Agile
-
@Lorne Kates said:
@_gaffer said:
I've played that game.
Spent 2 whole dollars on it.It's really, really awful. It feels Rockstar got the team that made GTA3 to try to remake it after causing them severe head trauma.
90% of it was walking up to enemy gangs and repeatedly mashing the attack button, and the remaining 10% was mostly taken up with trying to tilt my head correctly for the shitty camera angle to make sense.
And the constant goddamn spraypainting. Because if there's anything I hate more than doing things that require fine hand-motor control, is doing a simulation of them with a mouse. And anything I hate more than that, is doing it with an IBM-style nub. And I hate more than that, doing it with a touchpad. And I hate more than that, doing it with a janky analog stick to a weird camera angle while being attacked.
And I hate more than that: doing it with a janky analog stick to a weird camera angle while my character is attacked.
Oh fuck, yes.
I'd managed to blot out the memory of the spray painting minigame until now.
I have no idea how something like that ever made it into a finished game.
-
@Lorne Kates said:
doing it with a janky analog stick to a weird camera angle while my character is attacked.
I tend to do it with women.
My character is still attacked, though.
And then afterwards you find out that the camera angle was weird. Mannn.
-
@blakeyrat said:
How does 2005 count as "the late 2000s"
Rounding, http://math.about.com/od/arithmetic/a/Rounding.htm using the standard form of rounding, and logically assuming that late 2000's means the late 00's and not something like 2999 as dates like that would be beyond the lifespan of people here, which would make the significant rounding point the decade.
-
@ASheridan said:
@blakeyrat said:
How does 2005 count as "the late 2000s"
Rounding, http://math.about.com/od/arithmetic/a/Rounding.htm using the standard form of rounding, and logically assuming that late 2000's means the late 00's and not something like 2999 as dates like that would be beyond the lifespan of people here, which would make the significant rounding point the decade.Do you people need to go to school to be this unfunny?
-
@blakeyrat said:
Do you people need to go to school to be this unfunny?
No, but at least I did learn how to round numbers at my school.
-
If there were only "late 2000s" and "early 2000s" then you would be right, and 2005 would be "late 2000s" according to... mathematic rounding (which doesn't really apply here in the first place). Since we have the added distinguishment of "middle 2000s", most people would put 2005 in that category.
-
@Sutherlands said:
If there were only "late 2000s" and "early 2000s" then you would be right, and 2005 would be "late 2000s" according to... mathematic rounding (which doesn't really apply here in the first place). Since we have the added distinguishment of "middle 2000s", most people would put 2005 in that category.
Only if they themselves actually refer to that time period as 'mid'. Also, where would low end and mid begin? Likewise for mid to late? As those 10 years won't divide equally into 3 parts, why should one grouping have more years than the other? That sort of encourages ambiguity in where the lines get drawn.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Do you people need to go to school to be this unfunny?
It's a side effect of school.
I never went, so I'm hilarious.
-
@ASheridan said:
Who cares?@Sutherlands said:
If there were only "late 2000s" and "early 2000s" then you would be right, and 2005 would be "late 2000s" according to... mathematic rounding (which doesn't really apply here in the first place). Since we have the added distinguishment of "middle 2000s", most people would put 2005 in that category.
Only if they themselves actually refer to that time period as 'mid'. Also, where would low end and mid begin? Likewise for mid to late? As those 10 years won't divide equally into 3 parts, why should one grouping have more years than the other? That sort of encourages ambiguity in where the lines get drawn.
-
-
@ASheridan said:
@Sutherlands said:
What is it that you think I was addressing?Who cares?
Apparently not you, so I guess you didn't need to interject.
Nobody cares that early, mid, and late aren't precisely defined. The point is that they're not precisely defined. 2005 isn't "late 2000s" no matter how much flack you give blakey about it. You can't just say "anything that rounds up is 'late'". Well, I suppose you can, but you'd be the only one using that retarded definition.
Seriously, who takes rounding and applies it to English. ROFL.
-
-
@blakeyrat said:
Do you people need to go to school to be this unfunny?
You don't learn unfunny like this in an INSTITUTION, man. This street smarts. You learn unfunny on the job, on your feet, like a real duck. I'm fucking tired of all these kids thinking they're unfunny because they dropped $20k to be talked to for four years by some clown with a spinning bowtie with tenure. It's amazing that unfunniness survives the formal education process.
