I seem to be in the mood to post today, and because, for the past couple of years I seem to post only about video game related stuff (today's other post notwithstanding), I'm gonna post about this:
Crackdown 2 (Wikipedia entry. the Computer and Video Games.com review)
The last line of the review sums up my feelings:
"but, if you buy it, don't be surprised to experience a twinge of disappointment as the game unravels."
Okay, what follows contains information that may be considered 'Spoilers," but you'll know most of this anyway after playing for an hour (if you go for the Story goals. I didn't. I spent my first night jumping and climbing to find orbs, because I loved doing it so much in the original game). If you don't want to know, just don't read.
Also, I'm only talking about the single player here. While I like co-op, I'm just not interested in the other, more competitive or adversarial multiplayer aspects. Not yet, anyway.
I loved the original Crackdown, and I spent months anticipating Crackdown 2. Mostly, my disappoint lies with the story. There really isn't one. Instead, you only have two tasks:
First, the task of activating sets of three energy-collecting gadgets in order to power up a beacon. Drop beacon into freak lair and defend it against vandalizing freaks while it warms up, At full power, it gets all glowy, burns all the freaks in the lair, and ends their good time. After that, you go out to rescue the next set of three collectors and repeat, for a total of nine beacons spread throughout the city. The big climax of the game is that you get to activate a tenth beacon located at Agency headquarters that will finish off all remaining freaks in the city.
The second task it to take control of specific 'tactical' points throughout the city from the local terrorist organization, The Cell.. Each tactical point seems to have a partner point in the same neighborhood that you should capture soon after the first. Otherwise, the Cell, will come back and reclaim their, uh, sidewalks?. The tactical points are mostly on the streets (with a few on the rooftops) so it's more like a place that a bunch of guys with guns like to hang out, like an NRA club meeting in the parking lot of the bowling alley. Claiming a tactical point gives you a place to resupply, to store newly discovered weapons, or to change your weapon loadout.
Both tasks feel like they should have been side missions (thus, the reason I call them tasks instead of missions), there only to keep you busy while waiting for the main storyline to progress.. Neither task gives you much of a feeling of making a difference against the game's Biggest Bads...
Saying 'Biggest Bads' in relation to Crackdown 2 is a little painful. Collecting the "In Story" Audio Files scattered across the city kind of makes you think there really is a Big Bad that you'll have a grand final battle with. But not so much. More of a hook for events in a Crackdown 3 (which, despite my mild disappointment with the second game, I'm still hoping hoping hoping for a third).
Having said all that, I still like the game. Still like the look and style, still like the gameplay, LOVE the climbing and jumping and blowing everything into tiny little bits. Still love the orbs (even though they were the source of HOURS of frustrated searching in the first Crackdown). Still love picking up cars and throwing them at people. Still love driving fast cars through crowds of squishy people. I even love the Voice of the Agency guy, even when he was calling me names and questioning my manhood. Most of the fun I had in the original game was in doing all those things, and I still get to do them in the second.
Combat is still wild, especially once you've leveled up your abilities and acquired the better weapons Big booms, little booms, chains of booms. Toss a car from a rooftop, fire a rocket launcher... flying boom! There's even a quacky yellow rubber duck boom! Gun battles even get a little harrowing at times when you're surrounded on the street by rifle-toting thugs and have a few punks with rocket launchers, grenade launchers or gun turrets above you, all shooting at you while you scramble for cover in the one doorway or alcove they can't get a line of sight on, healing up so you can make a dash for the rooftops, only to be blown back to the ground by the guy with the Agent-seeking rocket.
And heck, I still love Pacific City, even if she is all shabby and rundown and blown apart. I always have a difficult time navigating around sandbox and open world game cities without frequently calling up the map. I have some trouble recognizing differing areas of the cities, and absolutely NO sense of direction in-game (there's no real awareness of where the in-game sun is unless I'm looking up at it, so every direction feels the same to me). I have to play for dozens of hours before I'm able to get myself from one side of a city to the other without calling up the map at every second or third intersection or using a waypoint system (sometimes, I still get lost on Call of Duty maps, even though the entire field of battle is roughly the size of my backyard).
