CorgiShinobi

I would say that as long as you went through the Everfall and got to the true ending, you can say you're finished. As I've said before, New Game+ doesn't offer a lot, just a few perks. Sure, there is something a little special when you get to the final boss again, but putting in another 35+ hours isn't worth it unless you love the game and have the time to go through different quests.

I have to thank you LittlePirate for sharing that song/video. Otherwise, I would not have been able to enjoy this video Studio Mir posted on Facebook tonight.

Yep, did that last night after going through the Witchwood once. Selena glitched or something, so I need to go back there sometime, but only when another quest permits it. I guess I could have gone back through the exit and that would have fixed things. Anything that requires Selena, King Bay Leaves, or Metal Golems makes putting a Portcrystal there worth it, not to mention that it does make for a great Cassadris waypoint.

Unless you're subscribed to Machinima's YouTube like I am, where I saw this at first. Anything labeled "Assassin's Creed 3 blah blah" is going to draw attention if you ask me. Didn't know what AnvilNext was, but I guess that's the point of the video since it's the AnvilNext Trailer.

The Kingdom Hearts thing isn't that surprising... I mean, it has been a while since the first and II came out, but those were part of the ending/finale. If you didn't play Birth by Sleep, definitely pay attention to Keyblade material. That game alone expanded on the Keyblade War and the intended purpose for all the conflict, aside from Kingdom Hearts.

The post-dragon stuff is really fun and since I have the guide it led me to the "secrets" throughout the world once there's "the event." The Everfall itself is really fun, but all the good stuff available from the pawn merchants is very expensive. People have suggested doing New Game+ and saving your money. I began doing this, but New Game+ is really bland. The difficulty doesn't scale, but this is obvious for two reasons: 1) set enemy stats, and 2) first-time challenge. Part of the challenge in Dragon's Dogma is knowing that certain enemies are very tough, ergo "difficulty." For example, when you head back to Gran Soren after defeating the Dragon, all the Giant Undead, Hellhounds, and Succubi are going to give you more trouble than the Dragon itself. In New Game+, most of the enemies are going to be fonder to you, though I've found some can still mess you up like certain bandit types. You're not going to have access to the truly amazing gear until getting back to the Everfall, or if you feel like defeating the Ur-Dragon in offline mode. In online mode... Yeah, the Ur-Dragon has only been killed 103 on PS3 as of July 30th, and only 52 times on 360 since July 24th. Considering that the Ur-Dragon increases in health each time it is defeated, yeah, you're lucky if you end up at the right time and have the skill to deal the final blow. I mean, the Ur-Dragaon in Offline Mode nearly has 1,470,000 in Health. I can only imagine what the Online Ur-Dragon's Health is now... To put that into perspective, the Dragon (and Archydra) has 100,000 in Health. So yeah, New Game+ is rather grueling. Sometimes you don't want to rush because there are time sensitive quests, and there are typically benefits to doing them. I mean, I was planning on doing different Notice Board quests and the alternate quests that I passed up. It isn't worth the effort many times, and even when you're so powerful Escort missions are still a pain in the ass. After all, you're only as strong as your weakest ally. That would be the escort, the person that can only be healed by a spell, certain health items, and defended by certain curatives. Still really enjoy the game, just my plans for trying out different vocations and spicing up my pawn are going so slowly since you get piss amounts of exp in the beginning of the game. She makes for a great Warrior, but the fun in having different vocations is mixing your Augments. Now I think I'll look through the guide to see if being a Mage any longer is worth it. EDIT: Oh, but there is truly one amazing perk to New Game+: Purchasable Portcrystals! Seriously, you only get one your first time, but second time around and you can set up a system of them. I have a stash of Ferrystones, so I'll make it work.

Yesterday I finally buckled down, was satisfied with my character's and my pawn's equipment, and tackled the Everfall. Did about half of the Chambers, faced the final boss, and at Lv. 64, it wasn't that challenging. I used one health item just in case my pawn or I got hit by some deadly combination (if you know the true boss, you'll get this...) So yeah, a spoiler... EDIT: So this isn't left out of the spoiler: Dragon's Dogma has an arbitrary love interest system. You could end up with the lovely duchess who wants to sex you, or you could end up with a sweaty fat man simply because you helped him on a quest and bought stuff from him.

I'll eventually get it. When I began buying back N64 games for a "new" collection, I knew I wouldn't be buying any new retail game soon. I even spent my $10 credit for Amazon on the Adventure Time Season One Collection, which was going to go toward this game.

