That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.
You mean that the argument that people play games for fun is invalidated by your definition of what a fighting game is?
I remember owning Killer Instinct on the gameboy (Ew, I know, but I enjoyed it back then!) when I was like ten or something and despite not playing against a single real person, I still enjoyed the hell out of the game. I agree with the argument that online play is just becoming a standard in console games (and now console fighting games) and developers need to implement it to stay competitive. There's a difference between the hardcore players and the the Joe Shmoes who just want to pit Vader and Yoda against one another from across the state.
As another example, a few college friends and I played Smash Bros in residence with each other during the entire second semester of University. Being 3 hours away from each other all summer, we decided to play online. Now the game lags like a bitch and really somewhat takes away from the competitive side of the game, but it was still great to completely ass-rape that Game and Watch-whoring friend of mine once we got used to the lag. It was a different game, but it was still a great social experience.
Yeah, that's great, but that wasn't what I was talking about.
You were addressing my point about time-sinks, and that's what I responded to. Not online play. And almost anything can be fun if you do it with friends. I've gone bowling, and I'm not very good at it, but I go bowling to be with the other people bowling, and to check out which old arcade machines they have. But I don't go bowling regularly, and if I did then I would make an effort to get better at it. There's a big difference between playing a game once or twice with your friends and owning a copy of the game and playing it long enough to unlock everything.
Ok, so then can we just agree that the online play is more of a feature for casual players, like that feature in Madden for the Wii that allows you to play using the wiimote motions? I mean, if you're really hardcore, you're just going to be playing against people in person at a tournament or something, right? If you've been playing fighters since before the inclusion of online play and are pretty hardcore, you should already know where to find these sorts of things. The inclusion of online play doesn't really interfere with that.
So in conclusion, I don't really know what you're arguing.
Is it already known what the extra Star Wars characters are besides Yoda, Vader and the Apprentice? I heard there were five in total, is that correct? If so I hope someone can put them in a spoiler for me since I don't wanna drudge through GameFAQs.
Is it already known what the extra Star Wars characters are besides Yoda, Vader and the Apprentice? I heard there were five in total, is that correct? If so I hope someone can put them in a spoiler for me since I don't wanna drudge through GameFAQs.
I believe that was the rumor, but it doesn't appear to be true.
That argument would be more valid if the point of fighting games weren't 1 on 1 direct competition with other human players.
You mean that the argument that people play games for fun is invalidated by your definition of what a fighting game is?
I remember owning Killer Instinct on the gameboy (Ew, I know, but I enjoyed it back then!) when I was like ten or something and despite not playing against a single real person, I still enjoyed the hell out of the game. I agree with the argument that online play is just becoming a standard in console games (and now console fighting games) and developers need to implement it to stay competitive. There's a difference between the hardcore players and the the Joe Shmoes who just want to pit Vader and Yoda against one another from across the state.
As another example, a few college friends and I played Smash Bros in residence with each other during the entire second semester of University. Being 3 hours away from each other all summer, we decided to play online. Now the game lags like a bitch and really somewhat takes away from the competitive side of the game, but it was still great to completely ass-rape that Game and Watch-whoring friend of mine once we got used to the lag. It was a different game, but it was still a great social experience.
Yeah, that's great, but that wasn't what I was talking about.
You were addressing my point about time-sinks, and that's what I responded to. Not online play. And almost anything can be fun if you do it with friends. I've gone bowling, and I'm not very good at it, but I go bowling to be with the other people bowling, and to check out which old arcade machines they have. But I don't go bowling regularly, and if I did then I would make an effort to get better at it. There's a big difference between playing a game once or twice with your friends and owning a copy of the game and playing it long enough to unlock everything.
Ok, so then can we just agree that the online play is more of a feature for casual players, like that feature in Madden for the Wii that allows you to play using the wiimote motions? I mean, if you're really hardcore, you're just going to be playing against people in person at a tournament or something, right? If you've been playing fighters since before the inclusion of online play and are pretty hardcore, you should already know where to find these sorts of things. The inclusion of online play doesn't really interfere with that.
