Descriptor

Somebody in the Youtube comments already asked this, but given your opinion of time limits in adventure-y explorer-y sorts of games like this, what is your opinion of The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask? I mean, the timer in that is a bit more forgiving (giving you about an hour per run, 2 if you know the ocarina trick), but I know it's thrown a lot of people off. That said, for me, I liked how they implemented the timer in regards to time-based events in the game. Certain things would only happen at certain times, so it added a whole new dimension to the exploration, I felt. Especially since it allowed you to actually fail missions, in which case you would just have to try again on the next cycle. For me, it's honestly one of my favorite open (sorta) world games out there for that very reason.

Pssht, always so negative? Oh, I wasn't even referring to just here. I mean just about anywhere. For instance, the achievements have already been released, and apparently do contain spoilers (which fortunately I wasn't privy to). That said, you should be fine if you just avoid major communities for the Fallout series for the next two weeks. Really wish I didn't have to, though. I'm really jonesing for the hype....

So hey guys, bit of news. Apparently the press copies of the game have been released, so for the next two weeks, be careful about spoilers. Although given how surprisingly little we know about the game, I'd have to wonder how much you can really spoil, since we don't even have the smallest shred of context for the game. Still, stay safe. Stay vigilant.

Holy crap, I swear I actually know metal Dave. Except I don't because the person I know was named Zack. But it all fits. Tall, tattoos, beard, listened to heavy metal, looked like Penn Jillete, and we had to give him a qualifier nickname, because there were like 5 other Zacks around. And honestly, the soul buying thing sounds like exactly the sort of thing he would do. As for the ending, I hate to say it, but that would be Hell for me. I am really not a club or techno person one bit.

What about a VHS or Betamax set? I bet they wouldn't even know you were doing it, then!

Hey Ross, mind if I make a suggestion? I don't think you should necessarily give up on Moon Gaming just yet. I think it could be pretty good if you retooled it a little bit. I think the biggest problem is that there is a lack of conversational flow through the whole thing, as well as a lot of dead air, as you mentioned. My personal thought on how to improve this would be to use the guest player aspect to your advantage. To help give better flow to the show, it might be more interesting if you interview the guest through the episode while playing the game. You know, prepare a set of questions to ask when the gameplay slows down a bit (in terms of having stuff to talk about, anyway) and just ad lib stuff from there. Like for instance, I know nothing about the other guy in this episode, and when it was over, I still didn't. By having a set of interview questions ("such as who are you?", "what do you do?", "why are you here?","what's your opinion on recent gaming news?", "what's with that thing in your face?", that sort of thing.) you remove from the guest the burden of having to think of stuff to talk about, while also helping the viewer get to know who this other person is, as well as giving the whole exercise more purpose. Even better, if you could work in the stilted moon-based shut-in aspect to the questions and ad-libbed discussion, it could make for a very entertaining and still fairly easy to produce product. I would also suggest that you play up the whole "games being assigned to me" secret conspiracy thing a bit more. Maybe stuff like getting your orders from transmissions from an obscured talking head (like The Sovereign from The Venture Brothers, for instance) in the intro/outro, as well as building up subtle references to something larger going on behind the show(but without getting too mired in some hamfisted story like a lot of internet shows do. Just play it fast and loose, with the broader picture of why you are on the moon coming across as more ridiculous and absurd with every new vague reference to whatever is going on). Anyway, good luck with everything, and I hope that helps a bit! EDIT: Oh, also, you totally missed the best opportunity with the forklift boss!

Yes, you're sexist. Here: MRA movement is misogynistic to the core, feminism is not majority sexist. Classic "us or them" mentality. Somebody can disagree with certain aspects of modern feminism without hating women. Especially stuff like the witch-hunting mob justice and moral guardianism that's becoming disturbingly more common as of late. Just because someone criticisms the extremists of a group doesn't mean that they reject the core concept. If anything, they may just be concerned that the group is heading down the wrong path. It's like saying that someone who hates the West-borough Baptist Church correspondingly hates all of Christianity. And as for the MRA thing, sure, a lot of them can be legitimately sexist, but again, not all. Both groups (feminists and MRA alike) are really suffering from the same problem. Extremists acting as the loudest megaphones of each group, causing it to seem like that's all there is. And because of that, it just breeds "us vs. them" like crazy, because if you're in one group, from your perspective, the other group looks absolutely crazy, since most of what you hear from them is from the crazies. It's where the term echo-chamber comes from, and it's become a major problem among internet discussions. Looking at your responses, you are being highly accusatory, making sweeping assumptions of someone's character based only on group, rather than individual behaviors. Don't let yourself fall into the same echo-chamber trap, as all it does it shut down legitimate discussion.