The new Pacific City really did seem all new. So, I was thrilled when, a couple of hours into the game, I recognized a particular set of buildings from the first game. No, it wasn't the amusement park, or a Shai-Gen building, or the oil rig. Just a couple of low buildings near the water, in view of Agency tower. It had been quite a while since I'd played the original Crackdown, and I assumed that the new Pacific City would be completely different except for a few high profile/well loved locations from the first game. Standing there, looking at these innocuous buildings that had no importance in the first game (or the second, for that matter), I realized that it really was my beloved Pacific City, and that I could find my way around after all.
I spent a few hours exploring for anything I could recognize from the first game. Got my low-ability-level self killed several times by bad guys, a couple of falls, and not running away from my own grenades fast enough, but it was worth it to see all the places I loved in the original Crackdown. They'd changed, fallen apart, been destroyed. But I could still see the places I'd fought those early battles, getting my butt kicked several times, places I returned to later after I was all grow'd up, just so I could throw a few cars at those bullies, toss in some grenades, then pick off the survivors with a harpoon gun. Ah, memories!
My recommendation for people like me, who aren't into the multiplayer: buy the original Crackdown if you don't already own it. Play through it for a while until Crackdown 2 has a more reasonable price, then pick up the sequel. I would have been less disappointed if I didn't also have the sting of paying full price for the game.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
The Tortured Mind of a Genius
From Fox News: PBS Defends Cutting Footage of McCartney's Jab at Bush From Broadcast
Is this even controversial? I've been out of the politics loop for a very long time, but this doesn't seem at all like something to get worked up about, or even report. It doesn't even seem like PBS is defending the cut, or only doing so half-heartedly. Quarter-heartedly. and with another guys heartedly-ness.
McCartney's comment doesn't seem all that bad either, other than being a tired old joke. He is probably also being lazy. If you're one of the most recognizable singer/songwriters in the world, invited to the White House, and standing in front of the President, you probably feel some pressure to say something memorable, but memorable is tricky. Maybe something amusing instead? Amusing is easier anyway, but you don't want to try to improvise something, because Jerry Seinfeld is watching only a few feet away and you just KNOW that if you try for the big laugh you'll be upstaged by him there or maybe later at some press-filled cocktail party that no-one told you about. Or you'll be ceaselessly compared to him, the way people are always secretly comparing you to Tilda Swinton... stupid Seinfeld. Stupid White Witch ...
Hmm.? Oh yes, focus.... a Democrat occupies the White House, so jokes about Republicans should fly, but who to make the butt of the joke? James Garfield? Nah, an assassination joke probably wouldn't go over well. Eisenhower? Nah, he's a war hero. Reagan, maybe? Golly, no way! That will definitely stir up a hornets nest of GOP anger. G.H.W. Bush ? Well... kind of tough. Seems to have been a decent guy, not a bad or controversial president, and only a single term. Would take too much thought to find something good. So that leaves... oh hey! The current President's predecessor! Hasn't been out of office too long, and the Dems REALLY seemed to dislike the guy and they talk like the current President's election was a complete repudiation of the last guy's entire term of service! Plus, all the jokes have already been written and retold! Can't miss!
So he spits out the easiest, laziest joke, just to get a quick chuckle. The crowd chuckles, mostly out of politeness for the venerable former-Beatle, then everyone goes to do whatever people do after a visit to the White House, like eat pizza or play Jenga or something.
Unless you're good ol' Paul. Instead, you go off and obsess about how you know you had something incredibly poignant and simultaneously hilarious to say but all the pressure of Jerry Seinfeld's presence probably made your brain lock it away in your subconscious for all time and now the world will never know it. Stupid Seinfeld with his handsome and charismatic presence.
Poor Paul... a tortured mind, if that fictionalized insider's view of his internal thought processes are accurate.
