0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:26:32 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.Fine, 20 slow zombies or 20 pillz whitey's?
Quote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.
Quote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?
I like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.
We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.
Valuve Admin Steve: If not we at valve can act as a "guardian gateway".Valuve Admin Steve: I will be your daddy.
Quote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 03:01:26 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:26:32 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.Fine, 20 slow zombies or 20 pillz whitey's?lol, sorry Slow zombies are better. A couple fast mixed in with the slow is fine tho. But when every Zombie is as fast as Usain Bolt theirs a problem.
The whole point of CG is ruined if no one post.
I know what you would do you would hump the shit out of that car, then you would get run over
It's an ulgy dem file.
And you're do not look any thicker. I've had Creaps.
Quote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 03:47:44 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 03:01:26 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:26:32 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.Fine, 20 slow zombies or 20 pillz whitey's?lol, sorry Slow zombies are better. A couple fast mixed in with the slow is fine tho. But when every Zombie is as fast as Usain Bolt theirs a problem.Depends.They could be slow and weak which would be pitiful and not very fun. They could be slow and hard-hitting, which IMO is the perfect match, nothing really beats a Romero zombie.They could also be fast and weak, which is actually fun as documented on L4D, and for a fast-paced game works very well.they could be fast and hard-hitting - which is frankly a terrible idea for a platitude of reasons.**: If the game was a one-bite-kill game then this could work, if you look at 28 Days Later as an example.A mix between Romero (Slow) and 28 Days Later (Fast) zombies would be wonderful - and is already in DayZ - albeit the fast ones are fidgety and annoying to shoot.
Quote from: Leetgrain on January 13, 2013, 04:34:41 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 03:47:44 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 03:01:26 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:26:32 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.Fine, 20 slow zombies or 20 pillz whitey's?lol, sorry Slow zombies are better. A couple fast mixed in with the slow is fine tho. But when every Zombie is as fast as Usain Bolt theirs a problem.Depends.They could be slow and weak which would be pitiful and not very fun. They could be slow and hard-hitting, which IMO is the perfect match, nothing really beats a Romero zombie.They could also be fast and weak, which is actually fun as documented on L4D, and for a fast-paced game works very well.they could be fast and hard-hitting - which is frankly a terrible idea for a platitude of reasons.**: If the game was a one-bite-kill game then this could work, if you look at 28 Days Later as an example.A mix between Romero (Slow) and 28 Days Later (Fast) zombies would be wonderful - and is already in DayZ - albeit the fast ones are fidgety and annoying to shoot.No 28 days later zombies are terrable.Play no more room in hell, next to perfect zombies.
Quote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 05:03:26 PMQuote from: Leetgrain on January 13, 2013, 04:34:41 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 03:47:44 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 03:01:26 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:26:32 PMQuote from: Pillz on January 13, 2013, 02:25:12 PMQuote from: Inject OH 4 on January 13, 2013, 02:06:26 PMI like how everyone assumes slow zombies wouldn't pose any threat. They would.I wish games would understand that. Few have, but some do.Dead Rising has slow zombies, not the best example, but games tend to not use slow zombies. It's annoying.Which poses a greater threat, a single slow zombie or a single Pillz zombie that's jumping off tables and doing spins in midair?Who said anything about a single zombie?No More Room In Hell, anyone? NMRIH is amazing.Fine, 20 slow zombies or 20 pillz whitey's?lol, sorry Slow zombies are better. A couple fast mixed in with the slow is fine tho. But when every Zombie is as fast as Usain Bolt theirs a problem.Depends.They could be slow and weak which would be pitiful and not very fun. They could be slow and hard-hitting, which IMO is the perfect match, nothing really beats a Romero zombie.They could also be fast and weak, which is actually fun as documented on L4D, and for a fast-paced game works very well.they could be fast and hard-hitting - which is frankly a terrible idea for a platitude of reasons.**: If the game was a one-bite-kill game then this could work, if you look at 28 Days Later as an example.A mix between Romero (Slow) and 28 Days Later (Fast) zombies would be wonderful - and is already in DayZ - albeit the fast ones are fidgety and annoying to shoot.No 28 days later zombies are terrable.Play no more room in hell, next to perfect zombies.Sigh... That's a mix of 28 Days Later, and Romero, Fast zombies and child zombies are... well fast.
I hate that keep on pushing it back, it is making me less excited every time they push it. I hate to have to wait another month for the "expected" Release date. I might not even buy the game if they push it back again. And thanks for all the replies
Quote from: AMM|mrrappingjake on January 13, 2013, 07:27:38 PMI hate that keep on pushing it back, it is making me less excited every time they push it. I hate to have to wait another month for the "expected" Release date. I might not even buy the game if they push it back again. And thanks for all the repliesSometimes good games require more time. It can be hard to find the perfect middle point between release date and quality.
I've proved people wrong on so many occasioans
Oh wow I do.Its because. I'm really active on the forum.
3 Days isn't log
28 days later was not a mediocre movie, you are just too picky. It received the following: Best Horror Film (U.S. Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films — Saturn Award)[citation needed] Best British Film (Empire Award)[citation needed] Danny Boyle (Grand Prize of European Fantasy Film in Silver)[citation needed] Best Director — Danny Boyle (International Fantasy Film Award)[citation needed] Best International Film — Danny Boyle (Narcisse Award)[citation needed] Best Breakthrough Performance — Naomie Harris (Black Reel)[citation needed] Best Cinematographer — Anthony Dod Mantle (European Film Award)[citation needed]Critical views of the film were very positive. Based on 205 reviews collected by the film review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, 88% of critics gave 28 Days Later a positive review. On Metacritic, the film received a rating of 73 (out of 100) based on 39 reviews.28 Days Later was a considerable success at the box office and became highly profitable on a budget of about £5 million. In the UK, it took in £6.1 million, while in the US it became a surprise hit, taking over $45 million despite a limited release at fewer than 1,500 screens across the country. The film garnered around $82.7 million worldwide.Thats not mediocre, that is success.
Quote from: Kwaurtz on January 13, 2013, 05:42:52 PM28 days later was not a mediocre movie, you are just too picky. It received the following: Best Horror Film (U.S. Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films — Saturn Award)[citation needed] Best British Film (Empire Award)[citation needed] Danny Boyle (Grand Prize of European Fantasy Film in Silver)[citation needed] Best Director — Danny Boyle (International Fantasy Film Award)[citation needed] Best International Film — Danny Boyle (Narcisse Award)[citation needed] Best Breakthrough Performance — Naomie Harris (Black Reel)[citation needed] Best Cinematographer — Anthony Dod Mantle (European Film Award)[citation needed]Critical views of the film were very positive. Based on 205 reviews collected by the film review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, 88% of critics gave 28 Days Later a positive review. On Metacritic, the film received a rating of 73 (out of 100) based on 39 reviews.28 Days Later was a considerable success at the box office and became highly profitable on a budget of about £5 million. In the UK, it took in £6.1 million, while in the US it became a surprise hit, taking over $45 million despite a limited release at fewer than 1,500 screens across the country. The film garnered around $82.7 million worldwide.Thats not mediocre, that is success.My dick received the award of InjectSaysIt'sAwsome.An award means nothing. I don't care how many billions of dollars it made. To me it's mediocre. Think with your own brain not some critics.
Author
Topic: DayZ Standalone Release (Read 5983 times)
ShoutBox!
