|
games anime | toys
|
 
|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
The Big Bad Wolf's blog
follow this blog
subscribe via RSS
send message
invite to meetup+play
|
|
| get involved register or login post a blog post a forum enter a contest contribute a news tip suggest a feature be a guest editor |
support new member's guide login assistance tech support report abuse email our editors read our dev blog nuclear crisis? |
keep in touch RSS feed Myspace Flickr Game nights Meetup+play online |
seriously about Destructoid advertising terms of use privacy policy jobs at MM buy our crap |
our network Tomopop Japanator Despingation? |
||
|
||||||
 living the dream since March 16, 2006 |
||||||
i hope to one day rise to your level of intelligence.
Yeah yeah, call me out like I'm on a high horse. Anyone whose offended by this blog deserve to be. I have no more sympathy for the babies I deal with on xbl or in gaming. These selfish brats are the scourge to this gen and next gen gaming.
If the game doesn't compliment their shit for brains, then the game sucks. That logic is flawed.
If I can't handle a RE5 demo, I stop playing it. Or I keep trying til I can. End of. I don't go bitchin and moaning calling the game rubbish- when I am the one who is.
Take notes, children.
Its okay man, calm down, I feel your pain, but there are better ways.
I think the problem comes from the game defaulting to a modern run-and-gun control scheme but not run-and-gun gameplay. When you aim, the left stick does nothing, and most people would feel like it should make you move (even very slowly). It's just awkward, and by appealing to a larger audience and not meeting that new audience's expectations of that control scheme lets the player do results in confusion, difficulty and eventually distaste.
Yeah, Gears of War wasn't out before RE4, so folks see the 3rd person view and expect a certain type of control. Its unfortunate because it will affect many newcomers, but RE will keep on trucking.
Not being able to run and gun, or move while shooting ADDS to the game's "fun terror" element they were aiming for.
It's risk vs reward.
All games need it.
Hardly any offer such.
Why are you dissing Halo and giving props to RE5? You are just as bad as someone who dissed RE5 and props halo.
Garison:
It was an example of the mentality of most 360 users. Am I wrong? They are overly dependent on run-n-run, spray-n-pray, health regen and cookie-cutter features.
Guess what Halo got?
Didn't the entire site have this argument yesterday?
I hope to one day rise to your level of speling and grammer.
Do you seriously ONLY post sheeple posts? I mean, it's funny anyone bites on these, but they've all been the same blog reworded. "Majority of XBL gamers are mindless ants blah blah blah if you're offended you're a sheeple and need to wake up blah blah blah." Needs moar originality, or at the very least positivity.
It sounds like you have some pent-up rage toward the majority of random people on Xbox Live. You should add some Dtoid people to your friends list, games are so much more fun and idiot-free that way.
I do not approve of your Halo bashing, but i do agree of your some of your points.
What you're suggesting is that the 360 userbase should stop liking the kinds of games they like and instead focus on the kind you like? Remember, Biohazard 5 is coming out and you will get to play it. For every person the demo did not impress, it most likely also attracted a new player who would be otherwise clueless. Not every person is going to share your view that Halo is cookie cutter and tactless and Resident Evil is innovation. Both have merit and both have a place.
Left 4 Dead FNF!!!
"It sounds like you have some pent-up rage toward the majority of random people on Xbox Live. You should add some Dtoid people to your friends list, games are so much more fun and idiot-free that way"
I haven't met a heck of alot of people to consider adding. Look at some of the comments. I can't blame them for being upset. Now we've got people sticking up for Halo.
Halo->3<- is a good game, if you enjoy over-doses of positive reinforcement or flipping coins.
I wasn't saying that RE5 was anything remarkable. Just that players are too used to the same old game styles for the psat several years here. For shooters.
Now one is out that doesn't allow you the elements you expect and kids freak out and think the game is rubbish, when they just cant give into change. And if they cant, then let it be that. Don't bash a game because you are incapable to learn it.
Who wants some pumpkin pie!
I don't get why people get so defensive because others hate a game most people enjoy. Who gives a flying fuck as long as you enjoyed it?
@SilverDragon
Cool Whip or ReddiWip? I'd love some pie but if you try and push that ReddiWip crap on me I may become violent.
