Archived forum posts for discussion of the upcoming sequel to Bungie's groundbreaking console shooter, Halo.
Please please PLEASE create new topics on the top level-- this thread is going to get overloaded soon.
Archived forum posts for discussion of the upcoming sequel to Bungie's groundbreaking console shooter, Halo.
Please please PLEASE create new topics on the top level-- this thread is going to get overloaded soon.
Comments
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: poker with grunts
In reply to: poker with gruntshellfish wrote on Tuesday, 03/4/2003 - 8:46 pm:
: this has nothing to do with the ground assault but it is
: funny: i was palying on 'keys'' on legendary and i was
: wondering around through doors....i found a door that looked
: locked..but wasent....i went through it and found coridoors.
: i looked around in the till i found two grunts playing poker
: with shiny glow gards and green chips! after 2 minutes of
: grunt talk..one acused the other of cheating and they argued
: than the acuser SHOT! the yellow one.....weird huh...and yes
: ive emaild bungie.
:
: tell me wat u think
i think you should lay of the marijuana
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: poker with grunts
In reply to: Re: poker with gruntsI agree with pat, why would Grunts be playing poker on a damanged starship while you're boarding it? Sure it wasn't a dream pal?
Blackdragon
Re: poker with grunts
In reply to: poker with gruntsyo hellfish, can you tell me exactly where you saw this? and dose it have to be on leagendary?
Blackdragon
Re: poker with grunts
In reply to: poker with gruntsok man, i cant find your " secret door" are you sure you wer'nt high or something? lol just kiddin, where the bloody hell is the door? i cant find it on leagendary, i went and searched all the way to the bridge, where is it? PS: i 4 one beleave you about the grunts, and.....I WANNA SEE EM!!!!!
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Ground AssualtSamati wrote on Saturday, 02/22/2003 - 7:33 pm:
: Okay, I know I've posted like four things on the site
: already, but I have more a question now and it's a good one,
: too.
: We've all seen the Halo 2 trailer (if you haven't, WHAT
: ARE YOU WAITING FOR??), the Covenant are bombarding Earth
: and there is little need to use ground forces and Bungie has
: said that you will be fighitng on Earth and the moon. So my
: question is: Why are the Covenant planning to use ground
: forces when their goal is to completly destroy the human
: race and Earth? Looking forward to your comments.
I can tink of two reasons. speed and efficency. in desert storm 1 after the allies established uncontested air supiority they could have bomed every enemy soldier, but this would have taken years and been very expensive. so they bomed for six weeks to prepare for the ground assult, and the 7th corp along with the 1st and 2nd marine divisions were able to force an iraqi surrender in 3 days. The 7th corp along with the marines accomplished more in 3 days than the air campaign could have in 3 months. air and sea power exist for one reason to suport land forces.this was true 400 years ago and I dont see why it wont be true 400 into the future.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground AssualtSawdust wrote on Wednesday, 03/5/2003 - 10:15 am:
: I can tink of two reasons. speed and efficency. in desert
: storm 1 after the allies established uncontested air
: supiority they could have bomed every enemy soldier, but
: this would have taken years and been very expensive. so they
: bomed for six weeks to prepare for the ground assult, and
: the 7th corp along with the 1st and 2nd marine divisions
: were able to force an iraqi surrender in 3 days. The 7th
: corp along with the marines accomplished more in 3 days than
: the air campaign could have in 3 months. air and sea power
: exist for one reason to suport land forces.this was true 400
: years ago and I dont see why it wont be true 400 into the
: future.
Um there we were using regular bombs...
Picture Desert Storm using Nuclear Weapons...
Thats what the covenant can do to earth...
So if ur talking speed and efficiency, glassing the planet is a LOT faster and more efficient...
No, the covenant want something on earth....
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground AssualtMWCM um... wrote on Wednesday, 03/5/2003 - 4:55 pm:
: Sawdust wrote on Wednesday, 03/5/2003 - 10:15 am:
:
: : I can tink of two reasons. speed and efficency. in
: desert
: : storm 1 after the allies established uncontested air
: : supiority they could have bomed every enemy soldier,
: but
: : this would have taken years and been very expensive. so
: they
: : bomed for six weeks to prepare for the ground assult,
: and
: : the 7th corp along with the 1st and 2nd marine
: divisions
: : were able to force an iraqi surrender in 3 days. The
: 7th
: : corp along with the marines accomplished more in 3 days
: than
: : the air campaign could have in 3 months. air and sea
: power
: : exist for one reason to suport land forces.this was true
: 400
: : years ago and I dont see why it wont be true 400 into
: the
: : future.
