chaosrage

What?

Here's the next 10 for wwf shows, the .5's. 2/97 - Final Four - Bret vs Taker vs Vader vs Austin .5 4/97 - Revenge of the Taker - Undertaker vs Mankind, Austin vs Bret .5 6/97 - King of the Ring97 - Undertaker vs Farooq, Austin vs Shawn .5 10/03 - No Mercy03 - Brock Lesnar vs Undertaker .5 12/02 - Armageddon02 - Triple H vs Shawn .5 2/98 - No Way Out98 .- Austin, Foley, Funk, & Owen vs HHH, NAO, and Savio Vega .52 11/95 - Survivor Series95 - Diesel vs Bret .57 5/97 - Cold Day in Hell - Austin vs Undertaker .57 8/96 - Summerslam96 - Shawn vs Vader .58 5/98 - Over the Edge98 - Austin vs Foley .58 OMG Austin is in 6 of the 10! Hilarious!

Yeah, Bret was such a good draw he got the two worst buyrates EVER. But it IS bret hart, nm.

Which is my point...... All 3 sold WM XIV. When I read this, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Do you really think buyrates in 2000 being better than 96 had something to do with HBK not being there? I mean, were you watching in 2000? Or was that some kind of joke?

Foley wasn't much of a draw in the middle of 98. No Way Out sucked too. But look, we all know he had a better run than Shawn. I'm not saying Shawn was a better draw than Austin. I'm saying the idea that even Austin could fight anybody and get a huge buyrate from it is plain bullshit.

Heh. But the best one is by far the Help Stop Rape: CONSENT one.

hello burger king

You're my hero.

.....The same thing goes for every single wrestler. Tell me, why do you think Austin got a .5 buyrate or whatever against Foley in the middle of his mega-over title run? And Shawn was all by himself fighting midcarders every month. Either being in the main event is the only thing that matters, or it isn't and you have to look at who they're facing, the rest of the card, interest in the company, etc. You can't give Shawn no credit for WM14 and then turn around and put all the blame on Shawn in 96. That doesn't make any sense.

Hmmm at least next time some idiots say "HBK drew like a Mo fo for WWE", I have proof he's even WORSE of a draw than Diesel, who only Main Evented 1 of the 10. Plz look up WM14's buyrate and then tell me how much HBK can't draw. Who was on the other side of that ME? Yeah, exactly Who was on the other side with Shawn in 96? Yeah, exactly. I love the bias around here. Also HBK vs Diesel got a better buyrate in April 96 than Stone Cold vs Dude Love at Over the Edge. Oh shit. That must mean they're bigger draws.

Hmmm at least next time some idiots say "HBK drew like a Mo fo for WWE", I have proof he's even WORSE of a draw than Diesel, who only Main Evented 1 of the 10. Plz look up WM14's buyrate and then tell me how much HBK can't draw.

Let me put it this way. Roger Ebert was right when he said that this movie WOULD have got an NC-17 rating for violence if anyone but Jesus had been the victim. Yeah, I found it a little disturbing that people are bringing their children to see this film. well see if the violence and gore's source is from the magical book, then it is quite ok. this is true. just look how fundies like SP equate suffering and torture with love simply because it's in the bible. (therefore it automatically MUST be good) it's kind of sick.

Did you see the thread where Eddy won the title? Honestly what doesn't this board throw a bitch fit about?

Graphics are a big part of the experience. A game like Mario64 couldn't be on the SNES and a game like Metroid Prime couldn't be on the N64. Plenty of people also love cinematic games. If everybody is paying $200 for systems just because they look pretty, then N64 would've won last time and XBox would easily be winning this time. I don't know. When was the last time something really new and revolutionary hit the market? I said they SHOULD play similarly but still have enough new elements to make it a different experience. The only one of those I'd call a rehash is MM. The new one's gameplay is similiar, but it's not like the game's an exact copy. Every Crash and TR is so incredibly alike another that if you showed someone all the games side by side, they wouldn't be able to tell which is which. If I put Wind Waker up against Ocarina, could you tell the difference? Is it like you're playing the same damn game? Well the 2D Marios (except for 2) all played similar too. And Mario64/Sunshine. LTTP and LA probably added more than Mario 3 and World. Hookshot, Pegasus boots, autojump, feather, towns, an actual storyline, 2D dungeons, ability to pick up things, flippers, dungeons with different floors, magic spells, etc..

Heh, you just noticed that? Holy fuck, Choken has 150 posts in this thread.

Yea, finally an oscar night that doesn't suck. Fuck you bitches.

Fuck yes

I want games to be good and different. I don't want developers to just take a good game and add new characters and levels to it. Sequels shouldn't stay the same. They should keep most of the gameplay but at the same time they should take risks and have enough things in it to make it a whole completely new experience. That was the difference between a Crash or a Tomb Raider and Zelda. Most sequels might as well just be an expanision pack. I mean, this is the same reason people buy new systems. Because they want new experiences that they haven't seen before. Next Gen was the only mag that really seemed to take that into account.

Technically, its on topic since the film being discussed deals with these issues on a timeline level. Were I intent on responding any further, I'd continue to do so. However, no answer is going to be good enough for chaos at this juncture in his life and I've said all I'm able with that in mind. Damn, you had to give SP an out. How would you know if an answer would be good enough if you never give one?

I want LOTR to win but this one shouldn't if the others didn't. FOTR was the best (Boromir was the most interesting character in the series), followed by Two Towers, and then ROTK. The changes made sense before, they were just stupid this time around. Frodo trusting Gollum over Sam. Or the fucking ghost army winning the war? What the hell was that? And the last hour went way overboard with all the slow motion shit.

I want to know WHY you think it's necessary. Any answer would be great. Yeah. The same goes for Mithra, or any of the other dozens of savior-gods that have died for your sins. All verified by witnesses. Yet I doubt this means anything to you, so why try to use it on others? People can write anything in a book. You don't believe any of the other books, well I don't believe those or yours. The way I look at it is an omnipotent god would know EXACTLY where to find me and what it would take for me to believe. Since he has not done this he obviously intends for me to go to hell. Bastard.

I loved Next Gen's ratings. The focus on innovation kept all the Tomb Raiders and Crashes from getting high marks. The ratings should reflect on it if it's something you REALLY have to play or if it's just more of the same shit that you already play. Next Gen was the only magazine I could trust for reviews. The little games only used to have a couple of paragraphs, but their big name games almost always had a whole page review, sometimes more. Mario64 had about 6 pages.

Yes. Now, why? You always write paragraphs of bible history but never answer the question. Why couldn't he just forgive us? He could if he wanted to. So what's the problem? Maybe God is just a masochist. Well if he gives me the offer and proves to me that he's God then I might take him up on it.