bbk

Ha, I can easily go 2.5-3 to 1 running around because that is how the maps are created. Standing in a static position in any of the maps, no matter which, is asking for trouble. To be honest, the ones who decide to camp around all day are the ones I will happily target with high discrimination even if it means forgoing the other five or six guys on their team. Being a team player in COD is a joke, as there is no such concept of team, except that grouping up just means you're going to get in the way of each other, and it will just be cherry points for the guy who wipes out said group. The maps in COD really are created to cause a circular pattern-- it isn't just an multiplayer concept, but dates back to the original concept set forth by the first Call of Duty's single player campaign. The levels were created with waypoints in mind, and a player had to hit the waypoints or the enemies would keep spawning. So, the secret was to continually push forward, even at risk of getting shot to sh*t. The same mechanic has endured all the way to the current iteration-- and to the studio's benefit, it is a common mechanic used in many games. How does this translate to the multiplayer? Simple, the maps are created in circular patterns with one or two avenues of approach that are used for flanking, but the concept is to speed up the games. When I was still involved in the community, I talked to the person who ended up being the senior head of the online gaming department for MW2, as MW1 was just making a splash and I was curious what he thought of the game moving forward. His concept of MW1 was that it was to be similar to the more traditional small-unit FPS, like CS. However, the studio moving forward wanted to make the game more accessible to more people-- which meant speeding up the process from rounds taking 30-45 minutes to 8-10 minutes. That way people, regardless of expertise, would get more variety over the same amount of time. Of course I didn't understand that this would translate to the maps being fashioned for the mechanic of constant movement, but it makes sense now (and the game hasn't changed at all from MW2 to MW3, at least in terms of mechanics). It's sad because MW3, and MW2, are built around the player, instead of the maps. I hate to keep referring to CS, but it is the pinnacle for what an online small-unit FPS is suppose to be... and I hate referring to it because the game is easily 13 years old now, and there is really no comparison. MW1 was probably the closest, but MW2 and MW3 are more reminiscent of the Unreal days, and really puts a damper on the FPS genre being anything of a thinking game. And I do have credibility, I'm not just spewing sh*t, haha. I was involved with that community from 1999 until around 2007. I was an administrator for CAL-cs, as well as a manager for zEx, and did background work for CGS; also did some things locally, working with sponsors for local events, hosting some of the larger regional tournaments. And with my background, I'm just disappointed and so critical because there was such potential, from both the economic and cultural perspectives... but the need to cater to the casuals really ruined pretty much everything. Sure, economic gains for the distributors, but not much for the community itself.

Fair enough

Ha, mw3 is an arcade game, no sense in trying to play it like its real ;(

Ugh, you're one of those, Vlad? Haha. The whole point of COD is to run around with reckless abandon because that's how the maps and mechanics are set up! It's the only reason why the decoy air drops even work, haha. Oh well, I guess we need campers so we can blame somebody for our futility

Ha, how is humanizing and intellectualizing the whole survival experience not interesting? As it's been said, repeatedly, the concept of the show is not zombies, but that the zombies are a vessel of the types of danger present. Think a natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina. The zombies present in TWD equate to the actual disaster, but the real story has to do with the process of surviving, what it means to survive, dealing with loss, and dealing with other human issues. Heck, the title of the show refers to the people and not the zombies. While some of the cinematography might be a bit yuppie at times, it does create, for most, a sort of emotion. For those who look at things objectively, maybe not so much. But that emotion is key to the overall progression-- same could be said about some of the character development, regarding the melodrama. As I've said since before the show even started, if people are concerned that this isn't zombie enough for them, they're approaching the whole show wrong. This show is not about zombies. Its a show that takes place in a zombie world. I don't understand how people don't get that.

Been a great season so far. They just need to keep an eye on the pacing. If it slows down to a crawl like last season, well, I won't be taking the time to watch it myself. To reiterate though, if people are expecting a Resident Evil movie, of course they'll be disappointed-- that was never the concept, ever, going back to the source material. Anybody familiar with the show 'Jericho' would not be disappointed as it is more in-line with that. And to add, there is a crazy long, ongoing thread here: http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php?/topic/19550-the-walking-dead/ I'll probably end up merging these two threads.

The more important thing about the barn is what it signifies after everything goes to hell (which is no spoiler as anybody could deduce that from the previews shown... plus, c'mon, it's zombies locked up in a barn that has been brought up numerous times [to be avoided at that]... and then the whole scene with Glenn, of course it won't end well). The direction post-barn incident is what I'm really going to be critical about moving forward. They can really screw the pooch, or the show will get a million times more interesting, no exaggeration.