Get out. Seriously, GG is just a misogynist, MRA temper tantrum, that's all it is or ever was. Source?

That's not too surprising. I mean, heck, just look what happened to Greece! TF2 was just practice. Also, as crappy as this update sounds, I'm not to bothered by it, since I haven't been playing in a while, either. Honestly, I'm more dissapointed by the the fact that the new comic wasn't a new Ring of Fired chapter. I mean, jeez, who knew Valve Time extended into comics, too?

Now, I get it... better revise it. Episode 29 has been revised, added Episode Titles for Episodes 4 , 5, 43, 64, 65 and 66. MORE SOON.... I am only thinking that is the best part when he said it, but hey you dont have to actually call it that, just call it cartoony crate mayhem or something.... Why not just "Looney Tunes Crap"? It has more of a zing to it.

Accurate. I'm gunna have to give a big "Ehhhhhh" on that one. I've been to a lot of the Gamergate hotspots, and the vast majority of the conversations really are related to talking about unethical behavior in the games industry. And granted, a lot of other conversations are related to modern feminism, but it's still kept pretty civil. Most of the folks that identify with GG tend to have more of an egalitarian streak than anything and are largely just opposed to the more extremist forms of feminism that are actively hateful or regressive. Especially when it comes to promoting censorship in games. And sure, there's no denying that it did get pretty rough when the whole thing got kicked off, but really, that's just the result of the internet being this huge nebulous thing where a handful of a-holes can really mess things up for everyone else. You're trying to treat a hashtag like it's the Borg, that everyone who uses it does so legitimately and represents everyone else who uses it. Jerks holding megaphones make things seem a lot worse than they are. Also, as sad as it is, everyone who is remotely famous on the internet gets death threats. Remember how bad Joss Weadon had it a couple months back? It's shameful, but again, it's hardly representative of everyone. At the end of the day, no matter who piggybacks on the GG crazy train, the movement as a whole still raises some good points, and have actually uncovered a lot of corruption and unprofessional behavior in games media (the same games media, I might add, which helped spread the misogyny label). All I'm saying is, based on what I've seen, the whole "women hating" angle is a lot more of a farce than it may seem, at least from my own experiences. A bunch of fucking manchildren wanted an excuse to complain about the feminist movement, so they took a tiny fucking issue and blew it out of proportion. Shit, gaming journalism has been corrupt for years, why do people only start to care when a woman's genitals are involved? Contrary to popular belief, a lot of what got the whole GG thing going wasn't just the whole Zoe Quinn affair. At first, it was just your usual relationship drama on the internet. It wasn't until people started to make connections between her game and the journalists who covered it (who were implicated at the time in the drama) that things started to get crazy. The biggest smoking gun was when a bunch of gaming journalist sites all published the (basically) same article, all on the same day, talking about how "gamers are dead" that lead to people finding out that a large number of gaming journalists were in cahoots that people really started to get sucked into it. The idea that the game's media were playing favorites with devs and were shaping things behind the scenes really didn't sit right with people. So really, it wasn't just the Zoe Quinn thing that started this. It's like asking "Why did everyone freak out and start WW1 when some third-rate leader got shot?". The true motivations are a lot bigger than just the initial catalyst.

