What games are you playing right now?

Faggot.

A lot (I think most) of the games can be played on a regular controller.

Who's your character?

I've been playing Kirby Dreamland 3 on my emulator. That's a lot of fun and it's challenging. I used to play him on Super Smash Bros when we used to play it.

Fox, but I can also play with Link, Captain Falcon, and Kirby. Talkin' about the original N64, by the way.

Never really played Melee, but my characters in Brawl are Toon Link, Snake, Falco, Lucas, and, of course, Ike. But Ike's too powerful. I feel cheap when I use him (don't say it!).

Minecraft, so much minecraft. I need more

playing through the first darsiders game. i like it so far. already spent a little over 4 hours.

it's like a mix between zelda and god of war.

I'm stuck on Kirby, stuck on FF3, stuck on Yoshi's Island. Such a pain.

Stuck, as in can't get past a part?

How do you get stuck in Kirby?

i really want Kirby's Epic Yarn for Wii.

But I want New Super Mario Bros even more. Why are games so expensive, grr!

There's a part where you have to go up this tree thing but there are leaves and branches in the way so you have to do it blindly. Somewhere near the top there's this block that falls over and over and kills you but you can't see it because there are leaves in the way. I have no idea which way to go, i've tried a few different ways. And the strategy guides don't really help. It's definitely a challenge.

Just preordered Black Ops II and Dishonored.

Also finally bought a mic so now I can actually play co-op games and feel useful.

Oh. Good answer.

How are you liking the games?

In FF you'll notice all the characters have their own side story. If you got to the part where you get Shadow, the way you learn more about his past is staying at any inn with him in your party, you have a random chance to see 1 of I think 4 dream sequences where you see his past and who he used to be. It's rather creepy.

I just downloaded Arkham City for the 360. I'll dive into it later.

The games are all fun so far. I never had a Super Nintendo growing up, just the Sega so it's cool. I downloaded a different Kirby game for now, it's more fun. I definitely have to read the FF3 strategy guide more often because i keep missing stuff and sometimes it's not easy to go back to another part of the map. There was one part where i was supposed to talk to a guy 3 times in a row to get an ability or something but how was i supposed to know that without a strategy guide? The part i'm stuck on in that game is the Magitek Factory where it's basically just a big puzzle maze and the strategy guide i looked at was no help at all.

Let me guess. Kirby Super Star? That's the SNES one I had growing up.

It's wonderful and will not disappoint.

I'm playing Ghost Reacon: future soldier. One of the best shooting & war games I've played. It enables you to experiance a real squd and platoon feel. It's dope so far anyway.

possible darksiders spoilers:

finished darksiders and probably the only things i didn't like about it are the buggy portal controls (you get a gun to shot portals ala valve's) and the backtracking. holy hell, there was a ton of backtracking. the puzzles were difficult too.

i read online that it's been described as devil may cry / legend of zelda / god of war all mashed up together and it's accurate. you also get a pretty useless gun.

anyway, i got uncharted 3 finally (game of the year edition) since it went down in price. i'll be playing that next. i'll wait for darksiders 2 to go down in price before i'll buy it.

The guns in DMC were pretty useless too.

Still in Arkham. Having a blast.

Deleted my gaming blog. I just couldn't keep it up anymore. Plus I'm just not much of a writer.

Here are my only two reviews in case anybody's interested in reading them:

RUNNING UP THAT HILL

From the first tease years ago, to it’s final release, I never paid much attention to Journey. To me it was just another “art” game. I have nothing against art games, it’s the attitude around them I tend to dislike. I’ve always found them somewhat condescending, like they’re trying to shame me and make me feel guilty about playing and enjoying the latest ultraviolet shoot ’em up. That’s one reason I paid little attention to the game’s development. Another was all the people saying how much of an emotional roller-coaster it was, some even saying it brought them to tears, which is the kind of hyperbolic shit I hear from JRPG fans all the time. But I eventually lamented and purchased the game because peer pressure works and it was either this or I Am Alive and I played the demo to I Am Alive and it was awful.

