Unfortunately, by the time I got around to playing IX for the first time, I think I'd past the point in my life where I could fall in love with Final Fantasy games. I only got about halfway through it before I gave up.
As a general rule, I think they're pretty mediocre games, from a mechanical perspective. They have amazing, interesting narratives. But narrative just doesn't draw me in the way it did when I was a youth.
Still, I should take another crack at IX.
It's a mocking way to refer to someone crying, usually over something stupid. (Baw, your class was nerfed in the latest patch, QQ moar nub). Two Qs next to each other look like a pair of eyes with tears coming down them.
Someday, we'll do away with that sort of reward point nonsense, during the glorious worker's revolution.
The HD Remake on steam is a pretty solid port. It's not some annoying cutscenes, but I think the bosses are actually much more interesting than in the original.
I'm surprised none of us have posted this yet:
I've got a weird relationship with Kirby's Dreamland on the NES. I barely remember anything about it, I don't know where it came from, but I'm pretty sure I had a copy of it when I was a kid. I'm also pretty sure I beat it, and it might be the very first game I ever beat. But I actually have no idea.
FF7 is a terrible game. It's also one of my favorite games of all time.
Though I don't think I played it until IX was out.
TREMBLE BEFORE MY MIGHTY SCORE. =P
This is actually consistent from when the game was new. The cartridge itself is 17 or 18 years old, and still has all the original save data. But that top score in particular only happened within the last year or so.
I'm a firm believer in the idea that the rules of a forum should service the needs of the forum. Activity that is problematic on boards with thousands of active members isn't necessarily going to be a problem on a board with fewer than 100. Obviously it would be bad if the forum filled up with stupid, pointless, annoying messages. But at present, that doesn't seem to be a real risk. We have a small member base sharing some lighthearted fun. An odd post here or there which might technically be defined as 'spam' isn't going to harm anyone's forumgoing experience. But heavy-handed spam moderation will.
Spam rules should be moderated with a light touch. Threads don't need to be locked or deleted, they can merely be allowed to die naturally. Nobody needs to be called out in public, but a private message that says "Hey, your post broke the rules. Here's the rule about spam for your future reference: ~~~~~" would be effective. I think the rules would only need more active enforcement if there were an active problem.
As to the definition of spam itself, I think you've hit on an important point, Kaynil: "Not all short posts are spam." Sometimes a single sentence, or even a single word, can be a vehicle to drive conversation forward. If we get it into our heads that short messages = spam, then we create a highschool environment. The kind where you finish your essay in 1 page, then have to write 2 pages of bullshit because the assignment was for a 3 page essay.
If I had to write the rule on spam, I might phrase it like this:
[INDENT]Members should avoid posting spam messages. Spam is any post which does not contribute to conversation. If you can't imagine other posters responding to your comment, consider not posting it. If you don't have anything to say, but you want another member to know that you read their post and liked it, consider using the 'like' button instead.
[/INDENT]
More than anything, I think we should bear in mind that it's more important to make people feel welcome here, than it is to maintain some strict ideal of utopian forum order.
This list would be so fucking long for me.
Aside from about 4 years where I was lower-lower middle class, I've been poor all my life. And my parents hated technology. Computers and video games were only very begrudgingly allowed into their home.
I suppose the early Final Fantasy games would rank high on my list. Banjo Kazooie would probably be up there as well.
I hate smash bros and you love it. It's hardly a surprise that my highest level of achievement isn't impressive to you.
It's still my highest level of achievement, and I have some pride in it.
I know. You feel lazy. But you own a digital camera, and lets face it your N64 is probably already hooked up to the TV. Take a photo of your high score, upload it to Imgur, and post it here.
Some of the best scores in the world are at something like 2900+ for context.
(I know I suck at taking photos of TV screens. It's 1453, if you can't make it out.)
The N64 smash is the only one I was ever good at. I reached the point where I would put all the NPCs on level 9, and on a team against me, and I'd finish the match without any deaths. But (aside from some really good levels that were missing in later games), melee is certainly the technically superior game.
Which doesn't make me like it any more.
I have no idea what those are, but I know I don't want any.
QQ to your Crew Leader. =P
It's that rarest of creations: a video game tie in to a kids show which is also one of the better games of its generation.
Shovel Knight actually draws some inspiration from it.
The '80s were a strange era.
Was that seriously an issue?
I never played a game that needed to be replaced under warranty due to bugs.
I'm just ever so curious if @Sardonic Pickle and @Raddrax69 have the same address.
For some eminently unknowable reason.
Eh, take it or leave it. I switched to Linksys a few years ago.
None of the original glitches were game breaking or bad, were they?
The only glitches I know of in OoT and MM are the kinds that can be intentionally exploited for lulz.
(Also: did they keep the goldcart, or greycart glitches? Because the greycart fixed some of the best glitches in the goldcart version.)
>.>
Hey @Link . You can view the IP addresses of posts, right?
I just can't agree. I had to give up on the Brawl story mode because I just got so bored with the pattern of 30 seconds of gameplay, followed by 3 hours of cutscenes, followed by 30 seconds of gameplay, followed by 3 hours of cutscenes.
And paying too much attention to the story of a Smash bros game just seems like a fundamental kind of mistake to me. These characters are all out of their natural environment. Each character has a different tone, which now has to be forced to fit into the tone of a smash bros game. So none of the characters are acting properly "in character" to begin with.
But we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that, I think.