"Halo->3<- is a good game, if you enjoy over-doses of positive reinforcement or flipping coins."
Pretentious fuck alert, weeyoo-weeyoo-weeyoo.
Wolf, everyone knows xbl is flooded with idiots. get over it. move on, everyone else has. Surley you have some real life friends to play with or somthing?
Most of my gaming is spent playing with RL friends over XBL/PC.
@Shipero
Blasphemy!
You remind me a guy who went by the name of Heretic, only that he was a lot more intelligent than you appear to be.
1st verse
Lovely is the feelin now
Fever, temperatures risin now
Power (ah power) is the force the vow that makes it happen it asks no questions why (ooh)
So get closer (closer now) to my body now just love me til you dont know how (ooh)
Chorus
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
2nd verse
Touch me and I feel on fire
Aint nothin like a love desire (ooh)
Im melting (Im melting) like hot candle wax sensation (ah sensation) lovely where were
At (ooh) so let love take us through the hours I wont be complanin cause this is love
Power (ooh)
Chorus
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
(ooh)
3rd verse
Heartbreak enemy despise
Eternal (ah eternal) love shines in my eyes (ooh) so let love take us through the hours i
Wont be complanin (no no)
cause your love is alright, alright
Chorus
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Refrain
Lovely is the feeling now I wont be complanin (ooh ooh)
The force is love power
Chorus
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
Keep on with the force dont stop
Dont stop til you get enough
RE5 is a racist... just like everyone on Xbox Live, amirite?
Dear Big Bad Wolf,
I have, at the very least, a point of contention with the last part of your post. I can only assume as the author of said blog that you would remember the content within, but for the sake of clarity I will quote the section in which I have my concern.
"1. Cry me a river
2. Build a bridge and get over it
3. Jump off the bridge and drown in your own tears"
Now, I definitely understand the point behind this section, but I do not quite understand the means in which you want your detractors to follow. If I'm to understand correctly, you want [a person who disagrees with you] to first cry long enough to create an entire river comprised of tears alone, buy the goods (and I suppose hire the help? or do you want us to do it alone?) to build a bridge that crosses aforementioned tear-fed river, and then finally physically jump into this body of water in order to drown ourselves to the point of death. I find this all quite ridiculous.
Ignoring the fact that a human being couldn't possibly come close to crying an actual, physical river (the human body only contains 40L of water afterall, which is barely enough to fill half of an average person's bathtub), the second part of your "impossible delineation" asks your opponent to build an entire, physical bridge. For what reason? Simply to "get over it?" I doubt anyone would want to go to such lengths (can you imagine the time and money spent for such a task?), and I would go so far to say that any person that was able to actually cry a river of tears (read: no one) would probably have "gotten over it" already, because they would most likely be dead from dehydration.
Of course, science might not be your strong point, so I can understand skipping over the first two points, so I will do the same and jump to step 3 which finally asks your critic to jump into the impossible river specifically to drown to death. Although I understand that the ultimate point is that you would like for anyone who disagrees with you to kill themselves, I don't think that anyone would want to, especially after they have spent the time and energy to create a miracle river and then build a bridge over it. I for one would be so impressed that I figured out how to build such a bridge that I would probably spend the time you want me to invest in drowning on more responsible tasks, like applying to further my career as a civil engineer. I think you would agree that this would be a better use of time, yes?
Anyway, I do thank you for sharing your opinion about whatever game to which you are referring, but I would thank you to use a little bit more logic in the future so we don't have any further mistakes worth pointing out.
Also, if you were to add a little picture to this post, it probably wouldn't look so shitty.
Thanks,
Roberto Summa
muh head is aching!
*runs back to halo*
That'd be a wise choice to the kids whining about a game like RE5 that doesn't compliment their limited gamestyles.
Maybe you should just get a PS3.
Oh I get it nowww. Everyone who likes RE doesn't like Halo and vise versa.
Makes sense.
Truly a bridge over a river of tears would be a shrine of human achievement. I agree with Mr. 40. This is a serious oversight in your logic.
this whole thing REALLY isn't that serious...
either way, Steel Squirrel wins this blog.
baa-aa-a baaa-aa-a
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be without a home
Like a complete unknown
Like a trolling stone?