Anyway, I say this is a totally dumb thing to get worked up about, though former Bush White House Press Secretary Dana Perino would seem to disagree with me. She says, "It was sad to me someone of Paul McCartney's stature can in one moment erase years of goodwill that he built up with so many people in America."
People who would allow something this insignificant to "erase years of goodwill" probably already had their own right-leaningness and Paul's left-leaningness clash, erasing the goodwill long ago. The people who enjoy participating in the Us-vs.-Them politics and squabbling will still outraged, lined up on their respective sides, hollering and hooting at their opponents (they aren't really outraged, by the way. Blockbuster was out of the movie they wanted. Well, there were, like, a dozen copies, but all Blu-Ray, and they really don't want to spend so much for a Blu-Ray player right now. But if you can't make it a Blockbuster Night, may as well get pissed off about something ).
Those of us who don't give a flying hogmonkey's rump will just use it as a way to relieve their boredom of searching the interwebbs for one single, particular, stupid-ass t-shirt, or the bleeding manufacturer that doesn't have a website, or maybe a retail outlet that even mentions that they buy from this manufacturer. Please, Kibo, give me something!
Is this even controversial? I've been out of the politics loop for a very long time, but this doesn't seem at all like something to get worked up about, or even report. It doesn't even seem like PBS is defending the cut, or only doing so half-heartedly. Quarter-heartedly. and with another guys heartedly-ness.
McCartney's comment doesn't seem all that bad either, other than being a tired old joke. He is probably also being lazy. If you're one of the most recognizable singer/songwriters in the world, invited to the White House, and standing in front of the President, you probably feel some pressure to say something memorable, but memorable is tricky. Maybe something amusing instead? Amusing is easier anyway, but you don't want to try to improvise something, because Jerry Seinfeld is watching only a few feet away and you just KNOW that if you try for the big laugh you'll be upstaged by him there or maybe later at some press-filled cocktail party that no-one told you about. Or you'll be ceaselessly compared to him, the way people are always secretly comparing you to Tilda Swinton... stupid Seinfeld. Stupid White Witch ...
Hmm.? Oh yes, focus.... a Democrat occupies the White House, so jokes about Republicans should fly, but who to make the butt of the joke? James Garfield? Nah, an assassination joke probably wouldn't go over well. Eisenhower? Nah, he's a war hero. Reagan, maybe? Golly, no way! That will definitely stir up a hornets nest of GOP anger. G.H.W. Bush ? Well... kind of tough. Seems to have been a decent guy, not a bad or controversial president, and only a single term. Would take too much thought to find something good. So that leaves... oh hey! The current President's predecessor! Hasn't been out of office too long, and the Dems REALLY seemed to dislike the guy and they talk like the current President's election was a complete repudiation of the last guy's entire term of service! Plus, all the jokes have already been written and retold! Can't miss!
So he spits out the easiest, laziest joke, just to get a quick chuckle. The crowd chuckles, mostly out of politeness for the venerable former-Beatle, then everyone goes to do whatever people do after a visit to the White House, like eat pizza or play Jenga or something.
Unless you're good ol' Paul. Instead, you go off and obsess about how you know you had something incredibly poignant and simultaneously hilarious to say but all the pressure of Jerry Seinfeld's presence probably made your brain lock it away in your subconscious for all time and now the world will never know it. Stupid Seinfeld with his handsome and charismatic presence.
Poor Paul... a tortured mind, if that fictionalized insider's view of his internal thought processes are accurate.
Anyway, I say this is a totally dumb thing to get worked up about, though former Bush White House Press Secretary Dana Perino would seem to disagree with me. She says, "It was sad to me someone of Paul McCartney's stature can in one moment erase years of goodwill that he built up with so many people in America."