So in conclusion, I don't really know what you're arguing.
For the most part, that's true. But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
And in general I don't think it's necessary for console online options to be so primitive. There's no reason, other than ambivalence, who console couldn't have online features on par with PCs.
But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
I'm so pissed. I was gonna buy this game, the Hori fighting stick and a new Gold card on Tuesday from Amazon with a 50 dollar gift card I had coming to me....that still hasn't shown up. I really don't wanna spend the full 170 or so dollars for all three of those.
Fucking Bank of America. Why do I have rewards points when the rewards don't fucking come to me.
Is it already known what the extra Star Wars characters are besides Yoda, Vader and the Apprentice? I heard there were five in total, is that correct? If so I hope someone can put them in a spoiler for me since I don't wanna drudge through GameFAQs.
I believe that was the rumor, but it doesn't appear to be true.
Ahhh, that's too bad. I was still holding out hope for Carrie Fisher.
But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
THEY'RE THE REASON FOR THE GIANT BOOBS
Hey, he asked and I answered. Whether you choose to make fun of my point or not doesn't change how valid it is. Obviously I have more invested in this game than most of you, but, guess what!, I still play SC for fun.
But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
THEY'RE THE REASON FOR THE GIANT BOOBS
Hey, he asked and I answered. Whether you choose to make fun of my point or not doesn't change how valid it is. Obviously I have more invested in this game than most of you, but, guess what!, I still play SC for fun.
But your fun seems to require a lot of stuff from other people. If you think the balance will cater to online play, then complain when that happens.
I haven't really played many fighters since the dawn of console patching; do they even do balance patches for fighting games?
Bama on
0
Options
The_SpaniardIt's never lupinesIrvine, CaliforniaRegistered Userregular
But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
THEY'RE THE REASON FOR THE GIANT BOOBS
Hey, he asked and I answered. Whether you choose to make fun of my point or not doesn't change how valid it is. Obviously I have more invested in this game than most of you, but, guess what!, I still play SC for fun.
But your fun seems to require a lot of stuff from other people. If you think the balance will cater to online play, then complain when that happens.
I haven't really played many fighters since the dawn of console patching; do they even do balance patches for fighting games?
My fun doesn't require anything from other people, but it is under threat of influence of other people. There's a difference.
And fighting games have been getting patched since forever. Back when there were arcade releases they were used as testing grounds, and most games went through many versions before they hit consoles. The main difference now is that many fighting games don't get arcade releases anymore, so you're forced to do that whole process once they hit consoles. This can be a problem since many people don't realize how these things work: no competitive game is ever fully balanced on initial release. Even in the week or so that a dozen people have had early copies of the game there have been a few issues found. And Namco has already patched the game, though not to address any of the known problems.
SC3 is all the example you need on how patching is needed. That game was released straight to consoles, without any testing, and because it was PS2 exclusive there was no chance of patches. The game was found to be terminally broken within a week of its release, and it almost destroyed the competitive community. Much later there was an arcade release that addressed many of the console version's problems, but it was far too late by then.
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
edited July 2008
I think the big problem here is that you think that for whatever reason the "competitive community" is better than the casual "hey let's just have fun" community.
It's not. In fact, I'm willing to bet that it's the latter community that makes games succesful.
What exactly do you mean by "better?" I value that competitive community more for their input, dedication and skill. I don't think they're the reason the game will sell well. And I never said any such thing. But after all the casual players have had their fill and moved on to the next game, the competitive community will still be there playing and promoting the game. It's up for the devs to decide whether or not they value that aspect of their games, but I think it's in their own best interest to keep them happy.
And I'll say it again: I play SC for fun, that's it. I just happen to have more fun at games that I can play well.
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
edited July 2008
Well, when I read your posts I get the impression that when you talk about the casual community you're talking about the ignorant, idiotic console playing simpletons who dare to have fun with their games when having fun isn't the Point!, and when you're talking about the competitive community you're talking about the super smart and sexy PC gaming manlymen who cure cancers and bring about the world peace all the while mastering every aspect of their favourite game.