:
: Um there we were using regular bombs...
: Picture Desert Storm using Nuclear Weapons...
: Thats what the covenant can do to earth...
: So if ur talking speed and efficiency, glassing the planet
: is a LOT faster and more efficient...
: No, the covenant want something on earth....
The overpresure and heatwave from strategic nuclear weapons moves across the earth and into the atmosphere, and depending at what altitude the weapon is denonated at it may or may not penatrate the ground at all. Our tactical weapons that were made to penatrate the earth and explode underground are single target weapons they don't have the huge blast radius that the strategic weapons do. If the United States had launched a fully cordinated nuclear strike aginst iraq they might have killed 98% of the population, but not 100%.
Maby the covanent do want somthing thats on earth maby they don't but if they want to be certian of killing every last human they would need to launch a ground campagin.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground Assualt: Maby the covanent do want somthing thats on earth maby
: they don't but if they want to be certian of killing every
: last human they would need to launch a ground campagin.
Dude if they glass the planet, there wont be any resources, food, etc. left to support humans. And even if we do survive, how the hell are we gonna get off the planet? We need shipyards, launchpads, etc. If the covenant glass the earth and destroy all major installations in space, we will be completely screwed. So the covenant have a reason for NOT glassing earth...
Anonymous (not verified)
grunt poker
In reply to: Ground Assualthmmm marjawana...really if i was on that the grunt wouldent be playing cards.
Anonymous (not verified)
jackle with needler
In reply to: Ground Assualti foundd something weird!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i found a jackle wheelding a needler on assault on conntrol room!!! ..........................................it killed me!!! =)
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: jackle with needler
In reply to: jackle with needler....SUUUUUUURRREEE you did. I'm sure you saw the two Grunts playing poker, too. You people gotta stop smoking the joints.
Anonymous (not verified)
grunts,poker,jackle,needler
In reply to: Ground Assualti did see wat i saw samati and im still sticking with my story..as for joints.....hmmmmm no havent even ever seen one.
Anonymous (not verified)
Um....
In reply to: grunts,poker,jackle,needlerThis is why we have 2 words:
Hallucination
Idiot
Anonymous (not verified)
Just An Idea
In reply to: Um....Mayb they wanna do a VERY thorough aerial bombardment, then launch a ground assault to wipe out ALL humans, so that the flood wont have anything to infect, who knows??
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: grunts,poker,jackle,needler
In reply to: grunts,poker,jackle,needlerhellfish wrote on Tuesday, 03/11/2003 - 5:31 pm:
: i did see wat i saw samati and im still sticking with my
: story..as for joints.....hmmmmm no havent even ever seen
: one.
I haven't seen it so, who knows, but I wont flat out say "No you didn't, you're a pot smokin' hippie." I'll believe you when I see it with my own eyes.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: grunts,poker,jackle,needler
In reply to: Re: grunts,poker,jackle,needlerSomeone wrote on Saturday, 03/22/2003 - 6:11 pm:
And another thing, LEARN HOW TO FUCKING SPELL!!!
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Ground AssualtSamati wrote on Saturday, 02/22/2003 - 7:33 pm:
: Okay, I know I've posted like four things on the site
: already, but I have more a question now and it's a good one,
: too.
: We've all seen the Halo 2 trailer (if you haven't, WHAT
: ARE YOU WAITING FOR??), the Covenant are bombarding Earth
: and there is little need to use ground forces and Bungie has
: said that you will be fighitng on Earth and the moon. So my
: question is: Why are the Covenant planning to use ground
: forces when their goal is to completly destroy the human
: race and Earth? Looking forward to your comments.
THey will launch a ground assault because they want to not because they need to.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground AssualtJRDestroyer wrote on Saturday, 03/22/2003 - 1:14 pm:
: Samati wrote on Saturday, 02/22/2003 - 7:33 pm:
:
: : Okay, I know I've posted like four things on the site
: : already, but I have more a question now and it's a good
: one,
: : too.
: : We've all seen the Halo 2 trailer (if you haven't,
: WHAT
: : ARE YOU WAITING FOR??), the Covenant are bombarding
: Earth
: : and there is little need to use ground forces and Bungie
: has
: : said that you will be fighitng on Earth and the moon. So
: my
: : question is: Why are the Covenant planning to use
: ground
: : forces when their goal is to completly destroy the
: human
: : race and Earth? Looking forward to your comments.
