Except it's hard as hell if you stop caring. It really, really, really looks like the button-mashey sort of game, but it actually takes a bit of skill, planning, and reflexes in your attacks; button mashing will just make you lose.triggrhappy94 said:Hey, from what I've seen of MG Rising it's actually a really competent specticle-fighter.
As far as I can tell, you have to stop caring and just watch Riden do cool stuff though
That poncho and hat is actually a traditional mariachi outfit that's still used today. So no it's not racist, just stereotypical.Astraleora said:Can't wait until next weeks "Revengence" slaughter, with its made up words and stupid/vaguely racist 'Mexican' poncho disguises its ripe for a beating
See but if you start taking into account specialty ammo then we can start talking about items like this [http://vikingsword.com/rila/k05.jpg ] and then arrows are back on top for damage... I would rather get hit with a hollow point than number 11. I was talking more of an average bullet and an average arrow. Looking at sheer mass and diameter an arrow is just larger and heavier, and has more kinetic potential just from that. Rate of fire and distance is really where archers fell to the wayside.Lonewolfm16 said:On the arrow issue, it depends on alot of things. Rifle rounds can leave big holes, and we have to take into effect hollow-point rounds. Bullets have alot more force, the question is if it is all transferred to the target, or if the round just rips through. Of course in the very early period of guns they replaced bows despite lower accuracy and long reload times mostly since it is much easier to train someone to use a gun than a long-bow.slash2x said:I completely agree with all of the points he made, especially the note about being so damn lazy you can not cover up the poorly done expansion pack for full game price, you do not bother to CHANGE THE DAMN XBOX PICTURE!
Only point... Arrows do more damage. They are larger and often make a hole so big it is easy to bleed out quickly. The real issue is distance, and rate of fire... Something a cloak solves.
Arrows don't necessarily do more damage. A bigger hole doesn't necessarily mean more damage, and bullets have a lot of nifty little traits that further benefit a potential for bleed out, if you want to go strictly by that portion of the math.slash2x said:Only point... Arrows do more damage. They are larger and often make a hole so big it is easy to bleed out quickly. The real issue is distance, and rate of fire... Something a cloak solves.
Lets assume a pretty hefty longbow and a .22 caliber bullet, thus giving the bow the greatest advantage. Now, ballistics mean that the actual damage is varied, as FMJ rounds tend to rip through things leaving a hole, but not really doing much else besides. This is just about force delivered. a .22 bullet weighs 30 grams, at a lower level if it is made of copper, and has a muzzle velocity of 1,750 feet per second when fired from a long rifle. So f=ma, so f=30x1750 or 42500. Now a brief Google search reveals that a war arrow weighs about 104 grams. The fastest report on average speed I can find is 140 feet per second. so 104x140=14460. A little more than a fourth of the bullets energy. And this is a pretty big arrow and one of the smallest, least forceful rounds. Arrows might leave big holes, but bullets have more force, and if all of that force is delivered to target (as hollow-point rounds are intended to do) the damage would be significantly greater.slash2x said:See but if you start taking into account specialty ammo then we can start talking about items like this [http://vikingsword.com/rila/k05.jpg ] and then arrows are back on top for damage... I would rather get hit with a hollow point than number 11. I was talking more of an average bullet and an average arrow. Looking at sheer mass and diameter an arrow is just larger and heavier, and has more kinetic potential just from that. Rate of fire and distance is really where archers fell to the wayside.Lonewolfm16 said:On the arrow issue, it depends on alot of things. Rifle rounds can leave big holes, and we have to take into effect hollow-point rounds. Bullets have alot more force, the question is if it is all transferred to the target, or if the round just rips through. Of course in the very early period of guns they replaced bows despite lower accuracy and long reload times mostly since it is much easier to train someone to use a gun than a long-bow.slash2x said:I completely agree with all of the points he made, especially the note about being so damn lazy you can not cover up the poorly done expansion pack for full game price, you do not bother to CHANGE THE DAMN XBOX PICTURE!
Only point... Arrows do more damage. They are larger and often make a hole so big it is easy to bleed out quickly. The real issue is distance, and rate of fire... Something a cloak solves.
True enough, but I suppose I just have a higher tolerance for that dissonance than Yahtzee does. Were the cutscenes in MGS4 way too long? Yes. Was the game still much better than the CoD or Battlefield "spunkgargleweewee"? Yes, absolutely, because at least there were likeable characters and the game doesn't come off as slightly racist.Marik Bentusi said:I assume it means there's too much story for the level of story & gameplay segregation in place. Hard segregation works in small bursts, but if you have a tall story you should try to weave it into the gameplay instead of switching back and forth in a dissonance that makes you feel disonnected during gameplay - which (hopefully) will still be most of your playtime.Ryan Hughes said:I've honestly never understood what Yahtzee means when he calls something "overwritten." I tend to like stories, so that is kinda like a chocolate cake being over-chocolatey, or a basket of puppies being over-puppiety.
I expected to be beaten to that point, but Christ, I didn't think it would take this long into the thread.i11m4t1c said:seems like yahtzee thinks that Crysis 2 came out last year rather than 2011.