People who would allow something this insignificant to "erase years of goodwill" probably already had their own right-leaningness and Paul's left-leaningness clash, erasing the goodwill long ago. The people who enjoy participating in the Us-vs.-Them politics and squabbling will still outraged, lined up on their respective sides, hollering and hooting at their opponents (they aren't really outraged, by the way. Blockbuster was out of the movie they wanted. Well, there were, like, a dozen copies, but all Blu-Ray, and they really don't want to spend so much for a Blu-Ray player right now. But if you can't make it a Blockbuster Night, may as well get pissed off about something ).
Those of us who don't give a flying hogmonkey's rump will just use it as a way to relieve their boredom of searching the interwebbs for one single, particular, stupid-ass t-shirt, or the bleeding manufacturer that doesn't have a website, or maybe a retail outlet that even mentions that they buy from this manufacturer. Please, Kibo, give me something!
Sunday, July 25, 2010
My Plastic Box Can Beat Up Your Plastic Box!
I posted twice in 2006. Three posts in 2009. And now, I make my first post of 2010. If I'm not careful, this will become an addiction. Anyway...
"Are PC gamers better than console players?"
Silly argument. It's like asking if North Dakota is better than South Dakota. It doesn't matter.
Both camps are gamers. I like the Xbox 360. One fellow I work with likes the PS3. Another fellow at work plays PC games. We rag on each other and talk some mad shite, but we still recognize that the three of us all love the same thing. We all laugh when one of us talks about botched attempts at something in-game, and we all get idiot-grins when the other guy is describing that amazing multikill or killstreak. The platform we play on doesn't matter. We just love the games.
The article linked at the top does not, at all, answer the question in its own headline. Basically, one guy (who advocates PC gaming) speculates that Microsoft pulled out of some kind of cross-platform competitive experiment because the "mediocre" pc gamers routinely beat the "top-notch" Xbox gamers. Also, he states, "You simply don’t get the same level of detail or control as you do with a PC over a console." I think that last statement is quantitatively true (though 'level of detail' can be an aesthetic consideration), and that few people argue against it, but it isn't proof that the PC-ers are inherently better than console-ers.
There are some great gamers out there on all platforms, and there are some real suck-ass players on all platforms, too. Playing on one doesn't bestow greater skill than playing on another, and comparing the two camps is insincere if the limitations of the hardware are not considered. Take the PC gamer and limit him to eight pre-assigned buttons, the numberpad (numbers only, but no zero or five) and two thumbsticks (and the reduced precision that goes with those sticks vs. a mouse), and he'll be closer the handicap of the Xbox players (yes, we Xbox 360 gamers are handicapped by the limitations of the controller. It's a little like playing Scrabble, but only being able to start with four tiles while your opponent gets eight).
The last half of the article asks, "But, all things considered, does the PC provide the best experience?" This isn't remotely the same type of question as the one asked at the top of the article, and has nothing to do with it. Indeed, a good PC will give you better graphics and a smoother running game with better, more precise controls. Undoubtedly. That's not what makes for a better gaming experience though.
I play PC games when my Xbox Live friends are not online or are playing something I'm not in the mood to play. The better gaming experience, for me, comes from having people to play with regularly, ones that make the game much more fun than it would be otherwise. Yep, most of the people I've met on Xbox Live are douchebags, half-wits, loudmouths, assholes or crybaby punks (most of the people I've met in the offline world are the same), but there are a few that enhance the experience for me.
They watch my back during team deathmatches. They coach me when I can't hit crap with a sniper rifle (almost every shot is a miss!). They rag on me when I'm killed by a claymore. In same doorway as before. For the fourth time. They (virtually) high-five me when I end the match with a high k/d ratio. And when I get too caught up in the game, get too competitive, they remind me that it's just a game. Or they irritate the shit out of me until I give up on trying to win, take a deep breath, and go back to playing just for fun.
"Are PC gamers better than console players?"
Silly argument. It's like asking if North Dakota is better than South Dakota. It doesn't matter.
Both camps are gamers. I like the Xbox 360. One fellow I work with likes the PS3. Another fellow at work plays PC games. We rag on each other and talk some mad shite, but we still recognize that the three of us all love the same thing. We all laugh when one of us talks about botched attempts at something in-game, and we all get idiot-grins when the other guy is describing that amazing multikill or killstreak. The platform we play on doesn't matter. We just love the games.
