Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums

Merlynn

DFA Backers
  • Content Count

    155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Merlynn

  1. Well,that was disappointing. About halfway through and I was calling the "shocking twists" pretty much the whole way through. In addition to being predictable,it ripped off the plot to Destroy All Humans. Which at least was fun to play and let you fight a 50 foot president. I don't know what I was expecting,but this was a let down on all angles. The overworked "girl power" bullshit angle just,ugh. Tim,you helped make Monkey Island which had Elaine Marley,a certified female badass. What the fuck happened? Vella is so bland and boring,her voice drains the joy from my soul. In fact,the whole cast does. What was the voice direction,be as boring as possible? You had some great talent here and they're just dead. Are you sure the whole cast weren't supposed to be robots? She's supposed to be a "warrior" but she just stands there without a thought in her goddamn head and speaks in a monotone that'd put Ben Stein to sleep. And let's talk about the other side of the coin. Shay is only slightly less lifeless but I'd still rather chew off my own leg than be stuck talking to this mildewed wet blanket. Jesus. I've seen rocks with more personality. And that whole "A boy knows what to look for in a girl" thing? Seriously? A TEENAGE BOY knows what to look for in a girl. Tim,I was a teenage boy and I didn't know fuck all what to look for in a girl. Neither did any of my friends. We've all just been winging it. And you never did explain why it had to be a girl. What,a dude can't have the "right stuff" to advance humanity forward? So,boring,predictable second hand plot. Horrible comatose acting. Jokes are non-existent. I expected Psychonauts or Brutal Legend storytelling with puzzles instead of action elements. And you somehow give us this? So,all in all,15 bucks poorly spent. Combined with Tim's apparent decent into madness,I think I'm just gonna stick to my decision to never buy a Double Fine game ever again.
  2. Ok,I figured out how to fix the bug. Fail the attempt with the directions and take note of the new knot configuration. Use the "be right back with new directions" option and you'll be instantly moved to Carol. Tell her the knot and go back. The right answer should now appear. I think what may have caused it was when I burned through the "non-directions directions" when you don't have the step by step guide several times cause I didn't know if it was a progression puzzle or not. That is,if you were supposed to tell him the vague directions and see if the knot got looser or tighter. And then clicked the dialogue option several times in frustration as one is wont to do. That may have been what messed up the code. Anywho,now you has fix and an idea of what might have broke it. You're welcome.
  3. It's not "pull the wings off the flies" cause the game said "nope".
  4. Pic 1: The knot. Pic 2: Dialogue options with Carol,highlighting the one I think is correct. I'm fairly certain the bug didn't show up in her dialogue this time. Pic 3: The picture and dialogue options when I get to F'Ther.
  5. Like I said,I'm not getting the proper directions that match the diagram. I've run across the flower one too and none of the options were "she loves me,she loves me not". Some times I don't even get the right knot description to give to Carol. It's bugged.
  6. Seems to be bugged. I give the proper description,get the instructions,get back to the cloud,and when it comes time to walk F'ther through the untying,it gives me ALL the wrong instructions. For example,I have 1. that looks like a finger pointing down which I'm guessing is "pull the finger". However none of the instructions say anything about fingers or hands. And it's like that every time. I mean,if I had the wrong instructions,it'd just fail me for picking the "right" one but there is no right one. They all describe something that looks nothing like the drawing. So,yeah,bugged.
  7. Grim Fandango was already released for the PC. Console gamers have waited 16 years to play Grim Fandango. You don't hear them complaining.
  8. It's ok,buddy,we all make that mistake from time to time. (hugs)
  9. Yes,ridiculous. Like what I said is a joke or something. Still,I suppose you're right. It could be seen as an attack on Tim's integrity. So to make it clear,I was just kidding. It's not often you see Tim caught flat footed by some jackass who's there for the paycheck. Not to say he's always a jackass who's there for the paycheck,but he certainly was this time. That clear enough?
  10. And Tim froze up when asked how much it cost to get him. So,probably more than he's comfortable admitting. Still,if the project's already screwed the budget,why not get Elijah Wood? If you're gonna crush and burn,might as well go out in a blaze of glory,am I right?