:
: THey will launch a ground assault because they want to not
: because they need to.
:
Aerial bombardment never does the trick fully, there could b underground units of human resistence, who knows, we'll find out in the game!
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground AssualtFo ShIzZy Ma NiZzY wrote on Sunday, 03/23/2003 - 8:37 am:
: JRDestroyer wrote on Saturday, 03/22/2003 - 1:14 pm:
:
: : Samati wrote on Saturday, 02/22/2003 - 7:33 pm:
: :
: : : Okay, I know I've posted like four things on the
: site
: : : already, but I have more a question now and it's a
: good
: : one,
: : : too.
: : : We've all seen the Halo 2 trailer (if you haven't,
: : WHAT
: : : ARE YOU WAITING FOR??), the Covenant are bombarding
: : Earth
: : : and there is little need to use ground forces and
: Bungie
: : has
: : : said that you will be fighitng on Earth and the moon.
: So
: : my
: : : question is: Why are the Covenant planning to use
: : ground
: : : forces when their goal is to completly destroy the
: : human
: : : race and Earth? Looking forward to your comments.
: :
: : THey will launch a ground assault because they want to
: not
: : because they need to.
: :
:
:
If any of you have read the book-Halo; Fall of reach, there is a part in the book that describes two hunters in a human museum. They were collecting as many of the rocks and minerals found on the human planets as they could. Then, the hunters sent a message to the other aliens that sort of meant that they had what they were there for. I think they found a good use of the human minerals. That's why they have been destroying human colonies and then inspecting the planets. What do all of you think?
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Ground Assualt
In reply to: Re: Ground AssualtOk, I have'nt read the books, so I'm not sure if bungie considers "glassing" a planet something the Covenant can actually do, but assuming they can, there are two good reasons I can think of why they wouldn't, besides what's already been mentioned:
-They want to keep the biosphere intact. Notice that both humans
all non-grunt covies breathe esentially the same atmosphere. They
may plan to colonize Earth once they kill all the humans,
something that may be hard with the soil turned to glass and the
oceans vaporized into a planet-shrouding cloud
-There may be a religious reason why the Covenant want to engage
humans in closer combat, like head hunters or other early
cultures, where one can enslave the spirits of slain enemies as
protectors
Just some ideas
Anonymous (not verified)
Sexist Captain...
Might seem strange but, i just realized that there were almost no females in Halo. I mean there were 3 - Cortana, Foe Hammer, and that dropship pilot. WHERE ARE ALL THE WOMEN?!?!?! I mean really even nowadays there are plenty of women in the military. But i didnt see a single one on the POA , or any other level in Halo (sexists....). Not meaning to sound strange or nething but really there should be some difference in sex for Halo 2. Or so i think. (I think it is all Captain Keyes' fault - he never did seem to like that doctor that was in the Spartan project)
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Sexist Captain...
In reply to: Sexist Captain...ManwithaCrystalMethod wrote on Sunday, 02/23/2003 - 10:49 am:
: Might seem strange but, i just realized that there were
: almost no females in Halo. I mean there were 3 - Cortana,
: Foe Hammer, and that dropship pilot. WHERE ARE ALL THE
: WOMEN?!?!?! I mean really even nowadays there are plenty of
: women in the military. But i didnt see a single one on the
: POA , or any other level in Halo (sexists....). Not meaning
: to sound strange or nething but really there should be some
: difference in sex for Halo 2. Or so i think. (I think it is
: all Captain Keyes' fault - he never did seem to like that
: doctor that was in the Spartan project)
I think Bungie just didn't want to put women in b/c then it would be kinda bad if they showed women screaming when they died or something along those lines, you know what i mean? But i think there are going to be female marines in Halo 2 b/c on the Halo Story Page (http://halo.bungie.org/story) there are pictures in the upper left hand corner which change depending on where you go. I saw a female marine once or atleast I think I did. I don't think captian keyes could choose not to have females on his ship b/c that would be stupid.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Sexist Captain...