The article linked at the top does not, at all, answer the question in its own headline. Basically, one guy (who advocates PC gaming) speculates that Microsoft pulled out of some kind of cross-platform competitive experiment because the "mediocre" pc gamers routinely beat the "top-notch" Xbox gamers. Also, he states, "You simply don’t get the same level of detail or control as you do with a PC over a console." I think that last statement is quantitatively true (though 'level of detail' can be an aesthetic consideration), and that few people argue against it, but it isn't proof that the PC-ers are inherently better than console-ers.
There are some great gamers out there on all platforms, and there are some real suck-ass players on all platforms, too. Playing on one doesn't bestow greater skill than playing on another, and comparing the two camps is insincere if the limitations of the hardware are not considered. Take the PC gamer and limit him to eight pre-assigned buttons, the numberpad (numbers only, but no zero or five) and two thumbsticks (and the reduced precision that goes with those sticks vs. a mouse), and he'll be closer the handicap of the Xbox players (yes, we Xbox 360 gamers are handicapped by the limitations of the controller. It's a little like playing Scrabble, but only being able to start with four tiles while your opponent gets eight).
The last half of the article asks, "But, all things considered, does the PC provide the best experience?" This isn't remotely the same type of question as the one asked at the top of the article, and has nothing to do with it. Indeed, a good PC will give you better graphics and a smoother running game with better, more precise controls. Undoubtedly. That's not what makes for a better gaming experience though.
I play PC games when my Xbox Live friends are not online or are playing something I'm not in the mood to play. The better gaming experience, for me, comes from having people to play with regularly, ones that make the game much more fun than it would be otherwise. Yep, most of the people I've met on Xbox Live are douchebags, half-wits, loudmouths, assholes or crybaby punks (most of the people I've met in the offline world are the same), but there are a few that enhance the experience for me.
They watch my back during team deathmatches. They coach me when I can't hit crap with a sniper rifle (almost every shot is a miss!). They rag on me when I'm killed by a claymore. In same doorway as before. For the fourth time. They (virtually) high-five me when I end the match with a high k/d ratio. And when I get too caught up in the game, get too competitive, they remind me that it's just a game. Or they irritate the shit out of me until I give up on trying to win, take a deep breath, and go back to playing just for fun.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Oy!
I'm making this official and declaring that Donna Noble is my favorite of the Doctor's companions.
and the ending of Journey's End makes me teary-eyed every time I watch it.
and the ending of Journey's End makes me teary-eyed every time I watch it.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Rosebug!
a provocative video rant on comparing Metroid Prime to Citizen Kane, and an article calling out "WTF!".
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Filler...
Freak- INFJ 26% Extraversion, 66% Intuition, 46% Thinking, 53% Judging |
Well, well, well. How did someone like you end up with the least common personality type of them all? In a group of 100 Americans, only 0.5 others would be just like you. You really are one of a kind... In fact, I do believe that that's one of the definitions for the word "FREAK." Freak's not such a bad word to describe you actually. You are deep, complex, secretive and extremely difficult to understand. If that doesn't scream "Freak!" I don't know what does. No-one actually knows the REAL you, do they? You probably have deep interests in creative expression as well as issues of spirituality and human development. You've probably even been called a "psychic" before, because of your uncanny knack to understand and "read" people without quite knowing how you do it. Don't fret. You're not actually psychic. That would make you special and you'll never accomplish that. You're also quite possible the most emotional of them all, so don't take this all too hard. Nevertheless you most definitely have the strangest personality type and that's not necessarily a good thing. ***************** If you want to learn more about your personality type in a slightly less negative way, check out this. ***************** The other personality types are as follows... Loner - Introverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving Pushover - Introverted Sensing Feeling Judging Criminal - Introverted Sensing Thinking Perceiving Borefest - Introverted Sensing Thinking Judging Almost Perfect - Introverted iNtuitive Feeling Perceiving Loser - Introverted iNtuitive Thinking Perceiving Crackpot - Introverted iNtuitive Thinking Judging Clown - Extraverted Sensing Feeling Perceiving Sap - Extraverted Sensing Feeling Judging Commander - Extraverted Sensing Thinking Perceiving Do Gooder - Extraverted Sensing Thinking Judging Scumbag - Extraverted iNtuitive Feeling Perceiving Busybody - Extraverted iNtuitive Feeling Judging Prick - Extraverted iNtuitive Thinking Perceiving Dictator - Extraverted iNtuitive Thinking Judging |
 |
My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
|
| Link: The Brutally Honest Personality Test written by UltimateMaster on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test |
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Friday, July 29, 2005
Employment: Still Sucking After All These Years
My job, lately, has been suckirific.