I’d played the demo for Flower, thatgamecompany’s previous game, yonks ago when I first bought my PS3 and didn’t have enough money left over to actually buy any games. Never has a game’s title been more indicative of what it’s about. Like Flower, the set up for Journey is quite simple: You are a hooded, faceless, and [almost] voiceless red robed figure on a journey to get to the top of a mountain seen in the distance at the beginning of the game. Again, it’s all there in the title. The game’s back story and thus your motivation for needing to get to the top of the mountain is explain via hieroglyphics shown at the end of the first few levels, but I was always awful at Pictionary so I had no idea what the game was trying to tell me. What I gathered was that there was a race of white robed people and then there was a UFO and then everybody died and you need to get to the top of the mountain because the game can’t go on forever.

Moving on, a big part of the game is that while your on your little adventure, your wanderer can run into another traveler being controlled by another player and the two of you can choose to undertake this little odyssey together. What makes this unique from other co-op games is that you can’t see your companion's name because I guess seeing XxJointOps420xX or VAgiNABiteR69 above your doppelgangers head might take you out of the experience a bit. Your companion's (singular or plural) name is only revealed after the end credits, accompanied by a unique symbol that I swear looks almost exactly like the symbols from the Blade movies. On top of that, you can’t communicate with each other and I have to commend thatgamecompany for this move because Journey is probably the only game on the PS3 to take advantage of the fact that almost nobody on the PS3 has a mic. The only way you can communicate with each other is by pressing a button to make your character emit a single tone or ping and the longer you hold it down the stronger the ping is. The ping button also pulls double-duty as the game’s “use” button to activate various structures dotted around the game world as well as the game’s, for lack of a better term, wildlife, which look like flying sentient oriental rugs.

I’ll be honest, I probably didn’t go into Journey with the right mindset. See, I had just come off a pretty long losing streak on Uncharted 3, so by the time I started Journey I already hated the world and everybody in it. This is probably why I decided to go through my first run-through solo. I did go through the first few levels with another person but, as I should have already known, give the average gamer the ability to do ANYTHING in a game and they’ll find a way to abuse it, as the one and only person I ran across did, emitting an endless series of pings that sounded like a small child punching the number keys on a telephone. After about 2 minutes of that I’d had enough, so I signed out from PSN and restarted my journey where I was immediately greeted by a message from the game urging me to log back in as if I’d hurt it’s feelings somehow.

Playing through Journey was both a familiar and entirely new experience. It was a new experience in the sense that it was the first game I’ve played in probably ever where I didn’t have a gun or sword, and felt quite naked playing through the first few levels, especially since the game's big. The mostly empty levels along with the score creates this great sense of unease though it’s punctuated by these brief moments where you’re hopping and gliding around with these flocks of living oriental rugs and it’s all quite beautiful and wonderful and all those other things that have already been said a hundred times in a hundred other reviews.

But the game is also familiar in that it takes a relatively classic approach to level progression. You start off in the desert sliding down sand dunes and by the end you’re on top of a mountain trudging through snow. There’s even a section in the middle that is for all intrinsic purposes an underwater level (Sans the “water” part) complete with tapestry seaweed and jellyfish-looking things that you bounce off of to a “raise-the-water-level” puzzle at the end. There are also some stealth levels where you have to avoid the game’s only enemy: big flying stone serpent things that look almost exactly like one of the colossi from the aforementioned Shadow of the Colossus (to the point where I‘m surprised Team Ico isn‘t suing). My favorite parts of the game were these brief sections where you glide along the sand down through ruined cities. In particular, one part where you go through a building and the camera angles through these arches out of the building to show the sun setting, bathing everything in golden light. These sections were disappointingly short and often broken up by puzzles you had to complete in order to open up the next part of the level and continue.

