You won't be laughing when the four of us get into Phantasy Star Online and start playing meta golf with all the koreans, japanese and KEKEKE role players. "

HAW HAW HAW" -- not Phruitcake, March 2003

I laugh at you both for arguing over a golf game....

I'd like to revisit this thread and mention that at the time, I was deep into the "career mode", and had notched all my stats up to the point where if I kept the mouse somewhere on the table while I was swinging, I could not help but hit a 350 yard drive straight down the middle. In the final tournament, at the Old Course at St. Andrews, my worst score was a 59. At this point I was saying that the game was "very easy".

Then I went back, into non-career mode, set everything to the highest difficulty, and now the game is most decidedly NOT very easy. Breaking 80 is an excellent score. So, I take it back.

Clearly the best computer golf game ever.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:added them to Warcraft III. I don't know.

There are dragons in WC3. But I was speaking figuratively. FIGURATIVE dragos.

The thing I got from your post is that while both of those games are interesting, I should not endeavor to race out and get them once I get some free time.

If you like computer golf, it is essential that you buy (the PC version of) Tiger Woods 2003. If you like RTS games that look good, but aren't particularly revolutionary otherwise, you have to get Generals. They are both excellent, excellent games. Generals might be less excellent if you are an RTS veteran, which (amazingly, since I've purchased like 50 of them) I am not (because I only played like 2 of them, and only for a half hour each.)

Ben wrote:I never played any of the other C&C games, so I can't compare it to them. All I know is, you're getting an amazing looking RTS with a ridiculous amount of detail and effort spent on the "little touches", even though it's essentially the same game as every other RTS in history. And (I can't stress this enough) TANKS INSTEAD OF DRAGONS.

I don't remember any dragons in Warcraft II. Maybe they added them to Warcraft III. I don't know.

The thing I got from your post is that while both of those games are interesting, I should not endeavor to race out and get them once I get some free time.

Free time might be spent on real-life, shockingly enough. To wit:

"Play any EQ or UO?" -- Interviewer
"How about RL... as in REAL LIFE?" -- Paul Steed
"HAHAHAHAHAHAALLORLRLROR" -- EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE

Alright, I see in a review that you can affect the spin of the ball in the air on the PS2 version. But it also said that the PS2 version includes a lot of other goofy crap that the PC version thankfully leaves out.

One more time, with feeling: PS2 == BABY GAMES FOR BABIES.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I cannot get into it because of how other-wordly BOP it is to be able to influence your shot once you've hit it.

Are you absolutely CERTAIN that this is the case? I find it hard to believe, but even if it IS in the game, I'm certain it's a special "mode" you have to select. Like, "baby mode" or something. Please look into this.

Is C&C Generals significantly better than Warcraft III?

Better graphics. Campaign story not as compelling or interesting (yet). Tanks instead of dragons. So, I'll say: NO, not significantly better.

or whatever the second one was called. Is there anything gripping about C&C Generals? What is the "magic" of C&C Generals?

I never played any of the other C&C games, so I can't compare it to them. All I know is, you're getting an amazing looking RTS with a ridiculous amount of detail and effort spent on the "little touches", even though it's essentially the same game as every other RTS in history. And (I can't stress this enough) TANKS INSTEAD OF DRAGONS.

Okay. My brother has spent every Friday night for the last three years playing Tiger Woods PGA for the PS2 (in its various releases, natch) and while he has stated that this year's version is the best yet I cannot get into it because of how other-wordly BOP it is to be able to influence your shot once you've hit it.

Is C&C Generals significantly better than Warcraft III? Let me put this another way: I played C&C... shit, "Red Alert" or whatever the second one was called. Is there anything gripping about C&C Generals? What is the "magic" of C&C Generals?

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:In the PS2 version of the game you can effectively control the flight of the ball while in the air. I presume you can do this in the PC version as well.

