Our Links 2004 Review

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • RustedWalleye
    Pro
    • Jul 2002
    • 824

    #31
    Re: Our Links 2004 Review

    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
    PatsFan said:
    No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

    But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

    Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

    I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

    No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

    Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

    Comment

    • SoMiss2000
      Hall Of Fame
      • Oct 2002
      • 20499

      #32
      Re: Our Links 2004 Review

      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
      RustedWalleye said:
      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
      PatsFan said:
      No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

      But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

      Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

      I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

      No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

      Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.
      "Never trust a big butt and a smile."-Ricky Bell
      Check out www.sliderset.net



      Currently Listening: The D.O.C.: No One Can Do It Better (evidence that rap music used to be good!)

      Comment

      • SoMiss2000
        Hall Of Fame
        • Oct 2002
        • 20499

        #33
        Re: Our Links 2004 Review

        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
        RustedWalleye said:
        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
        PatsFan said:
        No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

        But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

        Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

        I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

        No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

        Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.
        "Never trust a big butt and a smile."-Ricky Bell
        Check out www.sliderset.net



        Currently Listening: The D.O.C.: No One Can Do It Better (evidence that rap music used to be good!)

        Comment

        • SoMiss2000
          Hall Of Fame
          • Oct 2002
          • 20499

          #34
          Re: Our Links 2004 Review

          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
          RustedWalleye said:
          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
          PatsFan said:
          No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

          But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

          Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

          I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

          No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

          Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.
          "Never trust a big butt and a smile."-Ricky Bell
          Check out www.sliderset.net



          Currently Listening: The D.O.C.: No One Can Do It Better (evidence that rap music used to be good!)

          Comment

          • PatsFan
            Banned
            • Feb 2004
            • 204

            #35
            Re: Our Links 2004 Review

            </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
            taylor34 said:
            </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
            PatsFan said:
            No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

            But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

            <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

            All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

            Taylor34

            <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

            There isn't a good golf sim for the consoles. You either want to shoot extremely low scores, or you don't. And if you don't, you need to buy a good PC and get either Links or TW.

            Comment

            • PatsFan
              Banned
              • Feb 2004
              • 204

              #36
              Re: Our Links 2004 Review

              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
              taylor34 said:
              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
              PatsFan said:
              No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

              But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

              All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

              Taylor34

              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

              There isn't a good golf sim for the consoles. You either want to shoot extremely low scores, or you don't. And if you don't, you need to buy a good PC and get either Links or TW.

              Comment

              • PatsFan
                Banned
                • Feb 2004
                • 204

                #37
                Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                taylor34 said:
                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                PatsFan said:
                No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

                But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

                Taylor34

                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                There isn't a good golf sim for the consoles. You either want to shoot extremely low scores, or you don't. And if you don't, you need to buy a good PC and get either Links or TW.

                Comment

                • PatsFan
                  Banned
                  • Feb 2004
                  • 204

                  #38
                  Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                  </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                  SoMiss2000 said:
                  </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                  RustedWalleye said:
                  </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                  PatsFan said:
                  No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

                  But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

                  <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                  Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

                  I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

                  No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

                  Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

                  <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.

                  <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                  Good gaming is for me. Perhaps you're fine with the plethora of bugs in MVP. If that's what you accept as quality gaming, then that's great for you. Blissful ignorance is a wonderful thing.

                  Comment

                  • PatsFan
                    Banned
                    • Feb 2004
                    • 204

                    #39
                    Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                    SoMiss2000 said:
                    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                    RustedWalleye said:
                    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                    PatsFan said:
                    No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

                    But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

                    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                    Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

                    I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

                    No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

                    Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

                    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.

                    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                    Good gaming is for me. Perhaps you're fine with the plethora of bugs in MVP. If that's what you accept as quality gaming, then that's great for you. Blissful ignorance is a wonderful thing.

                    Comment

                    • PatsFan
                      Banned
                      • Feb 2004
                      • 204

                      #40
                      Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                      SoMiss2000 said:
                      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                      RustedWalleye said:
                      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                      PatsFan said:
                      No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

                      But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

                      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                      Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

                      I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

                      No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

                      Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

                      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">This is the same guy that has bashed the baseball games to holy hell. Gaming just ain't for him.