In reply to: Re: Sexist Captain...Samati wrote on Sunday, 02/23/2003 - 11:31 am:
: I think Bungie just didn't want to put women in b/c then
: it would be kinda bad if they showed women screaming when
: they died or something along those lines, you know what i
: mean? But i think there are going to be female marines in
: Halo 2 b/c on the Halo Story Page
: (http://halo.bungie.org/story) there are pictures in the
: upper left hand corner which change depending on where you
: go. I saw a female marine once or atleast I think I did. I
: don't think captian keyes could choose not to have females
: on his ship b/c that would be stupid.
Good point on the screaming. I dont agree with the choosing females on his ship though. In the book he chose his crewmen - ex : when he did that stunt with taking out 2 covie ships it was written that he chose a new navigations officer that day- and it talked about how that officer did not want to follow Keyes's plan because it could kill them. But i do agree that Bungie probably did not put it because of the screaming.
Maniac
Re: Sexist Captain...
In reply to: Re: Sexist Captain...Samati wrote on Sunday, 02/23/2003 - 11:31 am:
: ManwithaCrystalMethod wrote on Sunday, 02/23/2003 - 10:49
: am:
:
: : Might seem strange but, i just realized that there
: were
: : almost no females in Halo. I mean there were 3 -
: Cortana,
: : Foe Hammer, and that dropship pilot. WHERE ARE ALL THE
: : WOMEN?!?!?! I mean really even nowadays there are plenty
: of
: : women in the military. But i didnt see a single one on
: the
: : POA , or any other level in Halo (sexists....). Not
: meaning
: : to sound strange or nething but really there should be
: some
: : difference in sex for Halo 2. Or so i think. (I think it
: is
: : all Captain Keyes' fault - he never did seem to like
: that
: : doctor that was in the Spartan project)
:
: I think Bungie just didn't want to put women in b/c then
: it would be kinda bad if they showed women screaming when
: they died or something along those lines, you know what i
: mean? But i think there are going to be female marines in
: Halo 2 b/c on the Halo Story Page
: (http://halo.bungie.org/story) there are pictures in the
: upper left hand corner which change depending on where you
: go. I saw a female marine once or atleast I think I did. I
: don't think captian keyes could choose not to have females
: on his ship b/c that would be stupid.
I heard on the official site that the guy that created Halo said the women are too hard to create. It also said that the model of Cortana was difficult to create.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Sexist Captain...
In reply to: Sexist Captain...i dont reallt care about if there is are no girls. but it would be nice though. maybe they should have like femail hnters or something. lol bye
Anonymous (not verified)
puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: Sexist Captain...puttin women in would have required even more character models, delaying the game and making fans unhappy. Its not like the game is worse for it... look at the military today, if you try and think realistically, how many of the total marines in halo would have been women, it be like 1 marine, and if bungie chose to put more women in it would have been unrealistic and stupid. So why make a character model for one minor character, it's just not necessary
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Sunday, 02/23/2003 - 7:51 pm:
: puttin women in would have required even more character
: models, delaying the game and making fans unhappy. Its not
: like the game is worse for it... look at the military today,
: if you try and think realistically, how many of the total
: marines in halo would have been women, it be like 1 marine,
: and if bungie chose to put more women in it would have been
: unrealistic and stupid. So why make a character model for
: one minor character, it's just not necessary
I agree that the game is not worse withought them, but it is not unrealistic and stupid. I mean there are plenty of women in the military even now. There were plenty of women in the book (although not many were described well). And the delay would not be much- to add a few models would require maybe another 2 or 3 days. basically the only modifications to the model would be in the torso and head. Meaning that it would be simple matter to add withought annoying the fans. But still, I agree with Samati that it would be kind of....well just not good if you heard the screams. But i see your point on non-neccessity.
Earendil
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have re: I mean there are plenty of
: women in the military even now.
now I am NOT in the least bit sexist, let's clear that up right now :)
and I agree that there are quite a few female sin the military. but that doesn't mean that there are a whole lot in groups we're talking about here. this isn't the US army, this is the green berrets, the special forces. not so many woman make it into those groups.
now this is pure speculation on my part, if someone can bring up some hard facts I'd love to hear them. but the "marines" on the PoA were doubtlessly drafted and trained in 6 months. they are the special forces, and it's not unrealistic for the only 20 or so surviving marines to be men. I don't 1 in ever 20 greenberets is a woman.
also, it is being discovered lately that woman make much better pilots. this has been put into a few sci-fi books recently and in the past. the fact that foe-hammer is female doesn't at all surprise me.
and as for woman in the game. I'm not at all against it...but it'd be harder for a gamer, and in a time where games are coming under fire for "warping the minds of our teenagers and causing viloence" we probably don't need woman in the games dieing imho....