And no, it's not really in the companies best interest to keep the competitive community happy. There's 50 of you and 5000 of the casuals. You all bought the game, you all played it, but when it really comes down to it the casuals brought them more money. And when they make Fighting Mans 2: Electric Boogaloo, it's the casuals again who will bring them the most money because the competitive players decreed that in Fighting Mans 2, Hans Guttenburg's Mega Uppercut does 2 damage too much and as such ruins the game, so they spread the word and most of the competitive players won't buy it, but the 5000 casuals don't mind and they buy it and have fun with it.
It may seem that way on paper, but most the most successful competitive franchises remain on top by paying close attention to their competitive communities. The casuals will come either way, it's true, but getting the competitive players on your side really helps with word-of-mouth and general respect.
It may seem that way on paper, but most the most successful competitive franchises remain on top by paying close attention to their competitive communities. The casuals will come either way, it's true, but getting the competitive players on your side really helps with word-of-mouth and general respect.
See Virtual Fighter 5 or something, yeah I can understand that being a "competitive franchise" but Soul Calibur? What the hell dude. I mean just about anything could be a "competitive franchise" I guess. Call of Duty! Halo! Mario Kart!
It's you people that made Mario Kart DS's online mode unplayable.
It may seem that way on paper, but most the most successful competitive franchises remain on top by paying close attention to their competitive communities. The casuals will come either way, it's true, but getting the competitive players on your side really helps with word-of-mouth and general respect.
Yes, it's respect that makes the share holders happy, not big wads of cash.
Er. It's a demonstrable fact that the games that are widely considered to be the pinnacle of their genre's competitive aspects, and also enjoy huge sales, try to keep their competitive players happy. Or are you saying Blizzard, id, Bungie, et al, are doing it wrong?
And many of the problems that competitive players discover eventually influence casual players.
Is it already known what the extra Star Wars characters are besides Yoda, Vader and the Apprentice? I heard there were five in total, is that correct? If so I hope someone can put them in a spoiler for me since I don't wanna drudge through GameFAQs.
I believe that was the rumor, but it doesn't appear to be true.
Ahhh, that's too bad. I was still holding out hope for Carrie Fisher.
IIRC, someone suggested (and it's probably true), that the reason we got Yoda and Vader is because there's no need to deal with using anyone's "image" when recreating the movie character in-game, whereas with say, Luke, or Leia, you'd need to make them look different, or pay a lot more money to use them in the game.
Vincent Grayson on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Is it already known what the extra Star Wars characters are besides Yoda, Vader and the Apprentice? I heard there were five in total, is that correct? If so I hope someone can put them in a spoiler for me since I don't wanna drudge through GameFAQs.
I believe that was the rumor, but it doesn't appear to be true.
Ahhh, that's too bad. I was still holding out hope for Carrie Fisher.
IIRC, someone suggested (and it's probably true), that the reason we got Yoda and Vader is because there's no need to deal with using anyone's "image" when recreating the movie character in-game, whereas with say, Luke, or Leia, you'd need to make them look different, or pay a lot more money to use them in the game.
I can't decide if Mark Hamill would be all about it because he's a generally decent guy, or if he'd be against it because he wants to leave the Star Wars part behind. :P
Edit: Has anyone heard more on the Vader/Yoda thing? Is the video an extremely clever fake, or is it the real deal? I mean.. should we be buying the CE just in case? :P
It may seem that way on paper, but most the most successful competitive franchises remain on top by paying close attention to their competitive communities. The casuals will come either way, it's true, but getting the competitive players on your side really helps with word-of-mouth and general respect.
Yes, it's respect that makes the share holders happy, not big wads of cash.
Er. It's a demonstrable fact that the games that are widely considered to be the pinnacle of their genre's competitive aspects, and also enjoy huge sales, try to keep their competitive players happy. Or are you saying Blizzard, id, Bungie, et al, are doing it wrong?
And many of the problems that competitive players discover eventually influence casual players.
What about Street Fighter? Marvel vs. Capcom? Heck, any Capcom fighting game? They haven't been exactly pumping them out now have they? Yea, we're finally getting Street Fighter 4, but it bears to see how succesfull that game is going to be.
