- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,087
Retro Gamer magazine's terrible Metal Slug feature --reviewed!
- Thread starter aria
- Start date
- Status
So Metal Slug went with Zombies and Zelda went 3D.
Those are called changes.
And from the sales numbers and value of this title, I'd say people are content with it.
I don't think the developers were historically correct with the inclusion of man eating flowers.
People here tend to like someone who doesn't tolerate cretins. Over here, a man called Clement Freud (a descendant of the great psychiatrist) died recently - he was a broadcaster, writer, Member of Parliament and Knight of the Realm, among other things, and was very dear to the British public's heart.
At his funeral, his son said fondly of him, "He went out of his way to find fools not to suffer".
I hope that helps.
Last edited:
SIXPACK
Armored Scrum Object
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Posts
- 262
I don't give a rat's arse what it says in the instruction book. After all, I'm sure the instruction manual for MS3 calls the zombie-like creatures "zombies", but you've just told us they're not.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,087
Thanks for clarifying that you have no interest what the correct answer is, only that you will blindly stand behind your work and so long as you are unwilling to admit fault, in your eyes, it is 100% correct.
SIXPACK
Armored Scrum Object
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Posts
- 262
Man,i sure do love to watch you 2 guys argue about zombies!
Sam Madeupname
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Posts
- 0
No, I gave you your line. It was, "A-HA! The proof at last that you failed to do proper research for your article!"
Tsk, you got it all wrong. Tell us again how you haven't read the article, and then the bit about how poorly researched it is.
No, it really doesn't.
Unless you are implying that you want to be like him, that he is your mentor and you have 1 or 2 posters of him in your office and maybe a collection of his works?
Is he someone you look up to?
Because I whole heartily believe that this broadcaster/writer you mention would avoid presenting himself in the same fashion as you did with your responses to Bobak's solid and thorough dissection of your work.
There IS no "correct answer", you fucking halfwit. THERE ARE NO SUCH THINGS AS ZOMBIES.
I want to reanimate his corpse into a zombie so I can have sex with it.
We're back on topic!
See, with childish responses like this, I'm suprised anyone takes you seriously.
Unless its that reputation you have to uphold. (as mentioned earlier)
People take me seriously because I'm incredibly fucking serious about my job. Whereas taking the piss out of complete morons on forums in my spare time is more of a recreation.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Posts
- 5,611
Jesus, are you guys really arguing about something so trivial? Is the zombie versus mummy controversy really the make-or-break point for the article in question?
A mummy is a dead body that has been embalmed and wrapped in strips of cloth. A zombie is a dead body that has become reanimated. The two are not mutually exclusive. The creatures to whom you are all referring are mummies, meaning that they are dead bodies embalmed and wrapped in cloth, that have become reanimated (and can spread their condition to the living), and are therefore also zombies. This isn't rocket science.
Whether the manual refers to them as mummies or zombies is neither here nor there. To describe them as zombies is perfectly acceptable as a desctiptive term because that's what they are, as well as being mummies. Is the author equally incorrect if he doesn't go out of his way to point out that their skin is blue?
Don't get me wrong. I'm pretty blown away by the author's behavior in this thread, but I have to say that over the last few pages, he hasn't been the most pathetic thing about this thread.
A mummy is a dead body that has been embalmed and wrapped in strips of cloth. A zombie is a dead body that has become reanimated. The two are not mutually exclusive. The creatures to whom you are all referring are mummies, meaning that they are dead bodies embalmed and wrapped in cloth, that have become reanimated (and can spread their condition to the living), and are therefore also zombies. This isn't rocket science.
Whether the manual refers to them as mummies or zombies is neither here nor there. To describe them as zombies is perfectly acceptable as a desctiptive term because that's what they are, as well as being mummies. Is the author equally incorrect if he doesn't go out of his way to point out that their skin is blue?
Don't get me wrong. I'm pretty blown away by the author's behavior in this thread, but I have to say that over the last few pages, he hasn't been the most pathetic thing about this thread.
Aw, shucks.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Posts
- 5,611
Jedah Doma
Chroma Ma' Doma!,
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Posts
- 9,902
So I've read through this thread and pretty much got this out of it:
Bobak makes viable points
Stu gets a sandy vagina
Rinse repeat.
And as it has been pointed out before, the humor derived from a 41 year old "professional" journalist ranting and raving on a forum dedicated to a dead system is quite immense.
Thanks for the entertainment Stu.
*waits for witty elitist comeback*
Bobak makes viable points
Stu gets a sandy vagina
Rinse repeat.
And as it has been pointed out before, the humor derived from a 41 year old "professional" journalist ranting and raving on a forum dedicated to a dead system is quite immense.
Thanks for the entertainment Stu.
*waits for witty elitist comeback*
You wouldn't understand it, love.
You think you're "taking the piss" out of me?
You are in no fucking way, professional.
If I employed you as a freelance writer, and read the way you presented yourself on the largest Neo-Geo resource on the internet, you know "retro gaming" at its finest, you would be gone.
What would potential publications, looking to hire you, think if they saw this temper tantrum you threw on here?
You're 41, right?
No doubt, but to be in that position you'd have to be an editor, and to be an editor you'd need to know the first fucking thing about journalism, so that's not something either of us are going to have to be worrying about any time soon, is it?
You're really 41?
Why not try to get on with life?
Because, your future as a journalist might take a different turn once these publications see the way you treated a community of potential subscribers.
Honestly, you are nothing as a journalist, which is why you don't have a permanent position anywhere.
You are scum, rude and unprofessional.
I'm elitist AND scum? Man, this thread's getting me all confused.
Do you imagine, perhaps, that after 20 years in the business editors don't know perfectly well how I conduct myself on forums or anywhere else? Because if you do imagine that, you're even more stupid than you appear, which is very stupid indeed. Still, feel free to drop them a line if it'll make you feel better.
Sam Madeupname
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Posts
- 0
It's kind of like a cult, isn't it? I like that. it's sweet. Bobak can spew out any old drivel, and his acolytes accept it as a new gospel. I'd love to see someone try and explain one of these "viable points". Wait, don't tell me, it's the one where he gets cross because the article isn't a review of a Ford Cortina, right?
Come on, surely the bit where the editor of Retro Gamer came in and pointed out quite how embarrassingly wrong Bobak's position was swayed at least one or two people into doubting his holy word? Or the bit where Bobak not only failed to get the (-Ed) joke, but then after it was explained to him by two people, continued to shout furiously about how he didn't get it? Since you've all been waiting to find out, yes, that was my favourite bit of this thread. Write that down. The bit where Bobak carried on shouting about how it was a "mistake", after the editor of the magazine and author of the article explained to him that it was a running joke that he didn't get. Aw, poor widdle cwoss man didn't get the mean joke!
No, sorry, I apologise. Bobak said it so it's true. It wasn't a joke, it wasn't a running gag from the articles, but it was in fact a mistake. A mistake that the editor chose not to correct when editing, but rather to write about in parentheses afterward, for, um, some reason... Oh yes, it was last minute - that was the decree given. I know for sure that when I'm editing something at the last minute I don't have time for the Delete key - I'm not made of time!
Hope you're well.
Last edited:
Then that explains your lack of a position anywhere and small demographic of readers.
You are special.
Actually, it doesn't. That's explained by the fact that I've only applied for one job in the last 15 years, because I like making a living while still having five days off a week.
As for my "small demographic of readers", would you like to share with us the evidence that brings you to that conclusion?
- Status