Nice rifles. Do you find that the optic on the middle, which looks like a SPARC, is a bit low?

Wow, CompUSA still exists? I thought they went under years ago. With that said, nice price.

The reflexivity of Maks statement is apparent, however, it is viable in application because the change of gun culture in NJ cannot be transformed over night. To me, the changing of the gun culture in a place in NJ is like the introduction of technology to cultures that are simply not ready yet (which, for those who don't know, never ends well). We can say that as people of a larger community of gun owners across the US we are obviously not idiots, and have relatively clean backgrounds. Chances are that the overwhelming majority would not have any issues, however, could we account for everyone? Even if there were to be a single incident, the primary objective would be an absolute failure. Further, how can anybody vouch for the greater whole? I cannot say that John Smith, a character I've never met nor would ever care to, is of great and perfect personality... nor would I want to because that then reflects upon my own character. Just because we as NJ gun owners go through a "background check" doesn't really amount to much. It is relatively easy to get through life without racking up a criminal record or being mentally unstable. As for our contacts, we put down people who we know will vouch for us regardless. Not really much of a background check, considering what goes into SSBIs. I'm not saying that the introduction of reciprocity would unleash a torrent of loonies running around, trying to be cowboys. I simply and inherently don't trust that people in NJ, as a whole, in the current form with the current gun culture would be capable without incident(s). Now, I think that it would be eventually possible, and that is demonstrated because that is indeed how it works in the majority of the country-- which is fantastic. However, they have established their gun culture, and in fact it is the dominant one. So then the real question becomes how do we achieve that progression of culture? Simply throwing tools into our hands, that we are not culturally ready for, does nothing but exacerbate a larger issue.

I have no issues with the show or how it's developed. The writing was terrible in season one, without a doubt-- reason why the creative team was let go. However, it wasn't the mood or the material, it was what the writers chose to do with it all (first season was way to static, going in between essentially two sets-- camp site and the one or two buildings in Atlanta). While the writers totally deviated with the final two episodes from season one with them going to CDC (which never happens in the comics), I found them to be a bit more enjoyable because it really opened up the can of worms, in regards to the characters. Consider trying to write a story about characters, how they interact, etc., but that they are restricted to never leave a single room of a huge house. That is my sentiment for season one, and while it was necessary to an extent (as season 1 pretty much covered only the first issue of the graphic novel); the contrast with the approach now with the characters being in a more diverse area-- well, it really opens things up. And when you consider things like that, it's actually quite impressive with the strength of characters that they have developed so far. Once the process catches up with the material, I think the show will really take off... and it seems with the introduction to the barn at the end of the latest episode, the creative team is starting to realize that. I honestly was worried that they would do the same thing this season as the first, with them hunkering down at the farm forever. However, it appears that there will be more progression then anticipated, and I'm really looking forward to how the writers of the show include the material from the graphics novels (the impact of the barn is quite significant in the source material... at least in terms of it's sign of change). And then maybe we'll see the one location I've really been anticipating sooner then expected?

I also recommend the ferry ride in from Port Imperial (Weehawken), though as Frank said, a bit pricey. Speaking of Weehawken, the view from Hamilton Park and the waterfront park at night of the NYC skyline is quite nice given it's a clear view. For the first time, midtown is never a bad choice. As for museums, I prefer the Met over MOMA, and it doesn't hurt that the Met sits on the border of Central Park. In general though, NYC is starting to put up their Christmas decor (as well as the tree), so you'll have that festive atmosphere as well.

Ha! Clever way of using Merle. I approve.

Ha, touche. I'm not all about the melodrama, but someone like Merle will help keep things fresh-- hopefully. However, I guess Merle won't end up being the Governor... which might be a good thing.

From the previews and the fact that Michael Rooker will be on Talking Dead (the post-episode talk show), looks like Merle Dixon (the guy who was handcuffed on the roof, who then severed said hand to escape) will be making a return tonight... I'm pretty psyched as I really liked the anarchy and discourse he provided in the first season.