Understand the sketchiness of design choices stems from the fact that Bethesda already showed their intention of dumbing down their games to appeal to a dumber audience. Skyrim was likely the worst offender of this due to cutting weapon durability as well as attributes, which have always been a staple of character creation since Arena. And so far from what we've seen implies that skills got cut, the SPECIAL description is the worst offender to that. Intelligence; which previously determined skill points on a level up now states that it effects your XP gained effectively turning it into a useless dump stat. Agility also stating that it directly affects your ability to sneak. A similar system was put into place with Skyrim, because of the absence of personality which was the attribute that had the effect of directly setting how NPCs would act towards you; higher meaning much warmer and friendlier. While speechcraft effected your skill with persuasion. With Skyrim they just nuked personality with all the other attributes and had speechcraft affect both your persuasion AND NPC dispositions. While I certainly do agree that skills as we knew them aren't in the game, I still get the feeling that they aren't completely removed. I think it might just be rank based, rather than point based. I mean, think about it. In the previous games, a lot of skills were just used for very specific actions, like hacking or lockpicking or passing speech checks. A rank based system would essentially accomplish the same thing (i.e., you need Science rank 3 to hack "average" computers, for instance). I mean, we have seen a bobblehead in game for Barter, so we know at least something skill related is there. And while it may be seen as "dumbing down" (which is elitist as hell, btw), it's still probably pretty functional. I say we still have to wait until proven different. Also, they might have also stopped Intellegence from affecting skills to nerf it a bit, since it was way too overpowered before. It's just a cheap attempt to cash in on the huge influx of crappy survival games. And that's all it does, again appeal to morons with the dumbest of gimmicks that offer nothing in terms of the actual game's world beyond your little dome of base building. So what? It still looks like it's reasonably fleshed out and will be pretty entertaining. What the hell is wrong with having some more free-form fun? Like I said, it does affect gameplay because it forces you to rethink how you scavenge stuff, which is a big part of the game. Additionally, it provides a way for you to get additional benefits, like special items and additional trading locations. And for the last time, it's not out of place. It's gameplay revolving around re-building in a post-apocalyptic world. I can certainly think of game conventions that would be far more misplaced than that. Exactly what was wrong with the combat? Anyone that played a single tabletop RPG knew exactly how it worked, and even if the player didn't the game explained perfectly clear what a particular stat did with your character. Admittedly, a lot of it is subjective, in that I'm not that big of a fan of turn-based dice-role based RPGs, but at the same time, it still wasn't an entirely smooth experience. Stuff like Ian constantly shooting you in the back, the usual RPG mechanic of trying to hit a rat or scorpion or something for like 5 minutes (while playing the "gimme three steps towards the door" game for every turn to avoid losing health) and always missing (which was pretty tedious in Morrowind, too), as well as the isometric perspective giving a poor idea of line of site for gunplay (which also played into Ian shooting me in the back a lot). Also, one thing that got me was never being entirely sure of how my character would navigate the floor grid in combat, which would cause me to eat up my action points unintentionally. Admittedly, again, a lot of it is subjective and a fair deal a result of my lack of RPG skill, but at the end of the day, it caused me to dread combat more than anything, and as a result, hurt the games for me a fair deal. This list is huge but I'll sum it up. A company that bought an IP with little to no knowledge of what they were actually buying and had no affiliation with the series before the deal. Fallout 3 is a binary storyline where your goal is just to participate in a war between a very black and white idea of "good" and "evil". With literally only a hand full of choices having any impact on the world around you, and most are very minor choices such as returning Agatha's family violin. The REAL decision making of using the FEV virus or not and who enters the chamber, and at the end of the day has no real penalty or punishment for the player other than a useless little meter saying "You lost karma", once again portraying a very simple and crappy view of how "good guys" and "bad guys" work when really this has never been a thing in Fallout which was always just varying shades of gray. The world is very barren after 200 years, somehow there's still an ugly green tinge that implies the bombs just fell and we're supposed to believe that humans have survived this long just scavenging on loose scraps from prewar ruins? Are you fucking kidding me? There are no mass trade routes and no signs of farming and what you do in the world doesn't matter beyond a scolding by Liam Neeson and once again, a useless little meter that tells you what you did is bad/good. The Companions you meet have no depth to them and aren't involved in any major quests or have an impact on the game or your ending. The world simply revolves around the player and blows sunshine up their ass. Ah, good. I was worried you would just say something like "they ruined the BOS", even though they actually explained their motivations. And yeah, you do make some fair points here. I will definitely agree that NV had a better story compared to 3, but I think you're still being pretty harsh on Bethesda in your analysis. I mean, at the very least, flaws aside, I would still say that of all the companies to get the IP, they were still better suited for it than most (outside of Obsidian, of course). You act like they just took the Fallout IP as a quick cash grab, but you'd have to be a real cynic (which I honestly kinda suspect, reading most of you response) to say that they put no effort into it. Heck, looking at a number of other E3 interviews about Fallout 4, it sounds like they are still taking a lot of concerns about Fallout 3 into question. For instance, the fact that the green tint is gone, which I'm sure a lot of folks are happy about. Todd also mentioned putting greater thought into giving consequences to player actions, so maybe the story will be more along the lines of NV. And yeah, that's just conjecture, but again, that's really all we have to work with here. As for the capital wasteland's level of civilization after 200 years, it's not as unbelievable as you may think. Based on context clues of conversations and histories in F3, it definitely seems to imply that most actual settlements weren't started until within a century, which kinda implies that the Capital Wasteland was just kinda un-inhabited for a while. Which isn't entirely out of question, considering it was likely hit worse than most places, being the nation's capital and all. Combine that with the unchecked super mutant threat and general chaos, and it's not that out of the question for things to be kinda awful. I always likened the area as being a good indication as to what someplace like the Boneyard would have been like if the Vault Dweller never came along to basically fix everything forever. Which actually brings me to my next point. If you looks at the series, the biggest advancements in civilization always seem to come around due to the events of the games in the series. I mean, think about New Vegas before the NCR rolled into town. That place was radiation free and in good shape, but didn't seem to have much civilization outside of tribals. What's the deal there? And even Ceasar's Legion is a consequence of the first two games, since Ceasar himself is only able to do what he does due to the stability of the Boneyard (where he's from). Meanwhile, the east coast has been relatively deprived of games bringing about wasteland saviors, so it's not out of the question that things have been going pretty badly. As for food and stuff, it is mentioned off hand (or at least hinted to) that a lot of the food in the CW comes from trading, hunting, scavenging (since pre-war food is pretty much nothing but preservatives (and are in NV, too, so don't start) and is in great supply since there would have been a city's worth of food left for a very small amount of people), and hydroponics (in Rivet City), as they do state that agriculture is at best a crapshoot due to the lack of clean water for irrigation (and yes, plants in this series are sensitive to radiation. The Shi in Fallout 2 say as much, with radiation-resistant crops being one of their larger advancements). While it's not as comprehensive as NV at fleshing this out, it's not completely ignored. And if the settlement building montage in the F4 trailer is anything to go by, food will be better represented for settlements there, too. Additionally, considering the relatively small size of the map in F3 compared to F1&2, the amount of settlements aren't too terrible per land area. Like I said, it's honestly pretty comparable to the Boneyard if that place didn't have help from the NCR (as, afterall, keep in mind that in NV, they say it does still kinda suck there even with the NCR's influence in rebuilding). You realize it was significantly worse than simple political tensions right? There was mass rioting, looting, a deadly virus spreading in the population, and just a general "fuck the gobment" attitude going on across the entire United states. What we saw was a typical 50s sitcom neighborhood with the war SUDDENLY HAPPENING. I know all that. But that doesn't mean that every house in the country is going to get necessarily firebombed. Massive rioting and looting have happened in this country a number of times throughout it's history, but the fact is, while widely reported, it's still generally pretty isolated. If you weren't near the riots, your life would continue to go on as normal. The same thing with disease outbreaks. Thanks to some sneaky sleuthing based on screenshots, we know now that the main character lived north of Concord, MA before the war, meaning that he lived pretty far out from the city, where most of the worst of the rioting would occur. The fact is, in even the worst unrest, if they aren't in the middle of it, people will generally just try to keep living life like normal. Heck, if anything, the fact that getting tickets for a fallout shelter was seen as a rational thing to do implies that there wasn't certainly a mass apprehension going on. But the way you describe it implies that the society has pretty much collapsed already, with the nukes just being the cherry on top. Mass rioting=/Complete nationwide anarchy. Not to the level you're describing, anyway. We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see. Sure, you're allowed. It's just all hot air, though. You're also allowed to stick a fork in a power outlet... Doesn't mean you should. It's really like you have nothing else to talk about. You're comparing forming an opinion about a game based on what's seen of it, (a totally reasonable thing to do, mind you) to the act of frying your insides and killing yourself. You may as well admit you're wrong at this point. It's like you ditching that TF2 argument because you didn't have jack shit to say in your defense. Fact of the matter is, there's a lot of hype for Fallout 4, people were wanting a Fallout 4 for years and now they're getting one. You and everyone else trying to defend this game are only doing so in the fact that Fallout hasn't seen a sequel in nearly 5 years and you want your fix no matter how fucking garbage it is. But see, this is exactly his point. You've basically already decided it's garbage despite having a very limited perspective. There's discussion and critique, and then there's just downright condemnation based on conjecture. I certainly agree about having apprehension about certain design decisions, but you can't act like it's automatically complete crap without taking the chance to look at how those decisions play into the larger picture. Especially when we aren't even sure that those decisions are even what they are yet. Everyone is acting so ridiculously hostile about this that it's almost silly.