Even now, weeks after I’ve finished the game, I still have mixed feelings about my experience with Journey. I mean, I definitely enjoyed it; it’s probably one of the best games I’ve played in the last year. But as I made it to the top of the mountain and the journey came to an end, I didn’t feel that huge sense of accomplishment I’d heard so much about, the emotional pay off. Then again, it could just be my cold, cold heart. Or the fact that, again, I went through the game solo which, according to a few people I’ve talked to, is like playing chess by yourself. Wait, how does that make any sense? Since when was playing chess an emotional experience?

PSYCHIC PSYCHIC BENDY SPOONS

I don’t think I could really consider myself a huge fan of the F.E.A.R. series. I played the first game around the time I got my 360 and I remember quite liking it. I rented the second years later and thought it was a mostly average bordering on mediocre game. I never played the two now non-canonical expansions for the first game and wasn’t even aware there was an equally non-canonical add-on for the second game. And I never touched either game’s multiplayer.

I had nothing against the games. I enjoyed my time with them. Even the second game had it‘s moments. Plus I’m a big fan of Monolith Games, the developers of the first two F.E.A.R. games. Condemned: Criminal Origins, a game they developed as a launch title for the 360, is probably one of the scariest games I’ve ever played. The sequel, well, it had its moments. I’m beginning to notice a theme here.

Basically what I’m trying to say is that when the third game was released I had very little interest in playing it. And for a good while I didn’t. The last two games belong in a category of games I refer to as “Rental Material,” games you play through in an afternoon and then largely forget. Games like Singularity and the recently released Syndicate would also classify as Rental Material. They’re timewasters, fillers between more interesting releases.

That’s not to say the F.E.A.R. games weren’t interesting though. Filler games usually have a couple of cool ideas that they do pretty well and what the F.E.A.R. games did well was atmosphere, something the first game has in spades (The second, well, it has it’s moments). It took a lot of its cues from the J-Horror films that were so popular then with its unnerving soundtrack of ambient noises and more subtle, less Monster-Closety scares. It all meshed together so well and the fact that you spend 75% of the game machine-gunning clone soldiers in mechs doesn’t detract from the games atmosphere in the slightest. But it wasn’t enough to make me a convert to The Church of F.E.A.R. The game had problems: the controls were wonky, the story was barely there and what was there was a convoluted mess, and then there was the sequel which isn’t bad per say, it just isn’t great and it all but killed off any desire I had to play another.

This all begs the question why I even bothered with the third game at all, and the answer is simple really: I was broke and needed something to play. Like most people, what I play is dictated by what I have and most of the time I don’t have very much. So I rely on sales and bargain bins to sustain my almost drug-like gaming habit. Before making a purchase I’ll usually read up on it but every now and then I’ll take a leap of faith and get something I’ve never heard of before because sometimes I want a new experience.

It’s a gamble. I might like it or I might spend a few more bucks that night listing it on EBay and hoping I break even. Usually it works out. I’ve discovered some of my favorite games this way. I found The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, the game by which I compare all others, on sale at one of those generically named game shops you find in malls that always seem to perpetually be going out of business. Like I said, it’s a gamble. Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn’t, like when I picked up the first Mass Effect game.

F.E.A.R. 3 was a gamble. It was on sale on some used game site. This was just a few months after it was released. It wasn’t a failure, but it wasn’t a success either. Some people were turned off by the new co-op mechanic, which even to me at the time seemed gimmicky. Others were put off by the fact that Monolith didn’t develop it. The third sequel was handled by Day 1 Studio who’d previously handled the console ports of the first game. A game series changing developers is a weird thing that upsets a lot of people, the argument being that another developer wouldn’t “understand” the game as well as the original developers. The most obvious example is the Silent Hill games being outsourced to Western developers, which so far has been pretty hit and miss. I for one really don’t mind it. A series will start to stagnate if it stays with the same developer too long, as the fourth Silent Hill game showed with it‘s belching nurse monsters and a protagonist who acted like he was doped up to the eyeballs with muscle relaxants. Switching developers is the best way to change things up, experiment. If it were up to me, no series would stay with the same developer for more than 1 or 2 games. But it’s not up to me because I’m not the CEO or president of a big game publisher like Activision or Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. I’m a perpetually broke college drop out and it’s that perpetual brokenness (And general boredom with my current gaming library) that for lack of a better word “motivated” me to take a gamble and order a lightly used copy of F.E.A.R. 3 for the paltry-to-some, wallet-busting-to-me sum of $15, plus tax.