Considering that guns have been a prevalent item in American history from the Revolution to the Wild West, outside of the Second Amendment itself, they've had time to work themselves into society. Even the gang wars of the early 20th century cemented an identity of gun ownership for Americans. Technically, we haven't gone a whole century where guns haven't played a role in history, from crime epidemics to war itself. Ever wonder why the front passenger seat is called "shotgun?" In the West, bank stagecoaches would have both a driver and a gunman caring a shotgun to defend against bandits.

Then what's your solution? The only one I see is to ban all guns. Your hypothetical person could have passed all the requirements to own said firearm, but in his emotional outburst he was able to reason in his mind that his gun should be used to kill a person. The intent to kill, but by all our laws or any new ones he could still possess a gun if only he needs to jump through more hoops. After all, this person you describe is someone who believes he should have a gun in his car. He must have strong reasons for wanting to have the firearm in his vehicle. Take away the gun, and there's still the chance that said individual could have harmed the other driver. Following them, running them off the road. I mean, he went through all the trouble of shooting at another person in another car, he must be capable of other actions. It reminds me of the string of incidents in Texas during the 80's when truck drivers would either shoot someone who enraged them, or use their truck to run someone off the road. Even without the gun, individuals who wanted to cause harm would still carry it out. But still, we're talking hypothetical. The chance that someone would kill someone in road rage, or the chance that someone could rescue someone from a mugger. The chance that someone's emotional unstablity would take it out on someone else, or take it out of themselves. You can make a case for different possible actions. Funny thing is, even cut-and-dry actions can have different interpretations. Currently I'm read an interesting piece about a certain shooting in New York City circa 1984. It's in The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell where he's talking about different kinds of epidemics and how they spread, from disease, media, and crime. An incident involving a man named Bernhard Goetz and four youths on a subway, during a time when New York was averaging over 2,000 murders and 600,000 serious felonies a year. These young men were harassing Goetz, asking for five dollars and one in particular pointing to something hidden in his pocket. Suddenly, Goetz pulled out a gun and fired on all four young men. He fired his last shot into one of them, thus paralyzing him for life. After that, Goetz asked one of the passengers, who had fallen in shock, if she was alright. She said she was fine, and soon the conductor made it to the subway car and asked if Goetz was a police officer. He wasn't, and when asked why he did it, he answered, "I don't know why I did it... They tried to rip me off." He exited the subway car through the emergency exit and walked off through the tunnel. It turns out all four of those young men were criminals, and in the following days Goetz was treated like a hero. Tabloids called him the "Subway Vigilante," but Goetz eventually turned himself in to a police station in New Hampshire. When in court back in New York City, he was easily acquitted of the charges of assault and attempted murder. Later that night, an impromptu street party erupted outside of Goetz's apartment building. At any other time he would have been found guilty, a gunman who nearly took away lives simply because he was being harassed. Instead, he was deemed a hero by the public and the criminals had what was coming to them. Now, to not end on such a sour note, the book briefly mentions that Goetz was brought to court again in 1996 for a civil suit involving one of his gunshot victims. In those passing years, the citizens (metaphorically) sobered up and barely anyone paid attention to the trial.

It's from the show "United Stats of America" and they did a segment on death. Ways we could, vehicle transportation, germs, etc. I don't know where they get the numbers, they being Randy and Jason Sklar. If you can find the epsiode, it's called "Stayin' Alive." They went from meteorites, animals, to actually discussing the top killers. For example, deers kill more people than snakes. #1 killer in America? Heart disease! EDIT: But my point in bring it up is that I've been seeing people comparing guns to cars in a way to make guns safer. Except, you know, cars are still really dangerous and so are the people that operate them. Not even car-to-car accidents themselves, but being near cars/roads too.

Well yeah, that's why they're preferred. Less effort, nothing to construct, quick and hardly any skill. But if you have the intent to kill, you'll find ways. Pipe bombs, chemicals from school lab, it goes on. Back in high school, we had a discussion on this, and it got rather creepy. One student made the point that many different objects can kill us, in the classroom itself. The loose metal bars (crappy welding) on our chairs that could be pulled off and used to stab, or if anyone was carrying any scissors. Heck, sometimes kids in shop would be idiots and make crappy throwing stars for a laugh. Then there was the chemical fire in chemistry, but what if someone wanted it to purposely happen? We're surround by many ways to die and to kill, and needless to say after the discussion it was disturbing. (Especially when you think of the people who would answer and if they ever thought of those methods before).