Once again, if that was the case why is there outright nothing showing it there? To be fair, I think the complex weapon modding system might be the reason for no weapon degradation. And who knows, maybe there is degradation but it's mod-based instead of whole weapon based. I say +1 wait on this one. If I wanted to play a mediocre survival building game, I'd play a mediocre survival building game. Not a crappy attempt to cash in on that market by Bethesda in a game it has no business belonging in. Though I suppose that makes up for completely ruining it as an RPG to appeal to the masses huh? Honestly, I don't think it's all that out of place in a Fallout game. If anything, it's really nice because it actually makes scavenging a lot more complex, since common junk now has some real value. Overall, it actually adds a lot to the gameplay even beyond just the building aspect. Because they are. Bethesda bought an IP that was great, dumbed it down to appeal to morons that wanted to seem intelligent by calling the abortion an "RPG", and completely took a shit all over the universe that Black Isle established. If Fallout 4 was true to the previous games, I can tell you right now that there would've been a fire bomb that goes right through the player character's window before the bombs fell. But who cares about that when a game is epik fun amirite? only nerdz care about that kinda stuff xDDDDDDDD Man, the salt is strong with this one. First off, let me say this. As great as Fallout 1 and 2 was in terms of narrative and world building, in terms of gameplay, they left a lot to be desired. Combat was incredibly tedious, and the interface was often rather obtuse. Complexity isn't always a good thing in a game if it's not conveyed well, as that can just as easily take a player out of the world than it can draw them in. And while yes, the story in Fallout 3 could have used some work, it was nowhere as bad as you're making it out to be. Go ahead, give me some instances of what Fallout 3 did wrong, in your opinion. As for your last comment, I have no idea where you are drawing that from. Why do you think a fire bomb would burst through your window? Are you referring to the uneasy political situation in America at the time? That's a poor analogy. At least you can actually play an Early Access game to be able to judge it. Here, we still have limited information. While signs do point to issues regarding the dialogue choices, loss of skills, and general story concerns, we still have nowhere near enough information to declare a verdict. It's more like judging an early access game by the trailer than it is honest criticism, since we simply aren't in the position to know yet.

