• FierceVoltage - November 27, 2012 6:15 p.m.

    Was there an article just like this but for Halo 4? I thought I saw it but now I can't find it...
  • FierceVoltage - November 27, 2012 6:09 p.m.

    I have to agree with some of these and that's coming from someone who has purchased every Call of Duty since Modern Warfare, I am just wondering how long they can keep these annual releases of essentially the same game going, sure they alternate time periods every other year but the basis is the same. The only thing original is the campaign which treyarch seems to do a better job of.
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 10:01 a.m.

    Look, hes back! Your still not understanding this simple concept. Take what you just said with the quotes "I think we need to break up." Now, thats it! No context! You dont get to know that his girlfriend left slamming the door shut! "Slamming" indicates anger! All you get from me is the quote "I think we need to break up." Because THAT is how Im typing to you. Im not providing you any context. The only time you dont need adjectives is if your providing a situation such as "slamming a door" or "glaring." Those are descriptors. Now, sifting through all of your insults, this boils down to yet again, this going WAY over your head! Just stop! Give it up! You lost this a long time ago. Let it die.
  • winner2 - November 26, 2012 11:28 a.m.

    You apparently aren't able to keep up with your own argument. You claim that one needs adjectives to determine emotion. I disagreed. I provided an example situation where no adjectives are included, to demonstrate that you (yes, even you) should be capable if deducing emotion without adjectives from text. Also, you skirted my question. I asked you how the girlfriend feels, and you failed to give me an answer. I believe you failed to do this because you are afraid of admitting you're wrong. Just admit that you have a problem, that's the first step in defeating it. I mean, you are wrong in your arguments here. That's the word, yes, as crazy as it sounds to you, you are wrong. You are not right, you are wrong, and both I and another have now tried and failed to get you to understand why. You are making yourself look like just another average adult who can't prove they took much of anything away from a higher education with every effort you make to dig yourself into denial. If you want proof you can't "logically" refuse, show this entire argument, starting at the comment where I agreed with the gentleman who's post I supported, to 3 English professors willing to give you a few minutes of their time. If you are willing to do that (it can probably be done online so don't worry about your time), I hope you are prepared to be told you are in need of some remedial tutoring.
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 2:38 p.m.

    Read what i saif. I said adjectives without context. I gave you no context. You didnt get to know if i was slamming a door or glaring because i never told you. Im not wrong. Im right for the simple fact you STILL cannot tell me how you defer anger from my post with no adjectives, no descriptors and no context. THAT is what i said. Try again little boy. You should of let this die when u had the chance.
  • winner2 - November 26, 2012 3:32 p.m.

    The context is the situation, context can be one of those(believe it or not). The situation is that you are replying to my comments which disagree with your ideas. In this situation, I believe you to be disgruntled (with 100% certainty that I'm correct) because that is the most reasonable response from you in this situation based on the way you voice your opinions, the way you attack others, the way you can't seem to stand being wrong combined with your complete faith in your belief, and the way you have spoken down to others countless times in the past in other posts. This observation of your usual behavior leads me to conclude things about your natural tendencies, and those conclusions help me see the context of this situation. There were no adjectives, there do not need to be adjectives, I do not always need adjectives (and neither will you if you accept that you need help and pursue it), and I do not need to have every detail of an instance in time to come to a logical,reasonable conclusion about said instance. You are not someone who has ever needed to provide me with adjectives or the minutiae of your actions for me to tell if you are upset or not. That's the reality of this situation, I hope you realize that it's not my fault you can't accept it.
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 4:56 p.m.