  11. Welp,if it was me. And this is just me talking about what I'd do. I'd just look at what you got planned,find a good stopping point,and release the game as Broken Age 1. Use the rest of the design to work up a pitch for BA2. And then run a Kickstarter for that. I mean,if the game has enough content to last like 4 or 5 hours,I think most people would be happy with that. Considering we're usually getting hit for 40 to 60 bucks for 4 to 6 hours of content,most of which is cutscenes,you're still looking good. But yeah,Tim needs to learn SIFTS. Which is "Save It For The Sequel". Too much content and you won't be able to get it all in.
  12. Putting in my opinion? Which is what most people do? That's kind of how forums work. I hate to break it to you,but this one's kinda dead and I was trying to contribute to the community. Unfortunately,it seems it's a community that wants to slowly waste away to nothing so I'm not going to bother any more. Scarecrow's sighting phantom posts that simply don't exist. I mean,he and Feddlefew were the only ones who responded to my post and they were both on about the armor thing and he's saying there were several responses from other people that I just don't see. So the whole thing comes down to why the hell am I bothering? Either they're all nuts or I am and I don't really want to try anymore. I have better ways to waste my time than this. So in summation,SEE YA' LATER,FUCKERS!!! (disappears into the interweb)
  13. Yeah,that's what I thought. Gibbering insanity and then the "moral high road" bit. And this is what passes for conversation these days. I am depressed.
  14. I'm not offended,I just think it's a poor choice of attire for an agility character like Wonder Woman. It's like putting a ninja in a suit of armor and expecting him to be as agile and stealthy as when he was in his cloth ninja suit. It's just not going to work.
  15. So a woman wearing make up and heels in body armor that'd only slow down a character who uses her agility for defense,thus lowering her ability to defend herself effectively is badass now. I mean the shoulder pieces alone would block any attempt to stop a head shot with her bracers. If it's made of the same stuff as her bracers,she's not going be able to tear through them even with her super strength due to their magical nature,which means she's taking a bullet to the face. And if they aren't,she'll rip 'em off in the block attempt and more likely than not end up cutting herself,making the armor less than useless. The more I look at it the less it makes sense. How is this useful or badass? And how do you forget the topic of a discussion you started? Seriously,if you're not going to put any effort into this,I really don't see the point in going on.
  16. That metal is heavy and uncomfortable and you wouldn't wear it in large amounts if you didn't have to. Pretty simple concept,really. Can't imagine anyone disagreeing with the point.
  17. I've pretty much already explained it once. If you're not even going to try to understand my posts,why do you bother responding to them?
  18. Then the armor is completely useless and serves no function at all because anyone who's going to pick a fight with a superhuman isn't going to be put off by armor. So why not run around in a saucy one piece that at least looks hot? I hate to break it to you,but armor is worn for function,not fashion and it is NOT comfortable. You wear it cause it protects you. If it doesn't protect you,there's no reason to wear it,ergo,you wouldn't. You've just argued her out of the armor and back into her old costume. Which I approve of.
  19. Legs only have tights for protection,arms are fairly open,head is completely unprotected. Weapons are medium range at best and require a certain amount of strength or agility to use effectively. Armor is top heavy. It's not really practical armor and honestly,she looks like she's walking out in the open which even the most armored of soldiers wouldn't do. As this seems to be a permutation of Wonder Woman,I'd suggest sniping her head off if it isn't and a flamethrower if it is. End result,pretty much a dead woman walking. As for gender politics in general,I'd have to say that since it's politics it must therefore be based on bullshit and not the needs and wants of the individual. Ergo,it's not a good idea to live your life by them and given the choice,I'll take a flawed,relatable character like Derpy Hooves over some idealize girl Superman who's so OP that there's never any doubt how a story about them is going to end. Just like I'd rather watch a Goofy cartoon over pre-Crisis Superman comics. There's a reason they powered him down,you know. I still don't get what was so "bad" about the whole Lara almost gets raped thing. I mean,hot chick in short shorts at the mercy of men of low moral fiber,what do you really think is going to happen? And she knees him in the junk and shoots him in the face for it. How is that not empowering? I mean,they do the same thing in Farcry 3. You're a dude at the mercy of slavers and they're talking about "having some fun with you before the ransom comes". Which means they're probably not going to do anything visibly damaging. Which implies sodomy could very well be what they're alluding to. At the very least you're gonna be their