Earendil
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reI hate what this politically correct movement has done to America. The fact that you needed to clarify whether or not you were sexist is ridiculous. I'm sick of people being paralyzed with fear about being in any way judgemental and what people fail to realize is that we aren't all the same and that stereotypes do come from somewhere. The stereotype that black men can jump higher and run faster than the majority of the other races didn't come out of nowhere. The Average black man can jump higher and run faster than the Average white man. I'm sick of people wasting time fearing that they are a bad person because they recognize these patterns in people. These patterns are real and while some stereotypes are blatantly incorrect, for the most part they are true and are pretty good guides as long as you are not stubborn about them. As long as you are able to accept that there are deviators.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 9:57 am:
: I hate what this politically correct movement has done to
: America. The fact that you needed to clarify whether or not
: you were sexist is ridiculous. I'm sick of people being
: paralyzed with fear about being in any way judgemental and
: what people fail to realize is that we aren't all the same
: and that stereotypes do come from somewhere. The stereotype
: that black men can jump higher and run faster than the
: majority of the other races didn't come out of nowhere. The
: Average black man can jump higher and run faster than the
: Average white man. I'm sick of people wasting time fearing
: that they are a bad person because they recognize these
: patterns in people. These patterns are real and while some
: stereotypes are blatantly incorrect, for the most part they
: are true and are pretty good guides as long as you are not
: stubborn about them. As long as you are able to accept that
: there are deviators.
Heh um I didnt mean for this to be a discussion on stereotypes and sexism. I mean i just put the title as a joke. Im not trying to be politically correct : I just wanted to see people's thoughts on women in the (actually not in) the game....
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have re...Second day and im already defending myself from being possibly called a stereotypist...
...Oh , how it sucks to be me...
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reEarendil wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 12:41 am:
: : I mean there are plenty of
: : women in the military even now.
:
: now I am NOT in the least bit sexist, let's clear that up
: right now :)
: and I agree that there are quite a few female sin the
: military. but that doesn't mean that there are a whole lot
: in groups we're talking about here. this isn't the US army,
: this is the green berrets, the special forces. not so many
: woman make it into those groups.
: now this is pure speculation on my part, if someone can
: bring up some hard facts I'd love to hear them. but the
: "marines" on the PoA were doubtlessly drafted and trained in
: 6 months. they are the special forces, and it's not
: unrealistic for the only 20 or so surviving marines to be
: men. I don't 1 in ever 20 greenberets is a woman.
:
: also, it is being discovered lately that woman make much
: better pilots. this has been put into a few sci-fi books
: recently and in the past. the fact that foe-hammer is female
: doesn't at all surprise me.
:
: and as for woman in the game. I'm not at all against
: it...but it'd be harder for a gamer, and in a time where
: games are coming under fire for "warping the minds of our
: teenagers and causing viloence" we probably don't need woman
: in the games dieing imho....
:
: Earendil
Im not saying ur sexist :). I doubt that they were trained just for the POA. My guess (although the answer could be in the book) is that they were hand-selected from the elite of the Marines. And ok, so they make better pilots. But nowhere - i mean NOWHERE - could you find a single tech or anyone else for that matter on the ENTIRE PART OF POA THAT YOU EXPLORE. That does seem strange. I mean sure 1 out of 20 green berets are not a woman - maybe 1 in a few hundred. But still - you should see SOME. At least on the bridge where there is no dying so you cannot hear the screams...
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reWho the hell cares if women scream over men. God damnit, they are no better than men and their death cries should in no way be a problem if other screams are not. It is sexist to say that women dying is worse than men dying and it would be stupid to trade realism for acceptance
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 4:26 pm:
: Who the hell cares if women scream over men. God damnit,
: they are no better than men and their death cries should in
: no way be a problem if other screams are not. It is sexist
: to say that women dying is worse than men dying and it would
: be stupid to trade realism for acceptance
Hmmm......LOL im not really sure what im supporting - putting women in or not putting them in....I still think that the women dying would be worse than the men - unless they found some way to make it comical. I mean sure it is somewhat sexist (...Again - I put the title as a joke...) but really women screaming would be a lot more unsettling that some idiot marine men screaming like sissies coz they got their asses blown up...
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have resorry for the second post, but....
And really, which would you rather have? Screaming marine women or screaming marine men.