    "His post could be condensed down into a giant "meh, idc, do what you want." If thats all it takes to impress you, you need to raise your standards." That is what I said to you. Right after that, you ask if Im upset. Where is the context? Where is the situation? Your going to guess how Im feeling based upon things I write to people weeks or even months in the past? How do you know I was even pissed off when I wrote those? What makes you think what someone says on the internet even remotly upsets me, let alone pisses me off. Because I insult them? Is a comedian pissed off when he insults someone in the crowd? Because I debate and prove my case? I can debate and say my side WITHOUT being angry. No, yet again, what you are doing is called ASSUMING. You ASSUME Im mad or upset but you cannot TELL without me giving you a CONTEXT or an adjective to describe it. You even admit you "conclude" things about my natural tendencies based on what I say to other people in the PAST, without even fuckin KNOWING me. You DONT know me. Im going to give you a hint that will MAYBE shut you the fuck up. I may cuss at you. I may insult you. I may have a 20 page long thread stating my side. I may use caps and exclamation marks. But I NEVER get upset about what someone who I DONT even know says to me on the internet. NEVER. Im not upset now. And I wasnt when I wrote that comment to you. And I wasnt when I was CASUALLY having an ONLINE WRITTEN discussion with person BEFORE you. The reason you never needed adjectives to determin if someone was upset in the past was because you are IMAGINING or ASSUMING what they are acting like as they are typing. You can never tell what someone feels with the writted word unless they themselves want you to know. It is physically impossible. All you can do is assume, conclude or infer. But you will not KNOW. Now, we can stop this ANY time you want. Or you can keep digging yourself a hole. If you respond to me again with the same tired bullshit im just going to paste this comment for you to reread and hopefully educate yourself with next time you want to get into it with the big boys, k lil buddy? Have a nice day. :)
  • winner2 - November 26, 2012 5:21 p.m.

    You are completely deluded, but you won't see that because you're deluded. And if you're smart enough to see the circular reasoning in that, it doesn't really matter because that's how delusions work. I give up trying to teach you though. You're just asking the same question over and over even though I answered it, and you fail to answer my own questions. Also, if you think this was ever a competition, then you should know that you lost less than 5 comments in. Thanks for the good wishes though, I've been having a pretty good day so far and I'm feeling pretty good.
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 5:30 p.m.

    What question did you ask? If the girl in your little example was upset? Yeah, I would say so based on the fact you fucking said she "slammed the door." No one happily slams a door. But thats not what I gave you. All I gave you was the quote that you used. Thats it. Now how do you get anger from that? You cant. So, I'll take this insult post as you conceding to me. You really dont know what the fuck your talking about. You didnt answer my question because you CANT answer my question and I explained that to you three fuckin times already. I didnt "lose", kid. If you think I lost because Im "deluded" because I keep explaining the same simple concept to you and you refuse to aknowledge it, thats not my problem. You can believe you "won" all day. Its pretty fuckin apparent to everyone else who was right and who was a complete and utter ass who just fell on his face.
  • winner2 - November 26, 2012 5:55 p.m.

    So slamming the door indicates anger? I do believe you're assuming right there, which is kind of strange when in an earlier post you say that assuming is something you're supposed to never do on the Internet. Also, you initially assumed that I thought you were upset. Yes I did, but how did you come to that conclusion? You assumed, didn't you? There were no adjectives, or "context" (your kind at least), and nothing whatsoever that you could use to deduce that I thought you were upset. That's only 2 of the times you've contradicted yourself. But you were right about me making an assumption, and you assumed. "Preposterous," you might say, but indeed it's true. You assumed and you were correct, just as I have (with 100% certainty that I'm correct for reasons you cant seem to fathom).As for using your "logic hammer", you might want to work on that thing quite a bit before you start swinging it around, because otherwise everyone's just going to ridicule it. Another thing: I'm assuming you're lying about you being an English side major due to your grammar and lack of understanding my lesson to you. Also, please don't bring up how long you've been prowling comment boards and this site or your family as a defense of some kind of credibility you think those things give you. That just makes you even harder to take seriously. Your time here(also, I've been using this site since it was cheat planet as well, still type that in instead of games radar in fact) does nothing for your argument, and neither does the fact that you successfully reproduced. Oh, and your notion of how English works here is still wrong, in case you need me to address that again. Don't ask for details though, I've already given you the tools, it's up to you to use them.
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 6:45 p.m.