punching bag. If they let you live at all. Not seeing a lot of difference there. The Hitman sexy nun squad thing,that was complete nonsense and I get why people were pissed about that. Doesn't make logical sense to ditch the disguises so early in the mission and pull out rocket launchers and machine guns. Apparently "stealth" means "be as hard to miss as possible". And no one likes to see sexy women getting killed. At least I don't. And then there's Princess Peach. Frankly,she's received more characterization than anyone else in the Mario series. Honestly,how much do you know about Mario as a person? Favorite food? Book? Movie? What music does he listen to? Now how much of that is addressed in the games and not some trivia card? Peach is a product of the Mario series writing which honestly was never really good. Yes,she's a two dimensional character. Surrounded by one dimensional characters. What do you really want from them? It's a stupid kid's game. I don't see you demanding Shakespeare from Dora the Explorer. It's all simple concepts to get down to the actual game. So basically,we have Lara dealing with adult stories and situations and powering through them and that's not good enough. And then you have Peach who's all girly and sweet and strong in her own way and that's not good enough. So we end up with a "damned if you do,damned if you don't" situation,and that's why writers don't write female characters that much. Even female writers. It basically goes back to the lesson of "The Taming of the Shrew". If nothing is good enough for you,then nothing is what you'll get. As for feminism,the problem I have with it is it's really a failure in several ways. First off,it's not really liberating women. Especially not sexually. One would think one of the main inequalities between men and women would be addressed by a group all about women's lib and all,but they're just as repressive as the traditional roles of women. Basically playing up just about any form of sexual contact between men and women as being about "enslaving the female". It really just trades one unrealistic gender role for another. Instead of being a submissive housewife,they're expected to be super women who balance everything,job,romance,personal needs,all on their own with no help from anyone,especially men. And it completely ignores the fact some women WANT to be housewives. And I've never known a woman to be submissive. Oh,they're nice about it,but no matter how sweetly they put it,they let you know there'll be hell to pay if you don't do what they want when they want it. And,of course,by it's very name,it's pretty much exclusive only to women and their rights and a lot of the smarter feminists are starting to realize you can't change the role of one thing without changing the roles of everyone else. You wanna be liberated? Sit down with yourself and decide what YOU want. Not what society,in any form,tells you to want. If it's not gonna hurt anyone,I say go for it. If it is gonna hurt someone,it'd better have some major greater good behind it. Otherwise,you're just another jerk hurting people for no reason. In fact,you might end up that way anyway,so if it's gonna hurt someone,give it some more thought til you can come up with a way it doesn't hurt someone. But mostly,you just need to come to terms with what you want and think of ways to get it. Being reasonable and telling people what you want plainly and simply is usually a good starting point. And that's my take on it.
  20. Fine. By which I mean I'll stop participating in this discussion.
  21. If Ronnie wants to act like a pretentious little shit,I'm gonna call him on it. Claiming that I'd have problems with a "gay atheist liberal" child is pretty much akin to calling me stupid. That I have such a limited view of the world,I can't accept anything different from what I believe. And he's implying that he's so worldly and enlightened,he can handle anything thrown at him. And that's insulting. So,before you go talking about who threw the first punch,you better count slaps in the face too. Meanwhile he spouts nonsense that's out right wrong and refuses to accept that there's any possibility that any of the information he's been fed is in any way incorrect. That he,himself,may be the victim of propaganda and that all he champions is,in fact,just someone's political agenda so they can gain power at his expense. That's probably why he hates "sheeple",which I'm certain is a term he uses. They blindly follow,much like himself. He just refuses to see it in himself. Frankly,the only problem I'd have with a "gay atheist liberal" child is the feeling of utter failure as a father that I didn't enlighten my own kid to see beyond the socio-political bullshit that comes with following any such group. What people like Ronnie don't get,is there is no difference between the left and the right. They will both lie to you and screw you over. The only real way to deal with them is to call them on their own bullshit rather than trying to pretend only one side does bad things. Maybe he'll grow up and realize that bitter little pill is actually good for him to swallow. Xaromir,we didn't misunderstand the question. You need 24/7 access to your property because it's your property. And you don't buy a fire extinguisher and keep it at