....i thought i had kinda ended the speculation about 6 posts ago.....O well - My own damn fault for sticking my nose into things...
Earendil
It's ok, as long as it stays friendly :)
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reManwithaCrystalMethod wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 1:55 pm:
: sorry for the second post, but....
:
: And really, which would you rather have? Screaming marine
: women or screaming marine men.
:
: ....i thought i had kinda ended the speculation about 6
: posts ago.....O well - My own damn fault for sticking my
: nose into things...
Oh! They have the internet on computers now! - Homer J Simpson
Earendil
above post and this one = NT (it took my NT sign away!)
In reply to: It's ok, as long as it stays friendly :)Earendil wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 2:08 pm:
: ManwithaCrystalMethod wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 1:55
: pm:
:
: : sorry for the second post, but....
: :
: : And really, which would you rather have? Screaming
: marine
: : women or screaming marine men.
: :
: : ....i thought i had kinda ended the speculation about
: 6
: : posts ago.....O well - My own damn fault for sticking
: my
: : nose into things...
:
: Oh! They have the internet on computers now! - Homer J
: Simpson
Oh! They have the internet on computers now! - Homer J Simpson
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: above post and this one = NT (it took my NT sign away!)
In reply to: above post and this one = NT (it took my NT sign away!)WHA---? (O_o)
Earendil
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 1:26 pm:
: Who the hell cares if women scream over men.
**raises hand**
: God damnit,
: they are no better than men and their death cries should in
: no way be a problem if other screams are not.
I don't know if it's genetic, or if it's the way I was brought up (I'm thinking genetic though), but a woman screaming or in pain brings a much stronger sense of guilt/anger towards the cause/out-right-wrong than a man in pain. in the same way that if I saw a female getting beat up on I'm much more likely to step in (even it's it's futile) than I am with a male, hate to say it, but it's probably true.
it'd be interesting to hear what a female has to say on this issue.
: It is sexist
: to say that women dying is worse than men dying
maybe so. but I think I can say that I'd rather kill a male BOB than a female BOB. and that the sound of a female in pain, in my own opinion, is more unsettling than a males.
: and it would
: be stupid to trade realism for acceptance
I don't find it at all stupid. for example. I NEVER noticed, at least not in a "that-bugs-me" way that there were no females on the PoA. never noticed, and I've had Halo since day one. now if they had put females on, and had them screaming and dieing, I'm sure I would have noticed, and I'm sure it might have bugged me some. in that case I would have said "this is more real" but it wouldn't have made it a *Better Game* for me personally.
correct me if I'm wrong, but the point of a game is to have fun, not to see how realistic we can make the killing environment. if tossing females into the game in that way makes it more "fun" for you, that's fine, we're all entitled to our opinions :)
Earendil
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reWell fuck that. I refuse to believe that women are in any way more entitled to pity than men if they die in combat. A random women getting beaten up is different than trained female personell. Women on average are not as strong as men so understandably a women just being beaten up is worthy of some chivalry. However, a women who is prepared for combat deserves the same level of respect as those around her and should elicit no specific response just because she is female.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 5:51 pm:
: Well fuck that. I refuse to believe that women are in any
: way more entitled to pity than men if they die in combat. A
: random women getting beaten up is different than trained
: female personell. Women on average are not as strong as men
: so understandably a women just being beaten up is worthy of
: some chivalry. However, a women who is prepared for combat
: deserves the same level of respect as those around her and
: should elicit no specific response just because she is
: female.
Its not the dying... Really i think its more about the screams... (see how quickly people can change their opininons?) It is very unsettling to see women screaming as opposed to men. Women in their death throes are sure as hell not fun to see, not as much as some stupid marine sargeant getting his ass blowing up and screaming : "AAAAAIIIIIIEEEE!!!" .....
(....remember its a game and the dying of marines in Halo is not that bloody....)
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 5:51 pm:
: ...Women on average are not as strong as men...
WHAT???
Since when???
If you know anything about the human body, you should know that the female body is actually much better suited for physical labor than the male (notice also how out of 100 men and 100 women, when they reach 100, there will be about 90 women left alive and about 20 men left (these could be a bit off)).
So that statement was quite untrue. I myself know some women (girls actually) that are quite strong and (speaking in sort-of ghetto terms ) could whoop yo azz so hard you be running for yo mammy (and mine as well)...