Workload has increased to nutty levels, at a nutty pace. My supervisor is either deliberately obtuse, or a moron (I think she's deliberately obtuse but using a cultivated "moron" persona to cover it), assigning work and responsibilities in a 'willy-nilly' fashion so that nothing you're assigned to do fits with anything else, there is no "flowing" from one task to another, nothing complements anything else.
Today, because of the lack of preparation for a new function that my group has taken on, I left work six hours late. Yeah, the overtime is nice, and I do like getting it, and yes, I do usually stay late anyway, but I stay to get ahead, or to get caught up. To stay so long and not make any progress... that just blows.
I am tired. I am frustrated. I am ready to give up. Busting your ass and feeling like you've made no progress is just about the worst thing there is about a job.
(but I won't give up. Despite my laziness and my love of goofing off, it is my nature to get things done, which is what I'll do now also. But I won't like it)
Workload has increased to nutty levels, at a nutty pace. My supervisor is either deliberately obtuse, or a moron (I think she's deliberately obtuse but using a cultivated "moron" persona to cover it), assigning work and responsibilities in a 'willy-nilly' fashion so that nothing you're assigned to do fits with anything else, there is no "flowing" from one task to another, nothing complements anything else.
Today, because of the lack of preparation for a new function that my group has taken on, I left work six hours late. Yeah, the overtime is nice, and I do like getting it, and yes, I do usually stay late anyway, but I stay to get ahead, or to get caught up. To stay so long and not make any progress... that just blows.
I am tired. I am frustrated. I am ready to give up. Busting your ass and feeling like you've made no progress is just about the worst thing there is about a job.
(but I won't give up. Despite my laziness and my love of goofing off, it is my nature to get things done, which is what I'll do now also. But I won't like it)
It's game time!
The moblog and blog of Morgan Webb, co-host of X-Play (which has its own moblog too). And if you're interested, what did Adam wear during the show?
Kevin Rose, former TechTV host, has a blog and moblog too.
Kevin Rose, former TechTV host, has a blog and moblog too.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Why not another quiz or two.
20 Questions to a Better Personality
(but... but... I like my personality the way it is!)
20 Questions to a Better Sense of Humor
(but... but... I like my personality the way it is!)
You are a SRCL--Sober Rational Constructive Leader. This makes you a Ayn Rand ideal.
Taggart? Roark? Galt? You are all of these. You were born to lead. You may not be particularly exciting, but you have a strange charisma--born of intellect and personal drive--that people begin to notice when they have been around you a while. You don't like to compromise, but you recognize when you have to.
You care absolutely nothing what other people think, and this somehow attracts people to you. Treat them well, use them wisely, and ascend to your rightful rank.
Of the 138179 people who have taken this quiz since tracking began (8/17/2004), 5.4 % are this type.
20 Questions to a Better Sense of Humor
You are a DYT--Dark Dry Traditional. This makes you a Cynic.
You're a realist. You'll take the piss out of anything, and do it with style and a skinny gray tie. You find humor in the mundane. When the mundane is thousands of working class families watching their retirement savings get snarfed by unpunished white collar bandits, that REALLY gets the larfs.
