RandomGuy

^^That list is quite interesting. Even if there is some stuff in there I find weird (Renegade bombed? It was awesome!). And even if most of that stuff isn't really what Ross is looking for. I'd like to address one of them though, as it's the only one I really know enough about to comment on: First of all, the voice acting bit is interesting. I'd like to see a source for that; it'd explain some things. The other two points bug me. EA does bad things, but honestly, I think the Biodrones have demonized them too much (this is solely relating to Mass Effect 3, as I said I don't know enough about the rest to comment). The executive meddling didn't cause the horrible ending; the team has openly admitted that the ending was written by Mac and Hudson, and that they thought it was totally perfect. They honestly thought it was good. EA isn't to blame for this one. The lead ME writers are the ones who thought it'd be a good idea to give the Reapers the dumbest motivation ever, utterly screw over galactic civilization, render all choices meaningless, strand your crew, condemn the series' two most popular squadmates to a slow painful death for no reason, put in Synthesis space magic, et cetera. Thank god at least half of that stuff was retconned later, though too bad it wasn't ALL of it. On the DLC point: it's quite disingenuous to phrase it like that. What he's saying is technically true, but not in the way you may think. The DLC he's referring to is redeemable multiplayer bonuses you get from buying certain tie-in toys (which is where that huge number comes from). They don't actually add content to the game, they just help you level up in the multiplayer mode quicker by unlocking a meager amount of equipment that you would otherwise get by grinding. The actual DLC for the game totals about sixty dollars all together when including the three story DLCs, the weapon packs, the armor packs, and the free ending retcon.

As we all know, Freeman doesn't 'play' the game like a normal player. He bypasses numerous areas, runs into some funny glitches, rushes ahead when the game encourages you to let the two sides fight it out, et cetera. So for future reference, I actually went back and counted the number of Xenian military units and US Marines killed in the original Half-Life. I can post my chapter by chapter count if anyone would like, but I'll just stick to a general count for now: This is basically what the average person would get... so I didn't abuse infinite spawners or run towards a marine vs alien fight or anything. I did however count all of the Grunt barrels in Interloper for the Xenian side, let the marines and aliens fight it out whenever I could, and let the Nihilanth teleport me four times. US Military Killed by Freeman: -Infantry: 140 -Armor crews: 14 (two tanks, two IFVs) -Pilots: 8 (three attack helicopters, one transport) -Black Ops: 8 (female) -Gunners: 5 (manning artillery, rocket launchers, or .50 cals) -Snipers: 3 TOTAL: 178 Killed by Xenians (all infantry): -Bullsquids- 12 (found dead) -Grunts- 10 -Gargantuas- 5 -Slaves- 2 -Zombies- 2 (found dead) TOTAL: 31 Other: -Unknown- 2 -Turret- 1 -Drowning- 1 TOTAL: 4 COMBINED TOTAL: 215 military personnel. -175 infantry -14 armor crew -8 pilots -8 Black Ops -5 Gunners -3 Snipers Xenian Military Killed by Freeman: -Slaves- 115 -Controllers- 45 -Grunts- 65 -Gargantuas- 3 -Auto-Cannons- 1 TOTAL: 230 +Bosses: Tentacle, Gonarch, Nihilanth Killed by US Military -Slaves- 11 -Grunts- 12 -Gargantuas- 1 TOTAL: 24 COMBINED TOTAL: 254 Xenian military units. -Slaves- 126 -Controllers- 45 -Grunts- 78 -Gargantuas- 4 -Auto-Cannons- 1

Freeman mentions being acquitted for petty theft. Him mentioning that and only that in the same breath as "never fired a gun, not a part of any extremist organizations" implies that the petty theft acquittal was the worst thing on his record. But that just means he hasn't been caught. He's admitted to stealing from the company in his internal monologue.

Indeed. It doesn't feel like it's been that long.

The Poland thing was for real? Well ya managed to fool me Ross, I was 100% convinced it was a joke and was continually baffled by others thinking that it wasn't.

Regardless, Forget About Freeman is one of the game's shortest chapters (it should be done by the next episode). Lambda Core is one of the longest. These are all that's between Freeman and Xen. However, Surface Tension is the absolute longest chapter in the game, and Ross got through that in 9-10 episodes. So I predict Freeman will reach Xen at around episode 60.

