Sorry, but I haven't yet shared the information about myself that would typically display here. Check back later to see if that changes, or if I instead choose to remain an enigma.
It's often bothered me that, were society to end today, when survivors dug up the remains of our culture, they would be more likely to find copies of Twilight than of Shakespeare.
I for one, do not want future generations to judge my existence based off of a crappy vampire series that has somehow gained the endearment of the plushy middle-school heart of America. To be fair, I haven't read the books, and if the characters and writing are half as stale as they were in the film version, I never will.
In general, I dislike shooters online. I like the concept, the same kind of thrill as a paintball outing, and with certain game systems you'd expect it to work really well. But I just can't get into them. First of all, there's no such thing as a casual online shooter. You can't just jump in every once in a while and expect to have fun. The people that play these games play them so often that they murder newcomers. Even the ranking system doesn't really help (though I admit, things were worse before the ranking system).
For those that don't know, HOME is essentially Second Life, but done better. It brings PS3 gamers together in a real time environment where they can chat or game through avatars.
I'm not allowed to go into details, as per my user's agreement, but I can say the character generation rocks, the user base is friendly (if a little desperate... I've been hit on by at least twenty people... but all very friendly hits), and the graphics are quite good.
Sony's got this one in the bag. As long as they continue to expand HOME, there's no way it can fail. But it is a never ending project.
GOD I'm tired. I got to bed at 3:00am. That's not the rough part. I was planning on sleeping in, but I work with special aid kids, and at 6:00am one of them decided to call me to chat.
My biggest thing is that I can never decide on a clear score. I often gripe about my choice for days, only to come to the conclusion that it was a proper scoring after all.
The difficulty isn't in scoring an individual game. It's when I start to compare them. For instance, if PAIN and Mirror's Edge were the only two games on the market, PAIN would get a 1 to Mirror's Edge's 10. But when put in the general history of games, PAIN gets a 4 and ME a 6. It's when I notice that there's only a 2 point difference between the two that I start to feel bad, because I really liked ME WAAAAAAAAY better than PAIN. But PAIN is a totally different kind of game, and achieves/fails at its goals differently than ME.
Someone on the blogs was asking, and my simple reply turned into an autobiography. So I figured I'd make it a post in it's own right.
For me, it depends on whether the game is new or old. If it's old, I already have a general impression based on Nostalgia and my first experience playing it. Depending on just HOW old the game is, I might go back for a quick crash course or read other reviews to tighten up my thoughts. With an older review, I focus more on capturing whether the game was fun to play than on the technicalities. My style becomes much more freeform, as well.
Our film is an hour long, took us a year to make, and premieres tomorrow (I'm DAMN nervous).
I produced, wrote, edited, acted, and helped direct the film. It's a Noir film about a hitman who goes back to do what he does against his will.
Here's some pictures from it: