AndrewTS

I missed a lot of 2002. What exactly was "Ass Cream"? Was it cream Triple H put on his ass? The Dudleyz stole Vitamin C's bags while they were in the shower. One of them had a big tub marked ASS CREAM in big bold letters. No brand name, just ASS CREAM. Jericho: "How dare you steal m--Christian's Ass Cream!" I think it's like Prep H. Only a generic kind that comes in giant economy sizes. Really though--would two guys making decent scratch in WWE dare putting anything but a trusted brand name of cream on their asses?

ohhhh, so many fat chicks would disagree with you. Be very careful not to say that around them, as they would tear you apart quicker than a super size value meal. So, Vince shoved that coke forcibly up Jeff's nose (or whatever it was)? For cryin' out loud, he was taken off house shows, given plenty of time off and still was stuck in angles with Trish and HBK. Vince gave him too many chances.

We love you Dames, in a totally not-gay way. Well, some of us, at least... You know I do because I'm one of the few who actually feedbacks you. Yes, I post lots of bullshit, but I provide feedback bullshit to balance it out. Don't ban Logan, though...he's funnier than most of the jackasses you've banned in the past. Ripper I'd not mind seeing banned, though...

Anyone know the story about those really gay outfits he was wearing in those earlier tapes (like the one in the Snuka match)? I think he was very important to ECW...but he never really struck me as being a Raven, Sandman, Sabu, or New Jack. He was a passable worker who looked like a janitor. And again, he never made it outside ECW. Foley did. Hell, even Sandman and Raven at least gave it a shot outside of ECW and although they were mere midcarders, that's more than Dreamer was. He was loyal to ECW, but did any of the big two even want him?

For some reason he's been granted the proverbial "go apeshit" card. Supposedly he helped out Dames with something concerning the board, so he can do whatever the hell he wants. He's been given no "go apeshit" card. He's keeping the meaningless crap where it belongs and rarely does he ever leave HD, so there's no problem with him there. If you have a serious problem with how Dames runs his board, either take it up with him or stop crying about it(not you, Andrew). I've seen him posting quite a bit in other folders, but it's rare that I even notice it. I guess in HD he's fine, though, if that's where most of his stuff does go. Still, I think if you get banned a first time, you usually really earned it. I've done a few complaints to mods about quite a few people, and almost all of them are still around. There's another exception though--Sakura was banned then unbanned, but that was over a misunderstanding that was cleared up. Uh...something on topic... I think that Ray's being excessively harsh. Saying it's overrated? Good and fine, but "shit?" I disagree, although the Armageddon match I'd say sure thing. Basically, if you think that match was shit, I couldn't understand how you could tolerate the TV shows if you're set the standard that high. If you weren't entertained by it, that's fine, but why keep watching if you think that match was so terrible?

Yeah, the exception was made for Banky, and I can see why. Of course, since Banky came back, he still acts like a complete douche and seemingly won't get banned ever again. That's BS, frankly.

A Cat match, or a Cat segment involving Torrie? Either way, you lose.

For some reason he's been granted the proverbial "go apeshit" card. Supposedly he helped out Dames with something concerning the board, so he can do whatever the hell he wants.

Hmmm... $7.00...

By who? Where can I find this list? Man, a list of worst Playstation games...damn, that's gotta be quite a list.

Okay, let me get this straight... Hossenfeffer got a long-term contract? *sigh* I do admit having a perverse desire to see those matches teamed with Nathan Jones.

*barf* If you don't mind, you know, the messed-up gameplay. I've seen some really bad fighting games with more gameplay balance than that. I'm really pissed off at how Yukes f'ed this puppy up. Anyway--my personal list, in no particular order... Ratchet and Clank: Going Commando Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow Guilty Gear X2 Viewtiful Joe LoZ: Wind Waker

Hilton didn't have to. That's what Daddy's money is for. So she could land "acting" roles despite being unable to act (and being nearly nude for those roles despite being as arousing as a stick figure), and a "singing" career without any need for actual singing talent (now I could be wrong, but if so, it wouldn't be her talent to get her that gig).

Pfft--WWE bills him at 290, so he's probably a legit 250 or so. I think probably Shelton would be doing what Orlando Jordan is doing now, but probably would be regularly on SD. Wouldn't have a decent gimmick yet, though.

One Legged Man

Funny thing is, that bps predicted the No Mercy feud with Kane long in advance, just wondering when he'd get that job back. Shucky-darn, it happened, and he was right.

That really sucks--although Capcom hasn't actually made any original 2D fighting games in, what, 5-6 years? The Darkstalkers were great, but other than that we've had cross-over titles galore.

"used to" = "up until about last week" Yeah, but I shake my head and scoff when people try to say that Mick should be hired to write for WWE or book. Mick is really into S-E, he loved Russo's booking, and it's obvious he's not going to criticize Vince, just take his paycheck and shut up. He'd just be another yes-man, tow the company line, but he might come up with a few interesting new ideas.

No, but we're talking about WWE, so the point is moot. Yes there is a logic... Keep them from being useful in other companies. Oh yeah--forgot about that.

No, but we're talking about WWE, so the point is moot. WWE only seems to sell to the masses on one particular new star every 6 months or so, rather than attempt to elevate as many as possible. Usually they're the OVW guys, too. But it, yeah, takes time. Right. bps can take this one. It's too damn easy.

Who gives a f***? Who gives a f***? *Happy dance on one leg* If they're worried about a lawsuit, I guess they can pay him his downside and not renew. Who gives a f***? Who gives a f***? He's just going to come back to be squashed by Mark Henry on Heat. Aw, f***!!!!