This has been the best episode in a while. My favorite moments were Freeman wondering why the Alien Grunts don't wear armor on their torsos, leading him to believe that Earth is being invaded by strippers, and his reaction to the snarks: "I'M NOT YOUR MOTHER! STOP IMPRINTING!". That had me laughing like a maniac when paired with the high pitched squeaking, and the snarks eagerly running towards him. That's certainly an interesting way to interpret those snark mines... I don't know what Freeman was mad at that guard for though (the one that probably got torn to shreds by aliens). It's not like fires his pistol any faster. Well, if he considers "the end of the game" to be all of Xen, then he's not wrong per se, since there's just a tiny bit left of FAF and then just one more chapter.

I predict Forget About Freeman will only be one episode. Two episodes at most.

Nice solid episode. I especially liked Freeman's freak-out at the end, along with "good Godzilla that's a good Godzilla!". But I think the ghost tangent dragged on too long.

Favorite character is by far the Nihilanth.

Very well. I suppose it'll be mine as well. Yes, it would. Slapstick revolving around women getting hurt is pretty common, and can be just as funny as the male equivalent. I'm not denying that sexism against women is what most people think of, or that it's been historically more common. I'm saying that it's not the only form of harmful sexism. I said that statements like "women are more deserving of sympathy than men" and the common attitude that women are morally superior is sexist. I do consider that kind of discrimination just as harmful as "men are smarter than women", as it actively causes harm in our society, as I have observed personally. Actually, sexism against men in the legal system is far more common than most people know. See the linked statistics on sentencing and incarceration rates. The commonly referenced trend of women making less than men is actually in many cases a myth, at least today. They make less mostly because they don't work as many hours. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303592404577361883019414296 So what else is "more deserving of sympathy" supposed to mean? When someone is more deserving of sympathy, that usually implies that they're morally superior to whoever they're being compared to. So any game that glorifies violence (i.e. almost every game that features shooting as a game mechanic, including the ones I mentioned, Fallout and Mass Effect) feels misogynistic to you? Simply because both females and males can be killed? Or is this not what you were trying to say? You never did specify how a game could feature violence against women in a mature way. I don't see what's immature about the way the Mass Effect games do it, for example. I disagree heavily. A work should not have to be geared towards women to feature them getting killed, simply because in many contexts not featuring violence against women simply wouldn't make any in-universe sense. And again, I don't see the problem. It's not misogynistic to show one woman getting killed next to hundreds of males, like CarnEvil and I honestly don't see the logic in the violence double standard. Violence against women simply has not repulsed me any more than violence in the same context against a man. By this logic, should things targeted at females never feature violence against men? True. Because of attitudes like this. Male victims of abuse are not anywhere near as uncommon as many believe, and they often face skepticism from the police among as well as social stigma. Men killing women. But you seem to be acting like women killing men never happens, or that men killing women should be a bigger concern than men killing men even though the latter is far more common. That is indeed mostly because men are physically stronger. Women commit quite a bit of murders and other horrible crimes as well. I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with this statement, but I'm not getting good vibes from it. From what I've read, not much less likely given women are more much likely to use weapons. And this study says "men and women assault one another and strike the first blow at approximately equal rates". http://dvrc-or.org/domestic/violence/resources/C61/#mal Another study states that men consist of 40% of victims of severe physical domestic abuse, which would somewhat contradict the idea that women are assaulted by spouses three times more often http://domesticviolencestatistics.org/men-the-overlooked-victims-of-domestic-violence/ Again, I'd like to note most male rapes tend to go unreported. But okay, rape of females is far more common. The reasons for that should be obvious. Yet men are much more likely to be killed in general. Which was my point relating to video games specifically; man on man violence is seen as fine, man on woman violence is seen as bad regardless of context. Please note that even though they're less common than men, that 25% still exists. Err, no. I was talking about the few that I have personally seen. I didn't say anything about all women committing crimes and trying to get away with it, or say that men never commit a crime thinking they won't get caught. This is true. But women usually have more success when it comes to doing this in crime, as the incarceration rates would indicate. I don't see what any of the factors you listed have to do with bias in their favor in the legal system, for example. Violence in the media, maybe a couple of your points (and even some of those are in question), but if your concern is that violence against them in video games has some kind of negative effect in the real world, the same should apply to men, as they're more often victims both in real life and in the media. And like I said, the attitude that women "are more deserving of sympathy" than men is toxic. Which seems to be your attitude, given that's what you said. And what if it's not meant to shock or horrify? What if a female villain or just a regular female minion is killed, and it's just meant to be cool (or at least justified) like when a hero kills a male minion? This happens a lot in many video games: Fallout, Mass Effect, etc. There should be nothing wrong in these cases. They have female minions and villains that are actively antagonistic that must be gunned down in self-defense the same way male ones are. They appear less often than men, as justified by the setting, but aren't non-existent either. Women shouldn't automatically be exempt from violence, or are you suggesting that female villains shouldn't be able to be killed? Or that female villains shouldn't exist?