ItemForty is my hero
*Sigh* This is getting stupid
I've said RE4/5 isnt bad. Im just dissapointed that Capcom didnt even try to improve any of 4's shortcomings with 5. RE4 was not a perfect game, and it didnt invent the over-the-shoulder shooting mechanics (Splinter Cell did it first). Not being able to even walk while shooting is stupid; I'm not asking to turn Resident Evil into a run and gun I'm just saying take a page out of a few other games and at least allow you to be a little mobile. The melee attack still sucks and is only good for busting open barrels and crates. And really, they could have at least updated the enemy animations a little.
I dont hate RE5 or anything and I'm still probably going to buy it (at the VERY least rent it). Im just dissapointed that capcom didnt address any of the shortcomings in 4. Usually Capcom is very good with improving things with sequels.
aww man i'm late to the tard party.
"That'd be a wise choice to the kids whining about a game like RE5 that doesn't compliment their limited gamestyles."
did you just say gamestyles? ROFL!
I don't get it... I don't hear anybody doing anything but expressing excitement over RE5... do I have my hate filter on?
Acting smart or being smart, easy to see the difference between the two, especially in blog comments.
@Dimly, I don't get it either, I'm buying RE5, I love RE4, and I think that this control scheme shouldn't have an over the shoulder viewpoint. a fixed camera would fit better. Also, to those who think RE4 was the first 3rd person viewpoint with guns game, Socom would like to see you.
Amazing, someone took the dislike for RE5 and flipped it toward 360 users, that's a new one in the troll olympics I must say.
Its also not the first time I've read something like this so its spreading it seems, cause obviously if you're a 360 user you've never played previous RE games right?
This is obviously bait but I'll take it anyway.
We don't hate it, we simply dislike that after 4 years Capcom didn't improve on anything, its still using the same old archaic control scheme when it has been improved over the years.
Don't give me difficulty or sense of fear, you can make a game scary without making me into a plodding tank.
Not to mention the other numerous flaws, the game forcing you to do co-op with a human as the computer is awful and the stronger enemies are to difficult by yourself(mostly because they take far to much damage), enemies are just as stupid, toned down animations, recycled animations.
Its RE4, pretty edition, fine back then but better horror games have come out since then.
In: Re:: Mr. Roberto "Itemforty" Summa IV, Esq:;,
Dear sir, as a man of science and leisure who has been fascinated by tears and bridges since birth, and jumping into a river of tears at an only slightly more advanced age, I seek to clarify an omission that may cause you to reconsider some of your scientific conclusions on this very important subject.
Surely you are aware that the constituent parts of a river include (but are not limited to) the source or headwaters, tributaries, the main channel, and the eventual watershed. I do not mean solely to dazzle you with my knowledge of the natural world, but also to point out that a man on a bridge crying sufficient tears to form a river is only forming the source of the river. Since bitterly wept tears will flow in one direction, in accordance with Mother Earth's gentle gravitational tuggings, the crier need not weep the tears from a bridge. He is free too, of course, and may weep from any sort of dry chasm crossing he wishes in order to form a fresh river in the old riverbed below (I think we would both consider that a man crying into an existing river for the purposes of creating a river to cross via bridge is not actually creating said river, but merely contributing to its liquid volume). But he need not.
In fact, unless such a sorrowful person wishes to build two bridges, one at the source to create a dramatic waterfall of tears as he creates the river, and another bridge further downstream so that he can cross an actual flowing river, I would suggest that he merely cry from ground level or some other convenient pre-existing perch. A person undergoing such great emotional trauma would likely be, in my professional opinion, too physically weakened to build two separate bridges some distance apart.
Your comments on the water content of the human body are apt, but I have known of people sufficiently committed to creating a river of tears as to run a dedicated water line to the intended place of lamentation. With access to water (and other nourishment), such sorrowful individuals are capable of creating more than 40L of tears, much more in some cases. This I think we can also agree is not skirting the rules, unless an unscrupulous sobber contributes liquid to the river from a source other than his or her tear ducts.
I would discourse at length about the potential ecological ramifications of creating a salt-water river, but I have developed a sudden yearning for toast and jam. I look forward to further discussion with you about such a fascinating concept, and am delighted to have discovered a fellow enthusiast in my life's work.