    What? No, I didnt "assume" that someone slamming a door means their angry. Someone slamming a door MEANS their angry. No one happily slams a door or does it when their bored or sad. Plus the CONTEXT that they just broke up also proves it. Something I did NOT give you. I didnt assume you thought I was upset. You ASKED me if I was upset. It was right there. Yet again, you fall FLAT on your face. As for the rest of your post, its all straw men and insults. The fact that I "successfully reproduced" as you put it means I have children of my own. I raise them. Im a dad. I dont pop out kids and then run away like a fuckin gazelle. I wasnt trying to use it for my argument. It was for a conversation I was having with another person. As for my typos, Im typing this one handed. And on a phone. Excuse me if its not perfect and somethings are shorthand. So, yet again, this still flies over your head. Seems my logic hammer struck another blow!
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 5:42 p.m.

    And you want to know whats even MORE hilarious? The person who you THOUGHT was on your side? They think your a fuckin dumbass too! Go read the last page, thats our conversation. They DONT agree with you, you dumbfuck! My god, leave this site and dont come back. So worthless....
  • winner2 - November 26, 2012 6:17 p.m.

    I'm assuming (once again, oh the power) that you've run out of arguments (using that term lightly) for me to burn down due to the lack of "substance" in that. But I'm done with you now, it's been way too serious for my tastes. I mean it this time, for realsies. Oh, and you have a good day too. See you on another page!
  • zombi3grim - November 26, 2012 6:47 p.m.

    Yeah, because this wasnt added as an afterthough. Nor was it posted right after my previous post, which was pretty long. Burn down? What did you burn down? The fact that you conceded? The fact that your "done with me" attests that YOU have nothing left, not me. Im the one who explained to you in great detail why you are wrong. And you reply calling me delusional and saying your done. Your done when I say your done, motherfucker. Now reply to this like a good little bitch.
  • ZeeCaptain - November 20, 2012 4:13 p.m.

    This is hilarious, I can't say much for black ops 2 or the one before that, really the last one I bought for a reason besides it's what my friends are playing would be CoD 3, I can't say I agree with these "reviews" I think what CoD is doing is a different direction from what I liked but it's a game for those adrenaline jockeys who like to be the hero, I mean that is what CoD is now, it used to be your just a solider in a mass of soliders who die and re-spawn while you take your merry time to clear an objective, the only thing separating you from the others was a load of competence, but now you'r an action hero with a goofy name that does suicide missions and comes out dashing with heroism dripping from his glistening muscles.... I digress, I know old CoD wasn't the greatest but now a days I'll play an online match were it's one guy who's really good and a bunch of five year olds who are cussing me out. In my opinion CoD is moving farther away from the core elements of a shooter and is more about telling a story of an unlikely war where a hero does some shooting and everything turns out dandy, but the so called realism they put in to these really only appeal too a demograph of people who play for the multiplayer and people who think this is what war and killing is like, i.e. people who play GTA as a training for what's too come.
  • mothbanquet - November 20, 2012 7:18 a.m.

    Watch out GR journos; these guys are after your jobs...
  • GamingBear - November 19, 2012 4:09 a.m.

    On the topic of nonsensical and ridiculous reviews someone on amazon gave a top end tv 1 out of 5 starts for not the tv itself (they said it was good) but for problems registering with the companies, optional, help service. Needless to say I berated them for this
  • Brutus - November 18, 2012 7:10 p.m.

    where the heck did the halo version of this run off to? I was going to show it to my roommate. Did you guys take it down for some reason?
  • Divine Paladin - November 18, 2012 1:47 p.m.

    At least THIS time you used ACTUAL nonsensical reviews.

Showing 1-20 of 116 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.