No, I will not "deal with it". In matters where physical strength etc. is actually important, and the different treatment is practical, it's understandable. Otherwise (e.g. "I will treat one gender better than I treat the other" in a blatant display of discrimination, or the aforementioned problems in the court), it's not. People should be treated like people. And it just bugs me severely that Ross says that games need to be "mature" with violence against women while praising games for being immature about violence against men (this still makes no sense to me), or get bothered when a game features even one female enemy. Disliking a section over such a thing just seems silly to me.

I was not talking about potential negatives AGAINST women. "Positive" sexism is still sexism. Saying that women are inherently morally superior or more sympathetic than men, and treating them different accordingly based solely on gender, is sexism. It's an attitude that has done a lot of harm in our society as well. For example, women are over twice as likely as men to commit non-reciprocal violence. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/ And you didn't answer my questions on "maturity": why must we be more mature about woman violence than man violence, when men are much more likely to actually be victims of violence in the first place in the real world? Shouldn't it be the other way around in that case? Why can't a game be happy and comical about violence to both genders equally without you having a distaste for that element? Are those examples I mentioned what you would consider a game handling it maturely? Another reason why you shouldn't take a lot of statistics like that as the bible: whites commit more crimes than blacks. They're arrested and charged more often. Yet blacks make up the majority of INCARCERATIONS. http://www.ethicsdaily.com/news.php?viewStory=6384 It's not a matter of not liking statistics, it's that they're skewed, since women are acquitted and unreported far more often. Another fun statistic: because women are usually seen as more sympathetic than men, they almost always get more lenient prison sentences than men for the exact same crime. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html This study also states that women arrested "are also significantly more likely to avoid charges and convictions entirely, and twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted." Now, I wonder whether or not that's at all connected with the same attitude that gets women more lenient sentences... I've had the opposite personal experience. Mostly because the women know that they can usually get away with it. Because of how I was raised, my brain is hard-wired to see whites as more deserving of sympathy than blacks, and to consider whites morally superior when all other things are equal. I don't see the harm in this. No, but seriously? This attitude actually causes a lot of harm. I know this from both looking at statistics and observing it personally within certain families. So you're saying a male doesn't have the right to get offended when Ross outright says "I give females the benefit of the doubt more" or "I think the average woman is more deserving of sympathy than the average man"? If that was gender flipped, would you take any issue to it? "I think men are more deserving of sympathy than women" / "I'll give a man more benefit of the doubt than I'll give a woman"?

I did the same thing. Sometimes I'd make them run onto mines and laugh when they died. I blame the ragdoll physics. But either way, due to their... interesting AI, you'll still get a lot of funny ragdolls when you see Combine soldiers blow them up with grenades or one-shot them with sniper rifles. I actually cared about the Antlions a bit more.

It was more a point that violence against them wasn't glorified or demonized, just treated like a normal death, and they were reasonably, sensibly common combatants (on both the good and evil sides) within the setting. Obviously, both male and female civilians tend be slaughtered whenever there's a "we need to slaughter civilians to set a mood" scene. In both series. Half-Life 2: all the Combine soldiers seem to be male though. Kind of makes sense for the Overwatch, somewhat less so for the Civil Protection officers.