No. No, you can't. I mean, you can hit fades and draws and whatever, but that's all determined when the club face meets the ball.

This once again goes to show that PS2 is baby games for babies.

Ben wrote:

You can control the flight of the ball in Tiger Woods.

What in the hell are you talking about?

In the PS2 version of the game you can effectively control the flight of the ball while in the air. I presume you can do this in the PC version as well.


-- PresumerBot

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:No, seriously -- Tiger Woods over Links!?! DEAD. TO. ME.

It's a much better game.

You can control the flight of the ball in Tiger Woods.

What in the hell are you talking about?

Ben wrote:The reason most of you come here fifteen times an hour is to try to find out what the fuck I am playing lately.

I --

We all know that.

Oh, who am I to argue.

Sadly, you have not been able to find that information recently.

Well, that's because you banned yourself from the BBS for as of yet unexplained and unexplored reason, but still.

Therefore, I bring you this update, which you can read to find out what the fuck I am playing lately.

Ah! Cool. Hey, quit putting two spaces after a period. You're fucking my quoting up here.

I am (fucking) playing two things lately:
1. Tiger Woods PGA 2003.

Jesus Christ.

This series has it over Links in almost every area but realism.

"Masturbation is better than sex in every way except for how it feels."

It looks (much, much) better, it sounds better, it's more fun to play, and it's just generally cooler.

You're dead to me.

The only thing wrong with it is that it tends to be a little too... how do I say this... easy as hell.

Yeah, well, there's always Hot Shots Golf.

Where breaking 90 in Links was almost as impressive an achievement as doing it in real life, you will likely be a scratch golfer by the end of your first evening with PGA 2003. After a week, you will rarely shoot anything in the 70's or above. I shot a 56 at Pebble Beach.

...

Now, I'm great at the game,

...

but even you could probably do okay, and you suck at games.

What?

2. Command & Conquer: Generals. Now, you know, me and RTSes have a rather short and che

No, seriously -- Tiger Woods over Links!?! DEAD. TO. ME.

Unless the PC version of PGA is much better than the PS2 version. You can control the flight of the ball in Tiger Woods. I mean, Christ fucking died so that sins like this one would go uncommitted by man, dude!

The reason most of you come here fifteen times an hour is to try to find out what the fuck I am playing lately. We all know that. Sadly, you have not been able to find that information recently. Therefore, I bring you this update, which you can read to find out what the fuck I am playing lately.

I am (fucking) playing two things lately:

1. Tiger Woods PGA 2003. This series has it over Links in almost every area but realism. It looks (much, much) better, it sounds better, it's more fun to play, and it's just generally cooler. The only thing wrong with it is that it tends to be a little too... how do I say this... easy as hell. Where breaking 90 in Links was almost as impressive an achievement as doing it in real life, you will likely be a scratch golfer by the end of your first evening with PGA 2003. After a week, you will rarely shoot anything in the 70's or above. I shot a 56 at Pebble Beach. Now, I'm great at the game, but even you could probably do okay, and you suck at games.

2. Command & Conquer: Generals. Now, you know, me and RTSes have a rather short and checkered past. But I'd been seeing screenshots of this thing for many many months, and it just looked SO impressive that I had to have it. And what a groundbreaking game it is! Get this: You have to COLLECT resources. Then you have to BUILD structures. Then you have to BUILD units. Then you have to GROUP the units together. Then you have to SEND THEM at the bad guys. Then you have to FORGET how you grouped your guys, and GET ALL confused about where they are and what they're doing. Then lots of STUFF happens, and you win or lose. Like I said, groundbreaking stuff! I will not make any ridiculous claim that I'm ever going to finish this game (I learned my lesson from WC3), but since I like tanks and missiles more than wizards and dragons, there's at least some chance I might actually ever play the game again. And it does look amazing. The level of detail is just shocking, that's the only word that comes to mind. Shocking.

So, that's what the fuck I am playing lately.