                      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                      Good gaming is for me. Perhaps you're fine with the plethora of bugs in MVP. If that's what you accept as quality gaming, then that's great for you. Blissful ignorance is a wonderful thing.

                      Comment

                      • PatsFan
                        Banned
                        • Feb 2004
                        • 204

                        #41
                        Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                        hdaniel1 said:
                        We have just posted our Links 2004 Review.

                        Thoughts??

                        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                        Funny, maybe we're not all great speakers of English, but if I read that right, it appears to be asking for our *thoughts* on the review, which I gave. I don't recall reading that this was a message thread about giving your thoughts about someone else's thoughts of the review.

                        So basically what you're saying is they only were looking for *thoughts* along the lines of "GREAT REVIEW, I AGREE COMPLETELY...slobber slobber", "PERFECT! You didn't overrate or overstate the sim-aspects of the game one bit!"

                        So when you say you don't care about what I think of the review (or the game), you're not actually speaking for the person that began the thread, right?

                        Comment

                        • PatsFan
                          Banned
                          • Feb 2004
                          • 204

                          #42
                          Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                          hdaniel1 said:
                          We have just posted our Links 2004 Review.

                          Thoughts??

                          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                          Funny, maybe we're not all great speakers of English, but if I read that right, it appears to be asking for our *thoughts* on the review, which I gave. I don't recall reading that this was a message thread about giving your thoughts about someone else's thoughts of the review.

                          So basically what you're saying is they only were looking for *thoughts* along the lines of "GREAT REVIEW, I AGREE COMPLETELY...slobber slobber", "PERFECT! You didn't overrate or overstate the sim-aspects of the game one bit!"

                          So when you say you don't care about what I think of the review (or the game), you're not actually speaking for the person that began the thread, right?

                          Comment

                          • PatsFan
                            Banned
                            • Feb 2004
                            • 204

                            #43
                            Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                            </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                            hdaniel1 said:
                            We have just posted our Links 2004 Review.

                            Thoughts??

                            <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                            Funny, maybe we're not all great speakers of English, but if I read that right, it appears to be asking for our *thoughts* on the review, which I gave. I don't recall reading that this was a message thread about giving your thoughts about someone else's thoughts of the review.

                            So basically what you're saying is they only were looking for *thoughts* along the lines of "GREAT REVIEW, I AGREE COMPLETELY...slobber slobber", "PERFECT! You didn't overrate or overstate the sim-aspects of the game one bit!"

                            So when you say you don't care about what I think of the review (or the game), you're not actually speaking for the person that began the thread, right?

                            Comment

                            • Sully
                              Hall Of Fame
                              • Feb 2003
                              • 16003

                              #44
                              Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                              PatsFan said:
                              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                              hdaniel1 said:
                              We have just posted our Links 2004 Review.

                              Thoughts??

                              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                              Funny, maybe we're not all great speakers of English, but if I read that right, it appears to be asking for our *thoughts* on the review, which I gave. I don't recall reading that this was a message thread about giving your thoughts about someone else's thoughts of the review.

                              So basically what you're saying is they only were looking for *thoughts* along the lines of "GREAT REVIEW, I AGREE COMPLETELY...slobber slobber", "PERFECT! You didn't overrate or overstate the sim-aspects of the game one bit!"

                              So when you say you don't care about what I think of the review (or the game), you're not actually speaking for the person that began the thread, right?

                              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                              Beat...that...dead...horse...

                              Comment

                              • Sully
                                Hall Of Fame
                                • Feb 2003
                                • 16003

                                #45
                                Re: Our Links 2004 Review

                                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                                PatsFan said:
                                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                                hdaniel1 said:
                                We have just posted our Links 2004 Review.

                                Thoughts??

                                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                                Funny, maybe we're not all great speakers of English, but if I read that right, it appears to be asking for our *thoughts* on the review, which I gave. I don't recall reading that this was a message thread about giving your thoughts about someone else's thoughts of the review.

                                So basically what you're saying is they only were looking for *thoughts* along the lines of "GREAT REVIEW, I AGREE COMPLETELY...slobber slobber", "PERFECT! You didn't overrate or overstate the sim-aspects of the game one bit!"

                                So when you say you don't care about what I think of the review (or the game), you're not actually speaking for the person that began the thread, right?

                                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                                Beat...that...dead...horse...

                                Comment

                                Working...