And the gamble paid off.

Like the previous games, FEAR 3’s (And from now on I’ll be writing it like that, sans periods, because writing it the “proper” way gets really annoying after awhile) story is bonkers. It involves a lot of the cornerstones of most conspiracy theorists paranoid rants like evil mega corporations, cloning, genetically engineered super soldiers, and characters with psychic powers whose amazing telepathic abilities are mostly used to fill in plot holes. To recount it in full would require a shit ton of thumb tacks and red yarn, a feat compounded further by the fact that all the expansions were denounced as non-cannon by Monolith shortly, which must have been a real slap in the face to the developers of those add-ons. If you want to know the full story for whatever reason then go do what I do when I want to pretend I've played the latest new release so I don't feel left out and read each games Wikipedia page. If you can't be bothered or don't want to risk having a brain aneurysm then skip it. You really only need to know a few plot points going into FEAR 3: 1) You play as the [silent] protagonist of the first game called simply The Point Man, 2) you’re aided by your evil [And not so silent] dead brother, Paxton Fettel, who you killed at the end of the first game, 3) Alma, the aforementioned creepy little girl, is your mother, 4) she’s pregnant by the protagonist of the second game, Beckett, who she raped. Get it? Got it? Good.

You start out FEAR 3 nine months after the end of FEAR 2, in a prison you’ve been in since the end of FEAR 1 until you’re evil dead ghost brother breaks you out. Alma, your mother, is about to give birth to the antichrist. Or something like that. Her contractions are causing psychic distortions, driving everyone crazy and causing all sorts of destruction on a global scale (Cheap joke about this being no different from any other pregnancy). The main objective of the game is to track your mother down to, I don’t know, give her a very late-term abortion so she won’t bring about the end of the world. Of course you have no idea where exactly she is, so for 90% of the game you’re actually trying to track down Beckett, the baby daddy so to speak, who’s being held by Armacham, the token evil mega corporation of FEAR’s universe and whose clone army you‘ll be slaughtering your way through most of the game. I guess with him being the father he somehow has Alma’s location locked away in his head somewhere where even he can’t get to it. All I know is that when you finally find him, Fettel possesses him and a few moments later he explodes, and then the last level begins. Like I said, convoluted and bonkers. There's more to it that connects it with the previous games but I'm trying to keep this short so again, Wikipedia. The third game’s story was written by Steve Niles, the guy behind the 30 Days of Night comics. I’m not a big comic book guy but I remember reading a few of those and quite liking them and was a bit disappointed he didn’t do more with the story. But then again, look at what he’s got to work with. (Also of note is that John Carpenter directed the games cut scenes. That might mean a lot to some but it doesn't mean much to me.)

The game’s levels (Here called “Intervals”) take you through many areas, some familiar, and some not so familiar. As already mentioned, you start out in a derelict prison that’s apparently acting as detention camp of sorts with the Point Man being the only prisoner. From there you take a short detour through the sewers and end up in some slums somewhere south of the equator where you hijack a helicopter that eventually crashes in one of my favorite areas of the game: A Costco-like mega mart that’s been taken over by people driven insane by Alma’s influence. This is something the FEAR games are good at: Taking a setting people don’t usually associate with horror and making them horrifying. The first game was largely set in and around an office building, not unlike the one you probably work in. Nothing but white walls, cubicles, and frosted glass. Now offices have always been horrifying in an existential “What am I doing with my life?” sense but as far as I’m aware FEAR made them horrifying in the “There’s blood coming out of the faucets!” way. FEAR 2 had a harder time with this since the first game ended with a nuclear blast and the second takes place in it’s aftermath but it still managed with a few level, taking place in an elementary school being a standout. FEAR 3’s Costco trip is probably the most memorable of these levels because of just how well it’s set and to say any more would ruin it.