Respectfully Yrs.,
Nexium Calcide, P.pD
I love the RE5 demo, but this wasn't necessary. People are allowed to have their own opinion of things. Not liking RE5 doesn't make someone a moron. There is no reason to get so upset over this.
It's only a video game in the end dude. Take solace in the fact that you enjoy it a lot and just be happy about that.
Don't write an angry blog that sounds like it was meant for the entire dtoid community.
You're OBVIOUSLY not as smart as big bad wolf EDS. I mean, look, PEON, you can't possibly begin to start thinking you could almost grasp his magnificent brainpower. Ant. Sheeple. You only like RE5 because he said so, you couldn't possibly begin to appreciate it on the level that he appreciates it.
Nexium Calcide, P.pD, scientist:
Thank you for taking the time to read my comment on this blog and respond in kind. As a person who does appreciate "good points being made," I must applaud your good points, as it seems that they were not only imagined but were indeed made (and delivered in a succinct and sincere way I might add).
In regards to your "good points," I would only like to make it known that the author of this post specifically said, "Cry me a river," a phrase that I came to understand as, "starting at a location with very little to no water, and using only your tears, please create a large enough amount of liquid that would not only succeed in easily drowning a human being, but would follow the proper, agreed-upon guidelines to be considered a 'river'." Although some amount of interpretation could be argued upon, I would say that the main inference in his wording requires:
1. that tears are the main, and only element used, and
2. the final product should be a "river," which technically is any natural stream that flows INTO something larger (i.e. ocean, lake, or other body of water).
From this inference you should see that no further argument is needed, because the point is actually invalid due to a lack of necessary variables; most notable is whether or not the geography of the lamenting party's chosen point of origin would provide the right conditions to create a "true" river, or would simply pool up or evaporate.
I do appreciate your assistance in pointing out the flaws in my original argument, however. If anything, it's nice to see someone with your busy schedule take the time to focus on proper grammar and spelling. It's so rare these days.
Sincerely,
Robertar Sumo IV, Esq
Editor in Chief, Wittington Quarterly Review
Obviously, the parts of my brain that translate the simple-minded phrases that a person like Big Bad Wolf can so easily wield tend to get a little wordy, but if science were simple then everyone would be doing it, right?
Dearest Ronaldo Summers,
I agree with your implicit criticism of the hypothetical situation before us as being poorly fleshed out. For example, why would the weeper drown? Perhaps the forlorn lacrimator is unable to swim, or has created a deep river with strong currents that would defeat someone of modest swimming ability. But I believe the implication is one of suicide, which seems hardly likely given the considerable effort involved in such Herculean feats of infrastructure-building and terrain-sculpting. Would it not be easier to wash down a mixed handful of psychiatric prescription drugs with a large snifter of brandy, and settle in for the warm close embrace of Father Death?
You have made me think deeply about nascent rivers, and when a river can be said to have formed. Must the river reach a relatively permanent watershed? Can water seeking its way towards the ocean be deemed a river before any of it reaches the welcoming shores of the sea? Is it a pre-river? A river-at-large?
I am always receptive to your communiques, whether by telegram, telegraph, ham radio, or twitter. I am anxious to discuss with you a separate matter that has been haunting me -- the intent of an online user in choosing a moniker such as "The Big Bad Wolf". Is it meant to demonstrate an affinity with large things? Badness? Wolves? Or perhaps some inconceivable combination of the above? Whatever the case, it is most assuredly a fierce and mighty appellation that doubtless intimidates many. I wish I had exercised such forethought in selecting my own user name. Alas, I remain:
Nexar Pictures, Inc.
Fondest Nexium,
Indeed; if wishes were to be made in regards to a different online handle, I would spend such a divine gift on the chance to be either something much tougher and smarter (e.g. Huge Horrible Hippo) or, at the very least, closer to itemone or similar.
Yours,
Runners Slumbers, Cardboard.
Is it impossible to not like a control scheme, or does that instantly mean you love Halo 3? You're just as bad as the people you criticize in the beginning of your blog. Go make some more assumptions.
@Maxvest and Itemforty:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
AAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA
AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Front page this purely for the comments.
@Maxvest and Itemforty:
Brilliant rapport.