It's a shame Sega usually sucked so hard with marketing, or they'd probably still be in the race. Agreed though--I would expect system fanboyery out of 13 year old Gamefaqs users, but I should hope we're all past that. Each of the systems have great titles. Personally, there isn't enough titles on the X-Box to really interest me, but I'd be lying if I said all of them suck and aren't interesting. I'd want to at least try Shenmue II, Panzer Oorta, and KotoR. Although the N-Gage is quite an easy target. I don't hate the owners or call them stupid, but I think Nokia's done about everything wrong that they could. There's not enough good titles (or even any good titles, save for a butchered Sonic Advance 2) to justify a purchase to me.

Final Fantasy Chronicles is the one you're looking for. Yup. Note that there's loading times (unless they fixed that up better, which I doubt). Also, FFIV is a translation of the FFIV Hard Type. It's more difficult but has an updated translation of the text. I've heard complaints about the music and the Mode 7 effects (which the PS1 can't do well). Still, you won't have to worry about the battery burning out like you would for the SNES versions, and the average cost of each title is a mere 10 bucks this way. I've played FFVI (part of Anthology), and the slowdown isn't as severe as I expected. However, there's exclusive bonuses to the Chronicles/Anthlogy collections. I'm not sure if the bonus soundtrack CDs come with them, but you can unlock cool stuff when you beat the game. For example, I think in Trigger you can even watch each of the endings once you unlock them. Plus you can view the new cinemas and a bunch of other goodies. I've yet to beat any of the titles (I'm about 1/3 though FFVI and 7/8 through Trigger), but I'm looking forward to the bonuses once I do. Of course, any progress is halted until I re-buy them.

I actually agree with TMD on something. Wow. Yeah, I don't own an X-Box, but that was uncalled for. Of course it's no surprise that the PS2's sales have leveled off. Most of the people interested on one already have one, and the damn thing came out a lot sooner than the Box and Cube. Although I have to say that if you're into Japanese games, it's sales in Japan suck for you, since there aren't going to be many quality Japanese-originated titles for the Box. Yeah, neither the Cube nor X-Box can touch Sony right now, but Sony's been so successful the overall market has increased for videogames. People bought PS1's who never played video games before, and they managed to have older gamers, younger gamers, and everything in between for their customers. So the other guys are probably doing at least as well as the 16-bitters were.

I've said myself that sexuality will be used in popular music and so forth. However, if it's more subdued and not overt I can deal with it, because it can very well go over the heads of younger audiences. In fact, I think censorship breeds more creativity. If you can't be blatant and instead have to be more sneaky about what you're doing, you can have a clever song, or in the case of a movie--one suitable for wider audiences, that different ages can get different things out of. How the hell is "Nookie" at all clever, or any of the current songs that are just blatantly sexual? I don't call those men whores, I call them pricks and assholes. For men, I usually use "whore" in the sense of just going for money and not sticking to your principles--whatever they may be. Kid Rock, for example, I absolutely loathed for his bullshit "music" that's little more than him swearing, bragging, and talking about sex. Of course, I think his girlfriend, who has been caught on camera screwing several hasbeens from shitty 80's bands, is a whore in the sexual sense. If I find songs sung by a "musician" or that person's behavior distasteful, I won't listen to the music (if I can help it) or buy the albums. Simple as that. As for others--I can't speak for them. I also call Mick Foley a manwhore because he'll say or do anything for the right price, regardless of what it is. Back to the issue with the clothing. It isn't even the clothing, it's the behavior that usually those persons who wear a certain type of clothing engage in. Usually we're talking famous ones, and young girls emulate famous figures--from the clothes, to the way of talking, to the songs they sing, to the behavior. Plus, there are many cases in which the clothling, or lack thereof, is somewhat tied to the behavior. For example: tongue rings, thongs up the ass and the pants low, or no underwear at all. While that's not true in every case of those, there is a connection. If it's a matter of practicality--for example, the weather where you live, or comfort, or something to that nature, that's good and fine. However, a lot of this stuff being worn sure as hell can't be for comfort reasons. They're to attract attention, attention said females are desperate for. Heaven forbid someone be attracted to their personality or intellect. If you have a nice figure, you can wear some classy, somewhat flattering clothes. However, stuff that looks like it could fall off at any moment--why? You read, but don't comprehend. That's not as overt and blatant, although I could certainly see why they'd overreact. Ripper--READ AND COMPREHEND. I don't know where you got that particular quote, because it's not from my post. I never said "all hypersexuality is rooted in abuse." What I said was that "hypersexuality is a known side effect of abuse." There have been observable patterns of hypersexuality in a number of persons who were abused when they were younger. That doesn't mean that only hypersexual people were abused, and only abused persons are hypersexual. In the very same post I even pointed out that there are cases where being overly sheltered can be a cause. However, I am quite shocked that you seem to think that the way in which someone is socialized has absolutely no effect on their behavior, whether immediate or later on in life. I suppose you're completely in the "nature" camp. Oh wait--you contradict yourself by laying everything on the doorstep of parents. If it's only nature and can't be nurture, than the parents aren't to blame if a child grows up to be a scumbag drug dealer pimp or a prostitute, right? Or do you find "nature vs. nurture" too simplistic a theory, and you have to analyze the bigger picture? In which case, you simply have to admit that behavior is molded by many factors, of which parental upbringing is just one. One that you yourself admitted is often rebelled against. So what's the factor that leads to a certain sort of behavior, Ripper? I'm dying to hear it. Because there's no difference in clown makeup and other types of makeup?