After your trip through the Costco knockoff it’s only a handful of levels until you find Beckett and then there’s one more interval and the game ends. The campaign is short, but sweet and I‘m fine with that. If this was all the game had to offer it’d go in the Rental Material category along with the previous two games, but it doesn’t. FEAR 3 has a lot of tricks up its sleeve, some I’ve played, and some I haven’t. I didn’t get to experience the campaign co-op. I would have but all my friends are boring and either exclusively play JRPG’s or Halo. I guess I could have just joined a random game with some stranger but I don’t really enjoy playing co-op games with people I don’t know. Its fine in big multiplayer games like Call of Duty but when it’s just one other person it feels weirdly intimate. And I feel like it’s my obligation to entertain the other person and I’m too socially awkward for that, even if I'm talking to someone from another state or even another country over a headset, so I just avoid it altogether. But despite not playing co-op I’d be remiss to not at least describe it since it’s one of the main selling points of the game.

Remember Fettel? Your evil ghost brother? The one you shot in the head at the end of the first game as he so helpfully reminds you in the opening narration? Well instead of the second player playing as just another Point Man, you play as him. But because he’s, well, a ghost, he can’t pick up guns. Instead he’s relegated to more of a supporting role, being able to use telekinesis to throw stuff, stun enemies, and throw a shield around the Point Man. He can also possess enemies, but only for a short while because after a minute or so they explode into a bloody mess. This offense/defense type gameplay creates an interesting dynamic not seen in most other co-op shooters where both players are usually both playing offense. There’s a rudimentary scoring system and the ending of the campaign depends on which brother did the best. Because I’ve only played through the campaign as Point Man and obviously didn’t have much competition, I’ve only seen one ending. You can play through the levels as Fettel once you’ve beaten them as Point Man but I never got around to that.

Although I never got to play the co-op, I did get to play some of the games other multiplayer modes. I didn’t get to play through all of them because, well, not too many people were still playing the game by the time I got it. This is an unfortunate side-effect of living in a post-Call of Duty, post-Halo world. Not that I have anything against those games, at least not Call of Duty. If you’re not a AAA title being developed by a AAA developer with a AAA publisher chances are your game will be a ghost town within six months save for die hard fans or people too broke (Like me!) who can’t afford to buy a new release every month.

FEAR 3 has 4 multiplayer modes: Contractions, Soul Survivor, Soul King, and my favorite, Fucking Run. I only got a chance to play Contractions and Fucking Run. The former is a survival round-based game mode not unlike Call of Duty’s “Nazi Zombies” where you face progressively more difficult waves of enemies from the campaign including mechs and occasionally Alma herself, having to board up windows and doors between rounds. Setting it apart from other horde modes is the fog around the map which gradually gets thicker as the rounds wear on. This wouldn’t be that big of a problem if it weren’t for the fact that all your ammo and supplies spawns at the outskirts of the map in boxes you have to carry back to the starting area, and you only have about a minutes rest between waves. In the few games I played me and my teammates never lasted but a few rounds. Contractions is great, but the real stand-out is Fucking Run. In it you and three others fight your way from checkpoint to checkpoint. Complicating matters is the great, roaring Wall of Death as seen above, eating the world behind you. If even one player falls behind and gets swallowed up by the wall then it’s game over. It’s an incredibly tense experience that I’m finding difficult to put into words, a problem I seem to be having a lot in this review. If you’ve ever played any of the Left 4 Dead games, it’s like being chased by a Tank. Or rather 12 of them. A wall of Tanks. It’s an experience I hope to have again, if I’m lucky. (Like I said, I never got to play the last two game modes, Soul Survivor and Soul King. Soul Survivor is an infection type game mode with one player playing as a “Spectre” and the other three playing soldiers the Spectre must possess. Soul King is another infection type game mode where all of the players play as Spectres who have to possess enemy A.I.’s to eliminate both other soldiers and each other for points.)