Page, you sound like the stereotypical online/competitive gamer. "Bluh bluh bluh, you casual gamers are ruining everything! Bluh bluh bluh, you don't know how bad you have it."
Been a big fan of Soul Calibur series, but at this point I personally feel that it lost it track by introduction of not one, but two (And possibly 3) Star Wars Characters. It feels like a big advertisement for Star Wars. Why just choose Star Wars? And why so many? Is it a Star Wars fighting game? Why such big kow -towing to it?
Here are some other swordsman they could have included from
Conan
ThunderCats
and even Power Rangers
Putting those three into Soul Calibur makes as much sense as Star Wars.
It makes some sense in including traditional VIDEO GAME characters that were representative of a VIDEO games world for
Soul Calibur II. Heihachi from Tekken (Yoshi as well) on PS, Link for Game Cube, and XBOX been the new kid on thee block, had a brand new, ONE character.
Instead of continuation of original character design, they went down dilution of their brand, and expansion of Star Wars whoring. Great on Lucas on milking that old cow - shame on Soul Calibur for selling out.
I do not want to play SC in Star Wars Universe, just like I would not want SC to be in Power Rangers world.
Been a big fan of Soul Calibur series, but at this point I personally feel that it lost it track by introduction of not one, but two (And possibly 3) Star Wars Characters. It feels like a big advertisement for Star Wars. Why just choose Star Wars? And why so many? Is it a Star Wars fighting game? Why such big kow -towing to it?
Here are some other swordsman they could have included from
Conan
ThunderCats
and even Power Rangers
Putting those three into Soul Calibur makes as much sense as Star Wars.
It makes some sense in including traditional VIDEO GAME characters that were representative of a VIDEO games world for
Soul Calibur II. Heihachi from Tekken (Yoshi as well) on PS, Link for Game Cube, and XBOX been the new kid on thee block, had a brand new, ONE character.
Instead of continuation of original character design, they went down dilution of their brand, and expansion of Star Wars whoring. Great on Lucas on milking that old cow - shame on Soul Calibur for selling out.
I do not want to play SC in Star Wars Universe, just like I would not want SC to be in Power Rangers world.
Listen. Why don't you want to play Darth Vader or Yoda in a fighting game?
Seriously. This could be the greatest thing of all time.
EDIT: YOU CAN FIGHT AS JEDI IN A FIGHTING GAME. THIS CAN NEVER BE A BAD THING.
How can anyone whine about guest characters when they already had motherfucking Spawn in Soul Calibur? Star Wars characters isn't diluting the franchise because they've already scraped the bottom of the barrel for guest characters. It didn't even make any sense. I mean, why Spawn?
It may seem that way on paper, but most the most successful competitive franchises remain on top by paying close attention to their competitive communities. The casuals will come either way, it's true, but getting the competitive players on your side really helps with word-of-mouth and general respect.
Yes, it's respect that makes the share holders happy, not big wads of cash.
Er. It's a demonstrable fact that the games that are widely considered to be the pinnacle of their genre's competitive aspects, and also enjoy huge sales, try to keep their competitive players happy. Or are you saying Blizzard, id, Bungie, et al, are doing it wrong?
And many of the problems that competitive players discover eventually influence casual players.
What about Street Fighter? Marvel vs. Capcom? Heck, any Capcom fighting game? They haven't been exactly pumping them out now have they? Yea, we're finally getting Street Fighter 4, but it bears to see how succesfull that game is going to be.
Page, you sound like the stereotypical online/competitive gamer. "Bluh bluh bluh, you casual gamers are ruining everything! Bluh bluh bluh, you don't know how bad you have it."
Your first paragraph doesn't make any sense to me. How is that addressing any of my points? Capcom stopped making Street Fighter games . . . so? They didn't do it because the casual players wanted them to stop. And they're doing a pretty decent job at paying attention to the competitive community in in their SF4 and SF2HD designs.
