"stop action post-it note animation, makes me happy and will make you happy too probably."

That's why we have a *Happy channel.

Welcome to the sift.

>> ^dag:
The reviews I've read so far have pegged it as an non-stop action movie, moving from stunt to stunt. For me, these kinds of movies are a turn-off. If I want a thrill ride I'll go for a roller coaster.

Yeah, I've noticed that some people have been saying that, which I find kind of baffling. I mean, don't get me wrong, there's a lot of action, but there's also a lot of downtime between the action scenes -- probably more than in any of the other three films.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

The reviews I've read so far have pegged it as an non-stop action movie, moving from stunt to stunt. For me, these kinds of movies are a turn-off. If I want a thrill ride I'll go for a roller coaster.

The reason the last Bond was so good was not because of the action sequences, but the superb character development and interactions between the actors. Hollywood doesn't get this, or at least doesn't care. Action sells I guess, but I'll probably be watching this one via BitTorrent DVD.

I should have phrased that differently. It's more like "I had fun shooting shit."
But the game is terrible because it's 1) VERY linear, 2) has NO story 3) weapons are LAME 4)play time is criminally short and a few other small nuances. I never said that my opinion was fact, though.

In reply to this comment by Napalm:
In reply to this comment by MarineGunrock:
>> ^Napalm:
Wrong.


Wow, that was such a mind-blowingly articulate argument you posted there! You sure took me down a peg! Remind me to never have a debate with you!

Well if you can state your highly subjective opinion as fact then I can too. I just did it with fewer words.

I'm just kind of baffled someone can call Gears of War a "monumental pile of shit" with a straight face. Especially considering you yourself actually admitted the game was fun.
I qoute: "Yes, it was a fun game, if you like the constant non-stop shoot-em up types. The cover system is awesome, though. The camera work in the game is superb, the graphics are great, and yet didn't tax my system at all. The sound was awesome and the combat was very different with the cover system. You will die if you don't use it."

So basically you are complaining about a high price and non stop action.
I still don't see how that makes this game so terrible.

In reply to this comment by MarineGunrock:
>> ^Napalm:
Wrong.


Wow, that was such a mind-blowingly articulate argument you posted there! You sure took me down a peg! Remind me to never have a debate with you!

Well if you can state your highly subjective opinion as fact then I can too. I just did it with fewer words.

I'm just kind of baffled someone can call Gears of War a "monumental pile of shit" with a straight face. Especially considering you yourself actually admitted the game was fun.
I qoute: "Yes, it was a fun game, if you like the constant non-stop shoot-em up types. The cover system is awesome, though. The camera work in the game is superb, the graphics are great, and yet didn't tax my system at all. The sound was awesome and the combat was very different with the cover system. You will die if you don't use it."

So basically you are complaining about a high price and non stop action.
I still don't see how that makes this game so terrible.