2-3: fair enough I suppose. All that this tells me is that something is very, very wrong if only negative stereotypes against women are considered "sexist". It's not "technically sexist", it's just sexist, in every definition of the word. Well, you can see where the confusion would come from when you outright said that a main reason you don't like violence against women is that they're on average weaker than men. Wait, the wording here confuses me: are you saying that this is what was implied in your video, or that you genuinely believe this? In which case, that is extreme sexism. Women are not inherently more deserving of sympathy than men, they're not automatically more sympathetic or morally superior. An evil man and an evil woman should be held in equal regard. Lies, damned lies, and statistics. This commonly cited statistic is basically bullcrap. It looks like that because many, MANY cases of woman committed violence, particularly woman on man, tend to go unreported, or the woman tends to be found innocent due to attitudes like this. Here's another commonly found statistic: when it comes to crimes like murder between spouses, women are nine times more likely to be acquitted than men. Ten times more likely to be given a slap on the wrist for the same crime as a man. Again, attitudes like this ("women are inherently less violent than men", "women deserve more sympathy than men") are exactly why this happens. It's the same reason blacks seem to be "inherently violent and criminal": there are other factors, such as economic condition and social stigma (same thing applies for the violent women vs men crime rate), but by and large its because they're found guilty of minor crimes far more often than whites. That's actually a good thing to bring up: if you're honestly saying that you believe women are less violent than men based on this, and use that as evidence that all women in general are more deserving of sympathy, do you also say that blacks are on average more violent than whites, and that whites should be held in higher regards than blacks? Why must it handle it in a mature manner? You were just praising it for being silly and happy-go-lucky about its black comedy and violence. Why do women get special treatment here? Why do they have to treat violence against women maturely, but not violence against men? That makes no sense to me. Remember, you said that Tokkentakker's death was awesome, and he had quite a gory death in an immature game. But as far games that do portray violence against women "maturely": what exactly do you mean? In regards to female enemies in video games, I think the Mass Effect series does it the best. Due to a variety of factors, women are much less likely to become soldiers and mercs than men, so whenever you encounter human enemies, almost all of them are men. There are still female human enemies though. They're not much different than the male ones aside from slightly lower health and usually a different weapon, and you kill them by the dozens just like the male enemies. Though in Mass Effect 2 and 3, you'll only find them in the sniper and combat engineer roles unlike the first game, where they were also normal assault rifle wielding grunts. The Fallout series is also a pretty good example. With its wonderfully gory (though not exactly unrealistic.... except with Bloody Mess) death animations and black comedy atmosphere (especially in the first two games), it can be seen as being "immature" in the violence towards women area. But it handles violence against men the exact same way. And, you know, it's just how the weapons in the setting (and in some cases real life) work. No double standards here. And it does realistically portray females as less common enemies than men, but they're still there when it makes sense. You'll find random crazed female killers (albeit they're slightly less common than males) roving the wastes. Many NCR soldiers and officers are women (the NCR is both equal opportunity and desperate for numbers, and the disadvantages of having female soldiers is explored a little in New Vegas). So are a lot of Brotherhood of Steel members. And tons of random wasteland mercenaries. When the game needs to set the mood, you can find mutilated or shot up corpses of women as well as men as well. Some Enclave enemies are women, but they're very rarely/almost never front line infantry, usually instead being military police, officers, base security, pilots, (armed and hostile) researchers, etc. Kind of like the actual US military (the Enclave are partly descended from them). In a lot of circumstances, they're instantly hostile and must be slaughtered... just like the faceless male mooks you mow down all around the wasteland (or, if we're talking Fallout 2, get mowed down by).

I think my favorite is Serious Sam 3's straightforward anti-piracy method: spawn an invincible super fast killer scorpion to chase you down and murder you if you pirated the game. Well yeah, basically. But it's still legally theirs, so they should be able to do what they want with it; it's not like they're throwing spare food into a fire in front of starving people or anything, they're just choosing not to sell a certain product any more. That should be their right. Now, of course if they did that then piracy should be of no concern, but... like I said, I guess it's just hard-wired into my brain to see that kind of attitude as wrong.

Here's the thing though: while technically, pirating abandonware doesn't hurt anyone, it's still illegal, and the general moral implications bug me quite a bit. If someone decided to jail the person who pirated an abandonware game, and shut down the file, I'd think they were completely justified. Even if they didn't continue to distribute it themselves. Why? Because it's there stuff. They can do what they want with it; they don't have to justify crap if they honestly and legally got it. That's why the whole idea bugs me so much. Essentially, "use your property the way I want you to or I'm going to steal it". It really shouldn't bug me, since I know objectively that abandonware isn't making any money anyway- and the nature of piracy means you're not actually physically taking a product per se- but it just does. I don't like the "pirate it, then buy it if I like it" mentality. It essentially makes the developers rely on charity. I don't like a policy, like the one you said, that just relies on appealing to people's good nature. I'd prefer if there was just never piracy, period (why do you think DRM even exists in the first place?), but, yeah, that's not going to happen. It lacking a demo or you not being sure if your computer can run it is more of a grey area, but I still. Agree about the "company is evil so I can do what I want herp derp". It bugs me to no end when I see people ragging on companies for greed AS THEY'RE STEALING FROM THEM. Yes it is, because you are treating someone differently based on their sex. A knife is dangerous regardless of who is swinging it- less so than a gun, but still. I didn't have to make a connection, as one of the reasons Ross gave for not liking violence against women was explicitly that they're on average weaker than men. Implying that the average woman being physically weaker determines how he views violence against women in all contexts regardless of who it is or what they're doing. Like in this one, where the woman was a bullet sponge magic zombie. Okay, so you just said that it was sexist ("gender biased"). No comment needed here. And that's sexist. You are, right off the bat, thinking that a woman is more deserving of sympathy than a man, and that they have to do more to be considered worthy of death than a man. You feel worse about killing them even if all other things are equal, just because of their gender. Women are not inherently more deserving of sympathy than men. I feel no worse about killing a woman than I do about killing a man in video games, or seeing one die on film, or hearing about it in the news.