And I'm sorry you feel that way about me, because I'm really not. I love playing games casually, but I don't like to wallow in ignorance. I don't have to get "pro" at every game I play, but I do find that games designed to reward the player for being skillful are a lot more fun when you actually try and acquire some skill.
Really. you can have fun playing a game in any way you want. I enjoy Counter-Strike most when I only use pistols, and no amount of being bitched at on servers will ever change that. But I don't play Counter-Strike with anyone but my friends, and usually lan, and I haven't even done that in a few years. People enjoy listening to Top 40s pop music. Good for them.
That changes when their influence might effect my enjoyment of the game. And when I have to interact with noisy scrubs who think they're hot shit because they spent an afternoon boosting up the leaderboards with their friends, or who say "Yeah, you beat me here, but come play VS Special and I'll destroy you with my lvl 60 Ivy."
It's not new or casual players I dislike, it's dirty, dirty scrubs.
Also, if SkutSkut is fine with it, and B:L doesn't have anything planned, I could make up a new, more relevant OP when the game comes out. Keeping track of XBL and PSN accounts, some links to good introductory strategy guides, other community links for anyone who's interested, etc.
Posts
Nope.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Ok, so then can we just agree that the online play is more of a feature for casual players, like that feature in Madden for the Wii that allows you to play using the wiimote motions? I mean, if you're really hardcore, you're just going to be playing against people in person at a tournament or something, right? If you've been playing fighters since before the inclusion of online play and are pretty hardcore, you should already know where to find these sorts of things. The inclusion of online play doesn't really interfere with that.
So in conclusion, I don't really know what you're arguing.
I believe that was the rumor, but it doesn't appear to be true.
For the most part, that's true. But the majority of players will be online scrubs, and they have the potential to influence balance aspects of the game. This is what I'm worried about.
And in general I don't think it's necessary for console online options to be so primitive. There's no reason, other than ambivalence, who console couldn't have online features on par with PCs.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
guys, the people who dont play tournaments are going to fuck up everything, we have to stop this
THEY'RE THE REASON FOR THE GIANT BOOBS
XBL: Torn Hoodie
@hoodiethirteen
Fucking Bank of America. Why do I have rewards points when the rewards don't fucking come to me.
I hate it when doctors play videogames.
Hey, he asked and I answered. Whether you choose to make fun of my point or not doesn't change how valid it is. Obviously I have more invested in this game than most of you, but, guess what!, I still play SC for fun.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
I haven't really played many fighters since the dawn of console patching; do they even do balance patches for fighting games?
My fun doesn't require anything from other people, but it is under threat of influence of other people. There's a difference.
And fighting games have been getting patched since forever. Back when there were arcade releases they were used as testing grounds, and most games went through many versions before they hit consoles. The main difference now is that many fighting games don't get arcade releases anymore, so you're forced to do that whole process once they hit consoles. This can be a problem since many people don't realize how these things work: no competitive game is ever fully balanced on initial release. Even in the week or so that a dozen people have had early copies of the game there have been a few issues found. And Namco has already patched the game, though not to address any of the known problems.
SC3 is all the example you need on how patching is needed. That game was released straight to consoles, without any testing, and because it was PS2 exclusive there was no chance of patches. The game was found to be terminally broken within a week of its release, and it almost destroyed the competitive community. Much later there was an arcade release that addressed many of the console version's problems, but it was far too late by then.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
It's not. In fact, I'm willing to bet that it's the latter community that makes games succesful.
And I'll say it again: I play SC for fun, that's it. I just happen to have more fun at games that I can play well.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
And no, it's not really in the companies best interest to keep the competitive community happy. There's 50 of you and 5000 of the casuals. You all bought the game, you all played it, but when it really comes down to it the casuals brought them more money. And when they make Fighting Mans 2: Electric Boogaloo, it's the casuals again who will bring them the most money because the competitive players decreed that in Fighting Mans 2, Hans Guttenburg's Mega Uppercut does 2 damage too much and as such ruins the game, so they spread the word and most of the competitive players won't buy it, but the 5000 casuals don't mind and they buy it and have fun with it.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Super Smash Brothers Brawl disagrees.