You bring humor with you, and can flip over any situation to find the tender funny underbelly.
Incidentally, you're better equipped than anyone else to shake off the bad things happen to you. Mysterious lump? You've seen scarier lumps in your garlic cheesey grits. It seems like nothing makes you truly happy, but nothing really upsets you, either.
Your comic sensibility was more in tune with the eighties. But cross your fingers -- another coupla years of Bush and maybe we'll work up a nice Reagan-era national bitterness again. A sardonic orange cat will once again rule the newsprint, and Springsteen'll write more righteous Jersey retro-cock-rock anthems for the progressive pols of 2024 to cold gank. What's past is prologue!
You might like David Letterman, or maybe stay up to see if Conan has another "Pierre Bernard's Recliner of Rage."
Of the 21832 people who have taken this quiz, 10 % are this type.
Your Active humor score of 8/10 means you are a comic house on fire. You are Def Comedy Jam (for the first five minutes, before it becomes repetitive and degrading). You are a library of witty rejoinders, in-jokes, ad-libs and meatballs. Yeah, I said meatballs. They're underrated.
The trick for you is to ease yourself into a situation, since you have the capacity to dominate. If you're socially well-adjusted, you're awesome. If you're kind of nervous and twitchy like Daniel Radcliff in the Prisoner of Azkaban special features, then there can be trouble.
Conflict is my bread and butter
A quiz to figure out what type of relationship-person you are.
You are a RSYG--Reserved Sentimental Physical Giver. This makes you a Nice Guy/Nice Girl.
Oh, poor RSYG. You're the one all your friends of your target sex *should* be dating when you have to watch them go out with jerks. You're the sweet one that the lead in a romantic comedy ends up with after s/he learns a valuable lesson. You're the best friend, the chaperone and the shoulder to cry on when you should be the lover. Well, no one ever said people were smart.
You dislike conflict -- you prefer to express yourself through action, not discussion -- but you know it is necessary. This means you are more likely to tackle an issue before it grows, but you're also more likely to stop fighting before the issue is resolved to your satisfaction. This isn't necessarily a bad thing -- it's kind of a nice compromise between fighting about everything and fighting about nothing -- but you have to remember to look out for your own interests sometimes.
You have a strong sexual appetite, but it seems so out of place with the rest of your persona that people find it hard to believe. Often they try to shield you from sexual content -- it's ridiculous, but you can use it to your advantage: everybody wants someone clean in the kitchen and dirty in the bedroom. That's you.
You don't want to cheat, but you might. Especially since it's only when you're in a relationship that you start getting the attention from your target sex that you should have been getting all along. Your experiences could make you misanthropic if you weren't so tenderhearted.
A lot of RSITs think they're RSYGs. They're not.
You'll end up with someone who deserves you in the end.
Eh, the result is a little spotty in the accuracy department. Firstly, I have no preference regarding how I express myself, through action or discussion. I usually express my 'loving' side through action (I'm affectionate and enjoy touching the people I care about), but my combativeness, anger, jealousy, etc, I express through discussion/argument.
As for my "strong sexual appetite" that "seems so out of place with the rest of your persona that people find it hard to believe." Um, no. It's fits in perfectly with the rest of my persona, and I'm certain that my friends have no doubt about that. None of them try to shield me from anything. My demeanor is NOTHING CLOSE to an innocent.
Next: okay, so I don't actively think "I want to cheat," that's true, but that's as close as I get to the "You don't want to cheat" description. Another recent interweb quiz thing I took gave me this result on one part:
So... um... yeah...... me. Anyway...
But I really am a nice guy to those I care for, and I'm polite to those I don't care for.
.... You know, this result really doesn't say much and what it does say is mostly incorrect.
(found via hit-or-miss)
Thursday, July 21, 2005
James Doohan dies
Oh...... Actor James Doohan died yesterday. I don't know how I could have missed the news, or that no one had mentioned it to me yet.
The CNN article (duplicated here)
The CNN article (duplicated here)