monkeyboo2

Played Runescape for thousands of hours. Other than that, probably COD 4 cos i got about 25 days playing time on that :o Gears of War 1 also very heavy hour count and Shadowrun if they had counts on em.

The matchmaking system is bad (for now) But its better when you have 2, 3, or 5 people in the party. 1 and 4 are nasty numbers. So invite previous players and anyone you can to make a more full party.

I was skeptic when i heard about it. Seems pointless and i didn't think i'd be entertained by it.... But i've made a character which looks just like me so i have squeezed afew cheap thrills out of it :P lol. It'll be fun for the first few weeks but will soon get old. The technical stuff is an improvement, especially the partys where you can group chat even without the same game- although it needs fine tuning to stop people cheating in S&D games on COD 4 and Gears 2 for example where voice chat is prohibited between dead and alive players. Its just a minor problem, but lobbies seem awfully quiet now.

I've always like Monkeys... so when I played Timesplitters 2 at a friends house for the first time I of course played as a Monkey. I always used to run up behind people with a shotgun and go 'boo' or a cross between that and 'boom'. So Monkeyboo was born. I used that name on Playstation Network for PS2 and it became infamous across PS2 Timesplitters Future Perfect... so when i switched to Xbox 360 (live) i thought it wouldn't be right to re-use 'Monkeyboo' at the risk of damaging reputation I'd built up on PS2. So I changed to Monkeyboo2 (only slightly different, but its enough- and it rhymes). Although i just tell people that i was reborn with more ownage and returned as Monkeyboo2 ;) Anyway its such a part of my identity I even have a Monkey suit now. lol.

Given though, they made Gears 2 a lot more sad and tragic than the first... Now when certain characters die, unless you're a really insensitive [puncture], you're not going to go "LOLOLOL he died!" like when A.Carmine dies. lol if it weren't for that A Carmine moment, i wouldn't have completed the campaign so many times on Gears 1. Yeah i'm loving Gears 2 atm. I got it on launch night (2 weeks last thursday) at midnight but i had some internet troubles since so haven't played much. Now i'm back and pwning :)

lol Randox, your too picky. Pennywise, your too vague (and a little bit wierd). Rebdragon, your too hopeful :lol:. And this porridge is too hot, so i'm going on a walk until it cools down.

Mine is 2.5 :) But i'm still not convinced i'm gonna get this game; the only circumstance in which i would is if Gears 2 and Farcry 2 and all my friends list was playing COD 5. Its a downgrade from COD 4 in my eyes.

:) good point Alex. First post in a while i've bothered to reply to. Accurate knowledge/ science doesn't necersarily disprove/prove the existance of God but some current knowledge which contradicts the bible (atleast in some peoples eyes) which is why people endlessly debate and manipulate scientific facts. Its about the credibility, accuracy, origin (and divinity) and purpose of the Bible... But I think after 84 pages of no agreement on the matter, Alex is right. You're arguing about scientific/religous theories without any particular point to make anymore and its not really going anywhere.

Yes...Maths time :) So baring in mind the idea that 100% of the point of that story was 'to give an explanation as to how we're even living on this Earth' (or something similar-that is a quote)... How much % of the point of the story is to tell the truth or give an atall accurate account of what happened? (either literally or any interpretation) You see where i'm coming from? Its simply a story to fill (falsely) a gap in knowledge. Nothing in the story can help you about the origins of the Earth. It is based on no evidence.

how has he got points already?

Mmmm thats why i don't like it. I'm a big COD 4 fan...and when i play the beta i think to myself: 'Haven't i already got this game?'... I really don't think they've done much other than change the skin, imbalance afew things and add overpowered tanks. TBH all the good stuff on COD 5 is inherant from COD 4. If Treyarch had actually put their own input in and changed the game i'd have more respect for it. But there's virtually no gameplay changes so its just a different skin for COD 4 really- but with not so good map design. Only beef I have with what you're saying is that tanks are not overpowered. You have to be horrible to be unable to take down a tank. The gunner up top can be sniped out if you have any sort of skill with sniping, and you can solo a tank with fireworks+satchel charges/bazooka+sticky grenades. Yeah the gunner is easy to kill... But with other weapons you can't solo it as easily as you make out. You are equipped with 2 Bazookas. The tank takes about 6-7 (haven't accuratley measured this- could be more or slightly less). You are equipped with 2 Satchel Charges. It takes about 4-5 to kill it (also not accurately measured). Same goes for other weapons. unless there's some strategy i'm seriously missing for how to take em out they are overpowered in my view.

