", which is something fundamentally different. And this is somehow
*acceptable*??
The trouble is, of course, if you say X, some crazy hobo somewhere will
claim that you suggested Y and try to sue you. And that's probably why
these cases end up being judged on what the advert /literally/ said,
completely ignoring all the things it very strongly and repeatedly
/implied/, because they're so subjective.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