I definitely was not expecting a full let's play from you. Not that I'm complaining. Anyway I know that these were just things you off-handedly mentioned, but I think they deserve some mention if one of the points of this series is for you to state what you think about gaming in general: 1. Violence against women: maybe this is just something you can't control, that's just wired into your brain, but I really don't like this way of thinking. It just seems sexist. You disdain violence against women to the point where a video game having a female enemy in it reduces your enjoyment of it (Evil Marie). Yet you declare killing a male enemy in a brutal and gory way to be awesome (Ludwig Von Tokkentakker). It implies, among other things, that women are both always incapable and weak AND that they're always more deserving of sympathy than men. I actually kind of like when games feature both female and male enemies, though all too often they make the female enemies both rare and elite (Half-Life does this, for example). I think the best aversion of this trend I've seen is the Mass Effect series... and even then, 3 somewhat plays it straight, as two of the three female enemy types are the strongest unit of their faction. I also would NOT recommend trying to disarm a knife wielding woman. Trying to disarm anyone is very dangerous and can easily go wrong. Treat her like you would a knife wielding man. If she's just randomly charging you and has a knife- like in the scenario you mentioned in the video- of course your first reaction should be to gun her down. Assuming you have a gun. You'd do the same thing if a man was charging at you with a knife, wouldn't you? 2. Piracy: Call me crazy, but I'm in the minority that piracy is, except in extremely rare circumstances, always wrong. I do not sympathize with people who say "well I wasn't gonna buy it anyway" or something similar. It just comes off as a lame excuse to justify theft in most cases. And I don't get up in arms like some do when a pirate actually gets busted for breaking the law. Someone spent a lot of time and money making that, and by pirating it, you are stealing. I actually think the companies usually have a moral high ground here. I'm reminded of an old Cracked article that talked about how entitled gamers are- they pirate and then complain when companies get draconian in an attempt to stop piracy. This got very, very bad with the releases of games like Modern Warfare 2, or Spore. There was even a case where, as an experiment, a bunch of indie game developers LET players set the price for their games, to see what the players thought it would be worth... and a huge number of players just pirated the bundle anyway. This does not just apply to new games. Older games can and do still make a profit for their owners, and are still legally owned. Yet they are also often pirated. Now, the case is obviously different for games like this one, where it doesn't even have a home release and definitely wasn't going to make any more money. But in general I just really don't like the attitude of "this person isn't using their property the way I want them to, so I can steal it and be justified". It rubs me the wrong way. 3. Rail Shooters: even the linear shooters many people complain about aren't as restrictive as rail shooters. At least here you have freedom of movement. I'm tempted to think that these people are talking about the Modern Warfare and Call of Duty series, since those are the best selling FPS games around. The claim that they're stupidly linear does hold weight, but I wonder why they get flak for it while games like Half-Life 2 get praised. Don't get me wrong, in general, I don't like the series (mainly due to other reasons like lack of vehicles, plain multiplayer, and lack of enemy variety) but the linearity complaint always struck me as odd. Especially since the campaign is so little of the actual game. Speaking of Modern Warfare/Call of Duty, I actually think Half-Life can learn a lot of things from it. Black Ops 2 actually let's you choose certain decisions through your actions in the game, which effect the story, so the linearity complaint isn't very founded there. MW3 features Survival Mode, which is an arcade-y Co-Op hold the line mission where you fight off increasingly powerful and varied enemies (including militia, mercenaries, soldiers, badass gas mask commandos, chemical troopers, attack dogs, juggernauts, suicide bombers, helicopters, and mine-layers) using a huge variety of weaponry. You can also call in allies in the form of air strikes, rangers, and GIGN troops. I'd love if Half-Life 3 had this kind of enemy and weapon variety for the basic soldiers and allies, and if they were as accurate, smart, and aggressive as these ones. I'm actually kind of sad it's being replaced by the alien mode in Ghosts. This mode was the only reason I actually bought the game- albeit, after the price dropped. 4. "It would be nice if pirates couldn't touch a game for months or years, and in return gaming companies can just... not be evil": This assumes that no one buys any games after a certain time. Which doesn't happen. I bought Half-Life ten years after it was released, for example. It was released in the same year as CarnEvil. And you yourself say that you've never payed more than 20 dollars for a game (which I assume means you wait for the price to drop on relatively new ones). I'm not really sure how serious you were with this suggestion, so I'm not gonna say much on it, but also remember the Steam sales. I can't remember how many games that were over five years old that I bought on Steam because they were on sale. Interesting note on EA's marketing decisions: that space launch was for Mass Effect 3. Predictably, most of the copies ended up in the ocean. Anyway, the video itself: this may surprise you (well, not really), but I liked it. I can see what you meant when you said you'd be channeling Freeman's Mind. A lot of the comments here feel like they could've come out of Gordon's mouth (was this all improv? If it was, why was the video so time consuming?). Your sense of comedic timing and delivery is superb; I could listen to you narrate a documentary on wall papering, and I'd still probably laugh my ass off. Favorite joke: the return of the Doom Guy voice. For some reason that just had me guffawing. Maybe because I might have been imagining that this was a conversation between Freeman and the Doomguy. "Ross you pansy. You don't like killing women, killing babies, or torturing people? What kind of man are you!?" I really like RDG, but it's nice to hear that you'll get back to Freeman's Mind. I suppose I'm rather antsy for new episodes because, upon replaying Half-Life, I remembered that Freeman is really close to Xen. Can't tell you how much I'm looking forward to that, and kind of fearing how it can go wrong. But I have faith that it'll be great, like the rest of the series. You have yet to make a video that I've actually disliked. In conclusion: nice video, shame that it will be the last for a while, but looking forward to more of Freeman.