Mmmm thats why i don't like it. I'm a big COD 4 fan...and when i play the beta i think to myself: 'Haven't i already got this game?'... I really don't think they've done much other than change the skin, imbalance afew things and add overpowered tanks. TBH all the good stuff on COD 5 is inherant from COD 4. If Treyarch had actually put their own input in and changed the game i'd have more respect for it. But there's virtually no gameplay changes so its just a different skin for COD 4 really- but with not so good map design.

Ignoring all social and financial implications. That guy won't be able to raid half as effectively as 36 single players working as a unit. If he wanted to move each character across the map; he has to control each one individually with AWSD. His management CANNOT be as good as he makes out. Its not just implausible; its impossible.

I was only member for 2 months. I think they also take into consideratino your time spent/rank/ K:D on CoD 4 or CoD 3.

I have the beta and have played for 3 hours (and got a K/D of 3) :). Its a fairly good game, but i'd put that down to it being more or less COD 4 with a different skin. Would have liked a bit more diversity so i may find myself just continuining with my COD 4 escapades instead of buying this.

:shock: I was a little dissapointed that they kept so many offline achievements in. I don't particularly like achievements (because people obsess with them so much) especially when they are easy to get. In general, offline achievements are disgustingly easy, so they count for very little in my eyes. With online achievements, even though they are still fairly easy (most of them), you atleast have to beat real players who think fairly sophisticatedly insetad of just pointing and shooting at half-wit AI. I've only found 2 achievements on the (many) games that I play that i think are really worth getting. Shadowrun- Godlike Kill all enemies without taking any damage yourself. Gears of War- Seriously Kill 10,000 enemies in multiplayer. So basically I don't like it when people just denote good games like Gears into 'just another way to get achievement points without working for them'. Maybe went abit OTT with that rant but hey. :roll:

If your talking about actually printing the T shirts. You'll need capital. But if your talking about getting T shirts with your designs printed (to sell), then talk to a already established T-shirt printing Company. Buy a batch of T-shirts with your designs and sell them. Not as profitable perhaps, but you don't have capital.

Yeah. Thats true- the movement was clunky and 'sticky' so hopefully they upgrade that. And related to that the actual character movements weren't always synchronised with the animations. So even if the head looked as if it was on the floor in midroll the head would actually be at roughly crouched heiht above the centre of the person. You had to learn some really wierd spots where the head would actually be despite the animation.

Gears of War 2 is predicted to be the hottest seller this christmas, but apart from it being a sequel to Gears (1); what else do we know about it? I was a big fan of Gears 1, and i played and won several competitions along with my doubles partner and clan. But I never buy games based on hype ever since R6V2. So what can you tell me about Gears 2? Are you going to get it? What are the main changes to multiplayer? Do you care about the storyline (what little there is of one)? Discuss :

Correct me if I'm wrong but i always thought Ubisoft was a publishing company like EA + Activision etc, unless you're talking about the inhouse developers They also make games .. Eg Rainbow six, Ghost recon, Pop .. etc Yeah and Prince of Persia was one of the best single player RPG's i've ever played. I normally only play online games; but that series was like a set of films with some good gameplay ideas.

I played Rock Band the other day at a friends house... And it ROCKS. So yeah, i got high hopes for Rock Band 2- not that i'll be getting it though (cos of space and price issues). Its the only offline game i've genuinely liked for several years.

Nice effort. But I really find all Offline RPG's extremely boring; with the odd exception for afew hours.

My Favourite Developers. Free Radical Design. The small company which makes the Timesplitters series (and Haze for what it matters). They are the best and they have a nice tight community and one of the best series of all time. Ensemble Studios The Creators of the Age of Empires series. They have closed down now after the poor sales of the AOE3 games. Before AOE3 though they rocked, pumping out the most challenging online RTS's ever. :) Fasa Studio. Small company which made the most recent Shadowrun game. They've shut down now, because Shadowrun wasn't a 'huge' success amongst the average gamers. But for competitive gamers it was the Bees Knees. Could have been a lot more if they had catered for the general public aswell as the professional gamers. Epic Games. Creators of Gears of War and Unreal Tournament. Two great titles right there. Blizzard Now don't get me wrong; i'm no WoW fan, but they have made some great other Games like Warcraft 1-3 and Starcraft 1 and 2. Their RTS's are great and admittedly WoW aint half bad and if i started playing MMO's again thats what i'd play. 10 months ago though i think RS had the edge for MMO's.

And they wouldn't be alive without us either. PS for the vegetarians on this forum; you probably can't win this debate with any ethical argument, but you can win on the effiency argument. :P

Thats Shocking, they were a really good company and made the best RTS games that i've seen. OK, AOE3 wasn't great, but up until then (AOE 1, 2 and Age of Mythology) they were great. Real shame.