What, like the removal of skills? The voiced protagonist? The fact that the Vault-Tek guy just happens to coincidentally show up on the day of the war to sign you up for the vault? This is a pretty dull forum, so any discussion points are appreciated.

Looking around on the Fallout wiki's, I'm having trouble finding a Vertibird model that looks much like that one. The biggest difference is that none of the known models have the open bay design on the side. Plus, the other models appear to have some form of encompassing exhaust ports on the bottom of the engine nacelles. For comparison: Note the rather large bulge section where the open bay would be in the above image. Thus, I'm somewhat convinced that it isn't the Enclave style vertibird we are used to. Afterall, the VB-02 likely wasn't the very first VTOL vehicle in Fallout. Merely the most advanced. I say, give it time. We're jumping to conclusions here, I think.

Are we actually sure that the vehicle seen in the pre-war segment is the VB-02 type vertibird? It's a little out of frame, so it's hard to look at details, but is it at all possible that this is a simple helicopter type transport, such as maybe a VB-01?

Well, I watched a developer's conference recently where they first started dropping hints about this game, and they mentioned that it is going to introduce a bunch of characters who will eventually have games themselves, making the whole thing a massive game universe. They didn't really specify the kinds of games they would be producing, but based on the character silhouettes they showed, it looks like there will be a range of genres. Now, I kinda doubt we will get anything like Goldeneye or DK64 (especially since, I hate to say it, but GoldenEye hasn't aged as well as other FPS titles from that era), but maybe more stuff along the lines of Perfect Dark. That said, I vaguely recall that one of the characters seemed to have a gun, so we might just get an FPS of some sort. Too soon to say.