I'm just glad the story isn't so static this season, so far. The characters being forced to expand beyond one or two settings is quite refreshing. As for the dude/zombie with no legs, to further expand on what I said, it really does bring up a good question. [spoiler alert:] The graphic novels are adamant that the infection is not spread from zombies, but that the disease is already internalized within the human body. When a person dies, regardless of how, they will come back as a zombie unless they have their brains destroyed. So, a person can be shot (like Shane is in the graphic novel), stabbed, pass from old age, etc., and they will come back. But then we have the people who died in their cars, and, yes, the hanging man who, which no matter how you consider options go against the principle set forth by the source material. Would it be completely uncalled for if the TV version absolutely deviates? Obviously not as they have already. However, and maybe it's just me, but changing an absolutely essential part of the story really bothers me. [End of spoilers] As for Glenn, definitely the most under appreciated character, haha. In the graphic novels, he appears the most out of everyone except for the one person who is, essentially, chronicling the entire story, which is Rick Grimes of course. Glad to see that the studio hasn't totally butchered the story-- though, there is always time for that.

Exactly what Alec said-- which I thought was pretty apparent in the conversation between the two that were in the scene. ETA: Though what you said, Bruce, does bring up a type of conflicting idea. This scene means how the zombie disease works in the show differs from how it works in the source material (graphic novels)...I won't really divulge much more as I don't want to bring up any spoilers.

I got it, finished the campaign relatively quickly, and am wasting some time on the MP. I'll be one of the few that have an overall negative opinion about the game. Yes, I know that Infinity Ward was a mess after the fallout of the studio heads and mostly every staff lead leaving to form Respawn Entertainment... but that isn't much of an excuse to basically recycle game mechanics and engine, while forgoing a decent script (I know they got Paul Haggis to write it, but I feel the studios got cheated because it was a pretty bad story). They said this is a revamped version of the IW4.0 engine, but basically all it allows is for the game to run at 60 fps... which is great in itself, but is really behind the curve when comparing this game to BF3, Rage, Far Cry 3, etc. IW and Sledgehammer had two years to develop this game, and not that the graphics/cinematics/scripting/writing are huge disappointments... but this is the COD franchise. We expect fireworks and a Michael Bay experience at our fingertips. Visually this was more like sparkles, and while mostly everything was solid, I did feel like the story and franchise was not given the huge sendoff it deserved. As for the game mechanics, ugh. There is virtually no change, and the series is starting to feel more like a Halo-esque experience (dumb it down for the kids mantra). Modern Warfare [1] had an excellent MP experience, and I really thought that was the direction the developers were going to go. And when I heard that they were changing the Kill Streaks and classes (or whatever that concept means in the COD franchise), I was ecstatic. And then when I started at it, I realized how much of a joke these apparent changes had been. And to add, as a PC gamer, I'm really disappointed. No dedicated servers, and are still using P2P; maps are limited to a max of 18 and feel disjointed (MW2 maps had even more depth and tactical decision making); and the game is more intensive on my system than BF3, which is outrageous all things considered (BF3 forces you to have Origin running, a browser, and has a more powerful engine... you would think that it would have more of an impact). I want to like MW3, I really do. And I don't regret buying it because I wanted to see and experience the conclusion of a story I really have enjoyed over the past six years (or so). Fortunately, this is the last of this franchise (at least hopefully), and IW and Sledgehammer can focus on a project totally their own instead of trying to pick up the pieces and glue them together.

Hello and welcome from a faux-Mercer County resident.

Bravo Company Manufacturing, they're known as a top-notch AR manufacturer. The hat is FDE with a flag and BCM on the back. Had a fun conversation about rifles and the fact it's a small world after we had both voted.

Wore my BCM hat to the polling station, and a random individual noticed it... I was kind of surprised as I live in a pretty small town.

Ha, yea, seriously, I think there is a bit of ageism going on here. There are plenty of people who do ridiculously stupid things every day, quite frequently-- like drinking, smoking, driving fast, etc. All have a better chance of killing you than any gun, and people willingly do it-- heck, they will defend killing themselves. With that said, I do agree with the part that what makes this case specially stupid is that they did it for an audience via social media. That makes it transcend an accident, and almost a spectacle... which is quite ridiculous.

I'm intrigued, and will have to definitely see when my schedule is in line with the simunition courses being offered.

Mechanix gloves are widely used by the military (I can't speak for the LE community), and that was a reason why they make military-type gloves now (compared to the original). I have a pair, though I still do prefer my Hatch gloves I have used for years. My use is when it is cold, or when I know that I'll be using a firearm for an extended amount of time.

Hehe, people post on an internet forum, and then are worried about being tracked via something like EZ Pass. As someone who worked in the IC, the technology is way ahead of the culture at this point. Some is real, a lot is still science fiction. And as Maks said, you and I and the vast majority of people hardly register in the big picture-- so, I wouldn't be too worried. (Unless you have a reason too! )