So you have a rock solid campaign, some pretty great co-op, and a couple really interesting multiplayer modes. That’s more then you get with a lot of AAA releases, so why wasn’t FEAR 3 a bigger success? Sure the story wasn’t that great and the graphics, while decent and surprisingly colorful, weren’t anything to write home about. But that hasn’t stopped other games from being successful. Why is FEAR 3 seen by most fans of the games as the low point of the series? Well that probably has something to do with the elephant in the room I’ve been trying to ignore this entire review: FEAR 3 just isn’t that scary, which for a horror game is a pretty sizable problem. This might the fact that the scares this time around are supposedly randomized, something I hadn’t known until recently when reading up on the game. None of the scares I ran into seemed particularly random (Although that may be the point) and none of them were particularly all that scary either. A few obviously planned set were a bit unnerving at most but everything else was just jump scares. Diminishing the effect is the games co-op. It’s hard enough making a tactical shooter like FEAR scary. Orchestrating an effective scare with one player is hard enough, but when playing with a friend it’s damn near impossible. None of this of course is a deal breaker for me. As long as the game is fun it doesn’t matter how scary it is or is suppose to be. Dead Space 2 (Never played the first) isn’t really all that scary despite being labeled as a survival horror game. It’s pretty much all jump scares. But it’s still an amazing game and one I’ve returned to many times. It isn’t a deal breaker for me, but it is to others. To many, if a horror game doesn’t make you piss or shit yourself or make you bleed from your eyeballs in fright, it’s a failure and thus a bad game. For many people it seems the gamble of FEAR 3 didn’t quit pay off. But for me it did.

Come on man!

Xia just got a ps3, so I have been playing Modern war 3, and little big planet.
Little Big Planet is a lot more fun then I expected. Xia and I play it quite a bit and there is something about playing the game with her that makes it even better. Plus the first time I played it I was a little high so that made it even better.
As for MW3, I havnt played many standard FPS in a while. I plaed through Halo Reach, and played a lot of fallout. But as for Standard shooters go I have been having a lot of fun with it, Only played about two or three hours but still. I like the AI and the maps, Its fast paced without being overkill.

Borderlands 2 is pretty fun so far. I only played for about an hour or two, and it started out pretty annoying because we never had any ammo, but it gets fun. I love the design of the guns, how they have abilities instead of just stats. Sometimes it's wise to switch guns for something with less power, accuracy, distance, and reload time, just for the bonus of the gun having some affect.

I don't understand how this is played online. The setup seems GTA-like; we go to some nigga and he gives us a mission and then we run to that place. If someone joins our game online, do they go back to the point of the game we're at? Will we be rolling out with a level 16 when we're level 4? Or is there some kind of arena where you fight only against each other, Nuke Town stlye?

Just getting into it, but it's good. A stylish game and shit, dog.

Noahrm, do you know that you can whip your arms back and forth and punch your partner, in Little Big Planet? Use one toggle button and whip it left to right, and you can smack Xia in the face and her dude will go flying.

...Thank you for this info

If you complete a mission that you haven't gotten to yet, you can skip it when you get to it in your game.

I beat the main campaign of Arkham City. It was great and all, but I hate it when you don't know it's the final boss of the game. You win, scene, end credits. Still. Great game.

Something that disturbs me though is that I just have saving citizens, collecting riddler trophies and finding out who framed me for murder left (all side missions) and yet, it says I've only completed just over 50 percent of the game.

I'm doing the Harley Quinn DLC now. It was free in the GOTY Edition and takes place after the end of the game.