the fire house. Shit happens,without warning and without giving you a chance to get ready. You might as well ask why you need 24/7 access to a car or food or a hospital. For hunting and sport shooting,it's inconvenient to have to pick them up and you'd still have to carry them to where you're going. For self defense,well,you can't just ask the maniac to wait there while you go to the gun shop to pick up your weapon. You can try,I doubt they're gonna go along with it. And all of this is ignoring the main problem. You're infringing on the rights of the people who aren't shooting up places randomly to try,ineffectually I might add,to stop the ones who do. A good law is one that doesn't punish the innocent for the crimes of the guilty. And what you're ignoring is that you're looking at gun crime in gun ban countries. You're not looking at all crime. In gun ban countries,yes,gun crime is lower. But what's the total crime rate like? Knife crimes? How about beatings with your bare hands or blunt objects? Breaking and entering? Robbery? And there's still some gun crime. What you're not getting,Xar,is that if someone wants something,really wants something,they'll get it or die trying. And you can pass all the laws you want,if you don't enforce them. If you don't crack down on those who break the laws,you're not going to get anywhere. So how come is it that you're so quick to demand more restrictions on legal gun sellers,but you don't advocate cracking down on gun runners who are already breaking the law? And like I said,until you've been to a gun show,until you've tried to buy a gun at a gun store and seen what all you have to do to get one,you don't have any room to talk about gun laws.
  22. I've never heard of 'em. So if there are,it's a very special situation or locational thing. Generally cause shooting does means starving baby deer and can greatly damage the deer population in unseen ways.
  23. Nice rage quit,dipshit. With skills like that,I can tell you're a master debater. Look at you,talking about things you know nothing about and then stomping off in a huff when your ignorance is exposed. You came in thinking you had it all figured out and it turns out you were outgunned from the start. Like I said,ignorance is our best weapon. Then you bring up sexuality,religion,and politics all in one big mess which just goes to show how deep your thinking is. Merry Christmas to me. Xaromir,you need guns to defend yourself,hunt,and for gun related sports like target shooting. I know this doesn't cross your mind,but when a 98 pound woman finds herself up against a 200 pound wall of muscle,she might like an advantage,you know? And gun sports are excellent for target practice and just having fun. I know you can't see guns as anything but life taking abominations,but they can be a lot of fun if handled safely,which shooting sports also teach. The same could be said of cars. And hunting is one of the most important factors in preserving wild life. Hunters keep the wild animal population in check. What do you think game wardens do? They keep tabs on how many animals are out there and set the limits to how many you can shoot. Now,I know you were real tore up when Bambi's mom got shot,but I'd like to point out she was killed by poachers,not hunters. You can tell cause hunters don't shoot does. Anything else you want to know?
  24. Actually,ignorance is pretty much our best weapon. That the majority are required to be ignorant is good,but the ones who think things through,those are the dangerous ones and they don't get caught. Do you have any idea how many unsolved murders there are out there? A lot. All committed by "smarter criminals". By making things harder,you encourage criminals to think things through. Therefore,you make more smart criminals. And,as I said,they don't get caught. So,once again,no,smarter criminals bad. Dumb criminal murders 20+ people,mostly children. Smart criminal murders hundreds of people with an exact body count unknown. Smart criminals bad. And they had their friend buy ONE gun from a gun show. Know why? They found out they do background checks at gun shows,which is why they didn't just go in and buy the gun themselves. If gun shows were as easy to get guns at as you seem to want to believe,why would they have only bought ONE gun? Why didn't they go themselves? To hear you talk,it's just one big free gun buffet. Or maybe the gun banners have been lying their asses off about the whole thing and it's not like that at all. Have you even been to a gun show? I have. It's not like that. Also,straw purchasing is illegal. So yeah. All illegally acquired. Obviously,we need to put more money in education. We need to do that anyway. Might help some kid to not be a criminal. Maybe if his school had been better equipped to handle him,the Sandy Hook killer might not have become the Sandy Hook killer. As for paying for armed guards,well,actually,50,000 a year isn't that bad. I mean,if a town has 50,000 people,that's 1 dollar per person. If the population is greater than that,it's even less. So yeah,it's not a major tax hike and it keeps the kids safe. What's the big damn deal,bitch? Well,that's the beauty of the concealed carry law. You don't have to have a gun. All the crooks need to know is that you *might* have a gun. And as