If there is, which there is no evidence for, its not something we should worship.

Speaking of which, have you ever played Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth? It's not exactly an old game, being released in 2005, but it's pretty obscure and worth checking out, despite being bumpy at parts and having MANY bugs, some hilarious, some not. It does the first person immersion thing very well.

Another solid episode. This one didn't have as many funny comments as the last two (or, at least, ones I found funny), but it was still pretty interesting. The game is quite impressive for 1990. Can't believe I hadn't heard of it until now. However the replay value is severely limited by the fact that you can't get out and start beating the cows to death with a dildo. And you're still going to get one out in another four days? Well, that's twice what I expected. Count me in for not really minding the length. Generally I only think internet videos are too long when they cross the 30 minute line, like some of the newer Nostalgia Critic episodes (which is a point against them for me). Plus, in general, your videos don't feel long to me. I guess that's a good sign. Finally, when you say that you're going to be concentrating on Freeman's Mind, does that mean we'll be seeing a production rate similar to that one time you did nothing but produce Freeman's Mind episodes during the Power Up chapter? There was one out every few days then.

It can be opened with the use key, but it makes the locked sound if you just walk up to it.

Coincidentally, today is my birthday. A decent present, I suppose. Another pretty good review. Like slack59, I like the tone of these videos. Informative and concise without being dry or boring, always making room to slip in the occasional humorous comment, which for the most part are genuinely funny. Props for not resorting to the typical AVGN/NC style of excessively yelling of obscenities. Not saying that their videos aren't funny (they are, dangerously so), but it gets kinda dull when every single other reviewer on the internet does the same thing. It should come as no surprise that I've never heard of this game. In fact, I didn't even know that "Tetris games" were a thing. This game at least looks creative, though I can see how the micromanagement would take away all the fun. That's happened to me in more than a few games. Shame about the Freeman's Mind episodes being put on hold though. I was really looking forward to the next episode: the end of Surface Tension, Freeman's reaction to the soldiers pulling out in particular. That and the second Gargantua. But this is a good enough substitute. It taking only a short time to come out, much shorter than your other two series, is also a huge plus. (Though I don't really understand that part; don't you improvise most of what you say in Freeman's Mind anyway, only thinking about a few jokes in advance? And these videos are twice as long as the average Freeman's Mind episode to boot)

IT'S OVER 9000! 7 year old memes aside, it is at over 90% of the goal, but the ratings seemed to have slowed to a crawl. Is there a minimum amount of ratings you need for it to be approved or...?