I dont know how you connect how strong a woman is to the point of them dying and commanding respect. You were saying before that it does not matter who is dying - men or women - however, now you are saying that women are generally weaker than men and a woman getting beat up deserves an act of chivalry. That is quite hypocritical. Im not tryin to diss you or anything, but really, make up your mind...
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reAnd im sick of people using one specific ass example as a disprovement to a sterotype. Thats bullshit. Just because you know "some" women that could "whoop my azz" or whatever you said, which is unlikely because im a strong human being (6'7" 233) doesn't mean that on average women possess less physical strength. Note: I said strength and not endurance. And I don't know what the hell your example was about physical labor, what were they doing?
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 7:21 pm:
: And im sick of people using one specific ass example as a
: disprovement to a sterotype. Thats bullshit. Just because
: you know "some" women that could "whoop my azz" or whatever
: you said, which is unlikely because im a strong human being
: (6'7" 233) doesn't mean that on average women possess less
: physical strength. Note: I said strength and not endurance.
: And I don't know what the hell your example was about
: physical labor, what were they doing?
You wrote that already...or most of in in another post.
NVM
i meant strength too.
...and wait 1 second you said that it doesnt mean that on average women possess less strength...
....well i think you meant more....
...im not trying to disprove it with one example... Im just saying that you saying "generally" is incorrect. Afterwards, when you say on average, I agree with You. But not generally. They are two different things. Or they are to me :) ...
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reZaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 7:21 pm:
: And im sick of people using one specific ass example as a
: disprovement to a sterotype. Thats bullshit. Just because
: you know "some" women that could "whoop my azz" or whatever
: you said, which is unlikely because im a strong human being
: (6'7" 233) doesn't mean that on average women possess less
: physical strength. Note: I said strength and not endurance.
: And I don't know what the hell your example was about
: physical labor, what were they doing?
Oh when i worte about physical labor is just that the woman's body (genetically) is better suited for physical labor, pain, etc. than a man's. And BTW if ur asking about what that girl that i was talking about was doing....It was an "Inverted Iron Cross"... Its a gymanstics trick...i doubt any of your "weightlifters" could do that :)... Search for Iron Cross ;P
Anonymous (not verified)
ARGH ANOTHER THING!!!!
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reARGH AGAIN....
I keep realizing things after i already said something before.
I hate my mind...
I wanted to point out 1 good thing... You are using a stereotype yourself and trying to disprove me by using it... I wont post it just yet- PLZ try to figure out what im talking about before i come back : which will be about 9:15 EST.
Peace out, my tall and incredibly strong friend... ;)
Earendil
You two need communication skillz :)
In reply to: ARGH ANOTHER THING!!!!Manwithacrystal method (damn that's a long name, how about I stick with "MWACM"?)
gen·er·al·ly
adv.
1. Without reference to particular instances or details; not specifically: generally speaking.
2. In a general way, or in general relation; in the main; upon the whole; comprehensively.
3. Collectively; as a whole; without omissions
Males, are, on a whole, on average, and generally (note, all the sam meaning in this case) stronger.
this can pretty easily be shown by looking at the Olympics, the "world records" are almost exclusively set by men. fastest sprint, mile, swimming, ect ect.
you get into things like gymnastics and it no longer relies solely on strength, so we'll ignore those for a second.
or, just walk down your high school and check out the records. I'm betting the men have jumped higher, farther, and run faster than the females.
that is NOT to say that males are better at "everything". it is said that females are much better multi -taskers, along with faster reflexes. I'm sure there are countless other things. as for pain, I don't know anything about it, but do to childbirth, I wouldn't doubt the fact :)
NOW, all that aside. the subject was having woman in games. and for me, this would be more disturbing than just men. call it genetic if you like...men are, at the basics, competing against other men, to lure and protect females (same for females). or maybe I’m just odd, and am the only one that would have a harder time with this.
that is not to say I woudn’t do it. I have no probably punching my sister if she punches me, along with other woman (not to beat up, but to defend in a friendly way).
so MWACM and Zaebos, what are your thoughts, opinions for having, and not having woman as things to be shot up in a video game?
Earendil
Anonymous (not verified)
Thanks
In reply to: You two need communication skillz :)Earendil wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 8:57 pm:
: Manwithacrystal method (damn that's a long name, how about
: I stick with "MWACM"?)
:) Ill do that - ROFLMAO I should have realized that earlier (:
Well ... my opinions ? do i have to compile THAT many posts together?