It's you people that made Mario Kart DS's online mode unplayable.
XBL: Torn Hoodie
@hoodiethirteen
Er. It's a demonstrable fact that the games that are widely considered to be the pinnacle of their genre's competitive aspects, and also enjoy huge sales, try to keep their competitive players happy. Or are you saying Blizzard, id, Bungie, et al, are doing it wrong?
And many of the problems that competitive players discover eventually influence casual players.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
IIRC, someone suggested (and it's probably true), that the reason we got Yoda and Vader is because there's no need to deal with using anyone's "image" when recreating the movie character in-game, whereas with say, Luke, or Leia, you'd need to make them look different, or pay a lot more money to use them in the game.
I can't decide if Mark Hamill would be all about it because he's a generally decent guy, or if he'd be against it because he wants to leave the Star Wars part behind. :P
Edit: Has anyone heard more on the Vader/Yoda thing? Is the video an extremely clever fake, or is it the real deal? I mean.. should we be buying the CE just in case? :P
What about Street Fighter? Marvel vs. Capcom? Heck, any Capcom fighting game? They haven't been exactly pumping them out now have they? Yea, we're finally getting Street Fighter 4, but it bears to see how succesfull that game is going to be.
Page, you sound like the stereotypical online/competitive gamer. "Bluh bluh bluh, you casual gamers are ruining everything! Bluh bluh bluh, you don't know how bad you have it."
Here are some other swordsman they could have included from
Conan
ThunderCats
and even Power Rangers
Putting those three into Soul Calibur makes as much sense as Star Wars.
It makes some sense in including traditional VIDEO GAME characters that were representative of a VIDEO games world for
Soul Calibur II. Heihachi from Tekken (Yoshi as well) on PS, Link for Game Cube, and XBOX been the new kid on thee block, had a brand new, ONE character.
Instead of continuation of original character design, they went down dilution of their brand, and expansion of Star Wars whoring. Great on Lucas on milking that old cow - shame on Soul Calibur for selling out.
I do not want to play SC in Star Wars Universe, just like I would not want SC to be in Power Rangers world.
there ya go
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
Listen. Why don't you want to play Darth Vader or Yoda in a fighting game?
Seriously. This could be the greatest thing of all time.
EDIT: YOU CAN FIGHT AS JEDI IN A FIGHTING GAME. THIS CAN NEVER BE A BAD THING.
Sweet. Can I have a pony too?
And MechMantis..I bring you this to refute your point
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
That doesn't refute his point at all.
That was a bad fighting game.
Now imagine what it would have been like without Jedi and lightsabers.
And lets not even get started on Necrid.
Your first paragraph doesn't make any sense to me. How is that addressing any of my points? Capcom stopped making Street Fighter games . . . so? They didn't do it because the casual players wanted them to stop. And they're doing a pretty decent job at paying attention to the competitive community in in their SF4 and SF2HD designs.
And I'm sorry you feel that way about me, because I'm really not. I love playing games casually, but I don't like to wallow in ignorance. I don't have to get "pro" at every game I play, but I do find that games designed to reward the player for being skillful are a lot more fun when you actually try and acquire some skill.
Really. you can have fun playing a game in any way you want. I enjoy Counter-Strike most when I only use pistols, and no amount of being bitched at on servers will ever change that. But I don't play Counter-Strike with anyone but my friends, and usually lan, and I haven't even done that in a few years. People enjoy listening to Top 40s pop music. Good for them.
That changes when their influence might effect my enjoyment of the game. And when I have to interact with noisy scrubs who think they're hot shit because they spent an afternoon boosting up the leaderboards with their friends, or who say "Yeah, you beat me here, but come play VS Special and I'll destroy you with my lvl 60 Ivy."
It's not new or casual players I dislike, it's dirty, dirty scrubs.
Also, if SkutSkut is fine with it, and B:L doesn't have anything planned, I could make up a new, more relevant OP when the game comes out. Keeping track of XBL and PSN accounts, some links to good introductory strategy guides, other community links for anyone who's interested, etc.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
ONLY saving grace. Only.