I've had an opinion on this for awhile, but I decided against sharing it because, as Spork said, there's a hysteria to it and people have been passionate on the stance they've taken. I can't look at Facebook on any given day without there being an image macro about gun control, for or against. I'm also not a gun owner and of the near 24 years I've been alive I've only shot a "pellet" gun and two different small game rifles at an outdoor activity. I don't know the process it requires, other than what roommates and friends have said. In fact, I don't think a lot of people know the process since owning a gun, other than as a hobby, isn't required unless you believe the neighborhood you reside in would require armed protection. All I know for certain in that there are multiple tests, it depends on the state, where you purchase (in or out of state), and perhaps having a specific license (or two). Maybe someone who has gone through this can enlighten us? Speaking of, I've been seeing the comparison that guns should be treated like cars... But you know, that works against gun control. There are already measures in place, but lets say, for sake of argument, guns were exactly like cars. In ways they are very similar. -People without a license still seem to own or operate one. -No one should operate one while intoxicated. -Criminals seek after them, for whatever purpose they desire. -People seem to go through the motions when they are "tested." (Think of those online psych tests too.) -Elevated emotional state leads to potential disaster when handling device. It goes on further, and when you get down to it, cars are pretty dangerous too even with all our traffic laws. That "Stats of America" show did a breakdown of what's likely to kill us. It started off with flying, but supposedly chances of being killed when flying are 1 in 2.5 million. Chances of dying when driving in a car? 1 in 88. Anyway, while we could tighten up control with some new laws, we can't fool ourselves into thinking events like what happened at Aurora won't happen again because we've somehow improved. It's pessimistic to say the least, but I stand by the statement that "people kill people, not guns." The final straw that breaks the camel's back is one's own will, and an inanimate object has no will to sway your actions. A buddy of mine had a roommate that had what you would call the "warning signs." Life going in a sharp downward spiral, a loner, assortment of guns, trench coats, etc. While this scared the piss out of him, in the end nothing happened. All the materials needed to take away innocent lives, but nothing was done. Was the opportunity not presented? Was there another mental issue preventing him from exploding into an emotional wreck? Or was he simply stable and knew killing wouldn't be the answer to whatever problem he was faced with? Hard to say, especially since he wasn't my roommate. EDIT: Though, think of all the seemingly stable people we see daily. Everything is going well, but then a tragic event. The cliche cheating wife/husband, laid off, any little thing. Like the Joker said (in Dark Knight and Killing Joke), all it can take is a little push. As much as we can look for "warning signs," we can't very well look at psyche, misguided emotions, radical notions that seem to come from left field. Point is, whatever stance you take, we can't forget who's really at fault: the gunman. And most importantly, we must focus on lives and those who are affected now, not our own agendas and hypothetical situations involving hypothetical people. Rarely have I've seen these arguments talking about what happened, instead going off into scenarios that prove one side of an argument. "Sure you could use knives, but who would use knives?" or "Maybe more people should have a concealed gun, then no one would die!"

Having watched the movie on Netflix, all the Penguin's sea creatures were rigged with explosives.

As I've said before, I'm envious of anyone who made it to Comic Con... But then a dude did some high-res scans of the two posters that were being handed out haha! And text-less here and here.

Yep, Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes are pretty different. Wasn't it just about a year or so that Rotten Tomatoes changed the percentage system? It use to be 70%+ was Fresh, but now it's anything 60%+ is Fresh. I think that changed because there were a quite a bit of decent flicks that were ending up between that 60-69% range and being labeled "Rotten." Considering it takes a real stinker (Jack and Jill - 3%) to end up in the 0-10% range, now we have a 10-59% Rotten range and a 60-99% Fresh range.

First off, I'm envious of anyone who made it to Comic Con and grabbed themselves one of these. Next, Spirit World a la Legend of Korra.

Rico was the embodiment of why I couldn't fully invest in the plot/story for KZ2. It's a shame because there is a lot of effort put into the "mythos" of how a highly profitable corporation turned into a colonized race that had to essentially adapt to their new world. It went from an invasion to a "Dammit Rico, don't mess this up for us!" In KZ3, Rico is better as Strangelove said, but with the lack of a Visari or even a character like Radec, it isn't as engaging. The gameplay though you'll definitely enjoy. It definitely becomes "epic," but that's more so the actual game than any exact thing.