long as you don't go blabbing about it,they won't know and they'll be less likely to attack you. And what good is a gun going to do a crook if everyone else has one too? Like I said,the concept of getting shot is a pretty big deterrent for most people. And regardless of your method,if you don't want to die while committing a crime,you're not going to where there's a lot of armed people. And for the ones who do want to die while committing a crime,honest citizens with guns do more to lower the body count than all the hope in the world. Most crooks will have their gun out and have a bead on you before they announce they're robbing you. If they don't just shoot you in the back and loot your corpse. And I'm guessing Officer Tueller had the guy with the gun actually draw the weapon while the other guy was running up. Cause running straight at a target with a gun pointed at you tends to get you shot. And "Serpentine!" just reduces your chances of getting hit. And you kind of have to know what all that means to use it. I mean,if I'm willing to train at it,I could get to the point where I could reliably knock a gun out of someone's hands with a batarang like Batman does. That still doesn't mean I won't get shot,as the shooter might get the shot off before the batarang hits him or the gun might go off when it hits the ground and hit me,or there might be a second gunman on the grassy knoll. And yes,they sell batarangs so I could buy one. And use it to murder someone. And it's completely unregulated. Would a gun help me in this situation? Probably not. But since it's concealed and he probably just wants my wallet,I can just hand that over and he'll be on his way so worst case,he still gets my wallet. And if he just decided to shoot me in the back,well,he already had a gun so that's not really making the situation much worse for me,is it? Since I'm already dead and all. Probably should've invested money in a bullet proof vest. Well,I've seen "suburban kids" buy drugs so I can't imagine guns would be much different. And you're never going to completely stop crime. It's going to happen,even if you completely lock down and regulate everyone's lives. And they could just buy them from the armory. Remember when I said there's a reason AK-47s are popular? That reason is that,at first,there were several Russian armory officers who decided to sell off some of their guns for a quick buck. This put a LOT of AKs on the market. After that,the design was so easy to copy,it's now made all over the world,even in countries with complete gun bans. Pretty much every black market gun dealer has AKs now. So all it takes is one corrupt officer and that armory's a black market dealership. You'd be amazed what some people will do for money. Which is,of course,why we have crime. And no,I'm not going to go commit a crime and put up evidence with a full confession in a public forum. Dumb ass. And that's the difference between us. You want to sit and hope it doesn't happen. I want to sit and hope it doesn't happen,but I'm prepared if it does. Guess which one of us has a higher survival chance. And it's already hard to get a gun. As you've never bought one,you are ignorant of what's required to get one. So go buy a gun legally. Find out how much it costs,what hoops you have to jump through,and how long you have to wait to get it. Then come talk to me about gun laws. And there is no possibility that it'd work. Every country that has completely banned guns still has some gun crime and they usually end up with more of every other kind of crime. There's empirical evidence that gun bans either do nothing at best or increase crime rates at worst. The whole entirety of your argument is that guns somehow make people criminals and it's just not true. Deal with it.
  25. That's pretty much where the law is right now around here,Xar. The media likes to play up the "wild west/guns are just flooding our streets" frenzy of gun ban groups,but the fact is,it's just not happening. And if you want to see how anti-gun the media can be,watch any recent Hollywood movie and see how often and where guns are portrayed in any kind of good light. You're gonna find it only happens in military and para-military movies. And I'd like to remind all of you if you take away the pepper spray and tazers,the cops have to go back to the old method of subduing suspects. Which is beating them with a club. So,yeah,I'll take my chances with the tazer,thanks. And they bunker them for the same reason the army keeps nukes,chemical weapons,fighters,bombers,tanks,and a whole damn army on hand. In case they need them. Since any weapon involved with a crime will be checked,if they have an illegal one,that's extra charges against you. Some of which can have severe punishments. So they take them for if/when they need them and then they sit on 'em. That's the scariest thing about those weapon caches. What were they going to do with those weapons? Oh,fun fact of the day,the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban they've been talking about bringing back? Doesn't actually ban assault weapons. It bans weapons they think look like assault weapons. Most of them are just semi-autos with long clips or are based on a military design. They don't actually function like assault rifles.
×
×
  • Create New...