I keep trying to take a break from Borderlands 2 but this game owns my soul.

i'm playing through uncharted 3 now and i'm not liking the controls. they're clunky and platforming sucks because it's hard to line up your jump to the next platform. drake also runs weird. he does this stop/start jog thing that takes some getting used to. it seems like there's a lag from when you move the control stick to when he actually starts running.

the camera won't cooperate so most of the time you're looking at yourself especially when you're in tight areas or doing hand-to-hand combat.

i don't remember the controls being this bad on the first two. i wish they integrated assassin's creed-like platforming since grabbing stuff is getting really annoying.

Got this yesterday, spending far too much time playing it! It's a lot better than Super Mario Galaxy 2, which I tired of within less than a week.

I only like to play car games. Still Playing Forza Motorsport 4 and Project Gotham Racing 4 on my xbox.

Nightrious wrote:

Hattie wrote:

Got this yesterday, spending far too much time playing it! It's a lot better than Super Mario Galaxy 2, which I tired of within less than a week.

I've gotten every gold coin in this game, three for each level. It required elite gaming skills and precise swejenistics.

I think multiplayer option is going to ruin my relationship:
"Stop jumping on me!"
"You're going too fast!"
"No, that's my mushroom!"

[/unnecessary innuendo]

That game always turns into a yelling match.

Rented Dishonored and liked it so much I returned it after just a few hours so I'd have a reason to buy it later. Don't plan on getting it until it drops down to $30.

Bought Darksiders II and loving it so far.

Debating on whether I should just buy Dishonored now or still wait until it gets down to $30. Waiting would be the smart thing but I really want to play the game and I'm not a patient man when it comes to games.

I have been playing God of War Saga (all 5 games in 1). Skipped GoW 1 because I beat it years ago. Almost done with 2. Then on to the two PSP games and then finally 3.

I may play other games in between.

Got a force feedback wheel recently, so a lot of Dirt 2 and 3. A LOT.

Some Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 happens from time to time, with the occasional dabbling in baseball, skateboarding, or Naruto.

Just ordered Halo 4.

I feel like such a chump.

ManArchy may be doing a review of that (might even be an early review, but I doubt it looking at the release date).

I've decided that Borderlands 2 sucks. Is there more to it if you play it online, PVP or something?

The main problem I have is that there's no challenge. You die, you spend 32 of your thousands of dollars and then you're back to life. It's usually quicker, fighting a boss, to just bleed out and come back to life and attack him and bleed out and repeat; why bother with tactics, strategy, timing, character builds, all that shit that makes a game interesting, if there's virtually no way to lose?

Hattie wrote:

Nightrious wrote:

Hattie wrote:

Got this yesterday, spending far too much time playing it! It's a lot better than Super Mario Galaxy 2, which I tired of within less than a week.

I've gotten every gold coin in this game, three for each level. It required elite gaming skills and precise swejenistics.

What about all the little coins??

I think multiplayer option is going to ruin my relationship:
"Stop jumping on me!"
"You're going too fast!"
"No, that's my mushroom!"

[/unnecessary innuendo]

I never go for little coins, unless I need 99 free mans so that Mario takes his hat off like a boss. But my Mario usually has 99 free mans. Like a boss.

Whoever came up with that release date should eat shit. The day they should be out voting, they will be playing Halo 4.

The newer Mario games are fun and all. But they lack a soul. There are no new bad guys and it's always the same. Grass world. Desert world. Ice World. Island World.

I agree kind of. The Paper Mario series has a lot of heart though and I'm really looking forward to the next one.

I started Animal Crossing over again to try and numb the desperation for the 3DS one but it hasn't worked. I've gone back to Zelda: Spirit Tracks but still absolutely hate the train driving bits and the microphone on my 3DS is really hard to blow in to for the spirit pipes and it's annoying.

I am in the middle of the first God of War PSP game (on the PS3). The whole series is fun and straight forward.

But I also bought the cult classic PS2 game Psychonauts on the PSN store. Everyone goes on about how great that game is and how much Tim Schaffer is a genius. I'll admit his characters are clever and well written, but for right now, the game is slow moving. But it's been a while since I enjoyed a good 3D platformer so I'll stick with it.

Yes.

What do you think of it so far?