Well i think that shooting up women in a video game would not be that bad, but i really think they would have to tone down the screaming a bit. Because with all the marines dying you get...oh....maybe 100 screams every level (heroic and above). So that would have to be reduced with marines not screaming EVERY time they die.
But i must return to the men vs. women. Pardon for using your idea of the DICTIONARY GOD I AM DAMN STUPID but :
generally
\Gen"er*al*ly\, adv. 1. In general; commonly; extensively, though not universally; most frequently.
see /\ it says commonly. most frequently. but if you look at average :
Average
\Av"er*age\, a. 1. Pertaining to an average or mean
Mean :
Mean
3. (Math.) Average; having an intermediate value between two extremes, or between the several successive values of a variable quantity during one cycle of variation; as, mean distance; mean motion; mean solar day.
Ok well that was total crap... but let us say that average is putting together all the data and averaging it. Ok on AVERAGE women would be weaker than men - Due to the larger amount of men being athletes. However, if you do just strength, and factor in the figures that show that there are SO MANY overweight and weak men, you get it about even (Or so I think - it should be very near , although men would still win....). Now we use generally. Saying generally is most frequently. Meaning there are, again, 2 ways of doing this. 1 : You take again the sets of data : say they are about the same amount (the population of women now is higher than men but ill cut parts off for now :) ) And you like these up. Now you take and see out of each pair (they should basically be in 2 parallel lines, and you take the pairs that are perpendicular to each other) and you will see that the men GENERALLY will be stronger. Now method 2 : You take the two as separate sets, and you see how many strong men and strong women there are (by taking the average and seeing how many are above). This way men would still win . WHY you ask ? because the amount of WEAK MEN is higher than the mount of WEAK WOMEN. This lowers the average man so that even people that are slightly higher will be considered somewhat strong and counted in the calculations. Now if you cut all the crap out and take just a few weak people,(men and women) a few medium people, and a few strong people, you will see that they are almost perfectly matched. Now, i have proved absolutely nothing because i just forgot what i was talking about.... OH YEA..... Men are not stronger then women - not by a lot anyway. Plus women have less time to spend training their bodies for physical activities because they are the ones usually stuck home doing chores or even to at home but at work. They have to time while the men go to work, to bars, to parties, etc. Most of my friends can say that this is true and that their mothers are always stuck at home or at work. I really have proved nothing but i am trying to say that if the women try, they are as strong as women. WOW i just realized that was not even close to what i was trying to say before. I am a complete idiot. Thank you for making me waste my time on that :). (...Second day and im already skrewing myself for life...) Thanks for the revelations and telling me my name was too long :).
This is ManwithaCrystalMethod, signing off.
(...Wow that was gay...)
Tayla
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reI'm female.. and i love playing Halo with my friends. Sorry if someone already pointed this out but in Halo:The Fall Of Reach. There /were two/ /FEMALE/ Spartans, Linda and Kelly. And Linda made it onto the Pillar of Autumn. I thought it odd that she wasn't in the cryo-chamber since that was what the MC did first when he got back on the PoA. I wish they had put a female spartan body for use in multiplayer atleast ^_^.
Anonymous (not verified)
Re: puttin women in would have re
In reply to: Re: puttin women in would have reEarendil wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 5:06 pm:
: Zaebos wrote on Monday, 02/24/2003 - 1:26 pm:
:
: : Who the hell cares if women scream over men.
:
: **raises hand**
:
: : God damnit,
: : they are no better than men and their death cries should
: in
: : no way be a problem if other screams are not.
:
: I don't know if it's genetic, or if it's the way I was
: brought up (I'm thinking genetic though), but a woman
: screaming or in pain brings a much stronger sense of
: guilt/anger towards the cause/out-right-wrong than a man in
: pain. in the same way that if I saw a female getting beat up
: on I'm much more likely to step in (even it's it's futile)
: than I am with a male, hate to say it, but it's probably
: true.
I think that I agree with this, women and children have alwayz been put before men and I'm fine with that, men through history in all cultures have fought wars NOT WOMEN times are changing now though but I think that there's some kind of human empathy or wateva u call it that makes it natural to protect women and children over men and men to protect women and children, that is why I find seeing women or children suffering disturbing and don't find a guy suffering so bad, I mean come on... women and children are fragile and us men were designed to look after 'em. DON'T GO OFF AT ME FOR BEING SEXIST OR WOTEVA THIS IS NOT TRUE FOR EVERY1
Pages