So hey, does anyone remember a little forgotten console classic known as Banjo Kazooie? Or perhaps the even better Banjo Tooie? And certainly not the highly disappointing Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts? Well guess what! A bunch of former Rareware employees got together to make just what we've always wanted! That's right, a game that isn't technically Banjo-Kazooie! The former Rareware employees have started a company called "Playtonic Games" and have released a Kickstarter to promote and fund their new game, called Yooka-Laylee. This "completely new" game is about two characters named Banjo and Kazooie Yooka and Laylee, who are respectively a bear and a bird chameleon and a bat who travel around large 3-D platforming worlds collecting jiggies pagies, all set to the wonderful music of Grant Kirkhope Grant Kirkhope! So yeah, it's literally Banjo-Kazooie, without being Banjo-Kazooie. Because copyright. Like seriously, their Kickstarter features such stretch goals as a pre-final boss battle Quiz show and the ability to have transformations in each level. It's unabashedly Banjo-Kazooie, but without breaking copyright. So if you guys are fans of the BK games, then luckily for everyone, they already hit their KS goal within like 40 minutes, so it should turn out pretty good. Right? Links to the Kickstarter and Website below: http://www.playtonicgames.com/

Aaaand their gone. http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218 Whelp, that was fast. Lets just hope that it doesn't have an evil resurgence anytime soon. Or at least that they can make it less terrible. So, do you think they were being sincere with the removal, or just terrified of ticking everyone off?

Heck, it'd be simpler than that. Just constant, maniacal laughter.

Looking through the article, the whole thing comes across as becoming way too preoccupied with bashing the democrats more than giving a more in-depth analysis. And I don't say that as a democrat who's offended, but as a moderate who sees this kind of attitude as being the very reason the ACA became what it is. I mean, I think most of us can agree that healthcare funding (as well as the government involvement with that) could use a major overhaul. This applies both to the individual consumer, and also to the government budget. If you look ahead to what is going to kill this country's budget, it's the exponential increase in the cost of Medicare (as well as the cost of interest, once that causes all mandatory spending to exceed govt. revenue), which means that we need to something pretty quickly (here's a pretty interesting projection of govt. costs http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/GAO_Slide.png). But the failures in the ACA lie not merely in one party bullying the other into getting it enacted, it's in the fact that in the current political atmosphere, there really isn't any other way. Both parties have become increasingly calcified in the sense that the number of moderate congressional representatives has reached an all time low, with radicals (far left/right) becoming more common (XKCD has a really neat infographic on this trend, as well as trends through all of American history http://xkcd.com/1127/large/). This just leads to having two solid voting blocks that all vote on way or the other, making things like compromise or legitimate discussion impossible. So at best, all we end up with are waves of incredibly one-sided legislation that flip polarity every 4-6 years or so that end up causing more problems than they solve. And we all know just how difficult it is to remove established legislation. So in the end, I guess my opinion on the subject is that we do need major health reform, and honestly, I'm not sure the ACA is the way to do it. But then, the whole thing is so complicated and large in scope that I really don't have the formal training necessary to comprehend all of the particulars. However, the article posted came across as being too insistent on just throwing around blame, which just kinda bugs me more than anything. If things are going to get better, these things must be discussed civilly and with the creation of good legislation in mind, and not just with an "us vs. them" mentality.

I've been reading up a bit on the subject of crime rates vs. gun ownership, and would like to mention an interesting article on the subject that I believe handles the issue fairly well, and without significant bias. http://www.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/ Basically, most of it comes down to issues of correlation vs. causation, as well as difficulty in collecting and comparing data due to the incredibly high number of variables present. Oh, also... And the most ignorant statement of the week award goes to... (and seriously, you are being super childish about this) Oh, btw, most of the proof you offered only holds up as circumstantial, and can hardly be considered a properly collected represented sample of data. On the other hand, I do agree that I would like to see more sources from BTG, if not at the very least to see more representable data, and to encourage discussion over what that data might represent and how it was obtained.

So hey, did anyone check out the blurb for AF on the latest Nostalgia Critic review? http://channelawesome.com/nostalgia-critic-matrix-revolutions/ It includes a thing made by Ross for advertising. Also, Ross is the current spotlight producer. Also, there's a contest (of sorts) so that's cool too I guess. Just kinda surprised that nobody mentioned it...

Very good. Maybe he can do the animating for Ross in the future, so CP isn't so awful to make any more.

this do that ross i would love for you to do it Speaking of Dr. Girlfriend isn't Venture Bros suppose to have a special or new season start in a few days? Midnight of the 19th, I believe. Apparently it's gunna be a pretty big deal. And not just because it's a new Venture Brothers. EDIT: Trailer for the episode in question: TzRvdWH3R_0