<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for GuildCom</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.guildcom.us/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.guildcom.us</link>
	<description>&#34;To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:01:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Bloody Fallout 3:  My First Installed Mod by ???????</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=402&#038;cpage=1#comment-9562</link>
		<dc:creator>???????</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=402#comment-9562</guid>
		<description>?? ????????
???, ???... ?????????
??????????, ????????? ?????
?????? ??? ???????, ??????? ?? ??????????.
??? ???????? ?????
  http://vkysnenko.ru
 http://vkysnenko.ru -  ??????? ??????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>?? ????????<br />
???, ???&#8230; ?????????<br />
??????????, ????????? ?????<br />
?????? ??? ???????, ??????? ?? ??????????.<br />
??? ???????? ?????<br />
  <a href="http://vkysnenko.ru" rel="nofollow">http://vkysnenko.ru</a><br />
 <a href="http://vkysnenko.ru" rel="nofollow">http://vkysnenko.ru</a> &#8211;  ??????? ??????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Tagline Archive by gazongmk</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?page_id=2&#038;cpage=1#comment-6734</link>
		<dc:creator>gazongmk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 19:19:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-6734</guid>
		<description>The excellent and duly message.
It not absolutely that is necessary for me. Who else, what can prompt?
In my opinion you are mistaken. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.
I apologise, but you could not paint little bit more in detail.
Rather amusing opinion
  
&lt;a href=&quot;http://gazongmk.ru&quot; title=&quot;!!!&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The excellent and duly message.<br />
It not absolutely that is necessary for me. Who else, what can prompt?<br />
In my opinion you are mistaken. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.<br />
I apologise, but you could not paint little bit more in detail.<br />
Rather amusing opinion</p>
<p><a href="http://gazongmk.ru" title="!!!" rel="nofollow"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sermon 6: Half-Life 2 by Christine Grefe</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=74&#038;cpage=1#comment-6016</link>
		<dc:creator>Christine Grefe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 23:09:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=74#comment-6016</guid>
		<description>You are a very informed person!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are a very informed person!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Snakes in the Grass by 2Cold Scorpio</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1310&#038;cpage=1#comment-5986</link>
		<dc:creator>2Cold Scorpio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:41:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1310#comment-5986</guid>
		<description>First off, this particular Guildsman regrets any derogative language that hasb een said in heated discussions on this topic.

It seems to me that the root issue isn&#039;t in the use of either party&#039;s &quot;tactics&quot; (for sake of saving argument on what is tactical and what isn&#039;t, I&#039;ll use this term, albeit loosely to quell any possible disagreements on that particular subject; I feel it to be irrelevant to this post), but rather two competing schools of thought that have emerged in these two unique battlegrounds that opened up new possibilities and abilities we never had dealt with before...and to compound matters further, there were some changes between the two  that were for better or worse, depending on one&#039;s point of view.  

In the old days (with the exception of the Rainbow Six games, which were generally slower paced and more deliberate in all but the smallest of maps *cough*Killhouse*ahem*), deathmatch play was simpler, and generally more frantic more often.  Which is odd considering in those older games, we didn&#039;t have the degree of agility and free-movement that the nanosuit in Crysis gives.  That isn&#039;t to say that Crysis doesn&#039;t have frantic gunfights (heavens no!), or that those older games didn&#039;t fall into creeping around campfests either every so often.

Crysis does a lot of things we didn&#039;t have back then:  we can move faster than before, jump higher, crawl around on your belly, turn invisible temporarily, modify your weapons on the fly, drive not only land but also aerial vehicles, beat someone senseless with super-strength, etc.  Parts of the battlefield can not be utilized that couldn&#039;t have before without a ladder or a pile of boxes present.  The battlefields are generally much more open than in the old days, but not &quot;arenas&quot;; instead, realistic outdoor battlefields with cover and obstacles that consists more of pillars, buildings, and courtyards.  There&#039;s a day/night cycle that actually influences things for once, as well as weather.

I think we&#039;ve all been adjusting to it, whether we realize it or not, and in different ways, for better or worse.  Do I think I&#039;ve utilized tactics that were a bit on the cheap side?  Yes, perhaps, depending on how one looks at things.  Why?  To win, of course...or to at least close the gap.  Have others done the same?  Maybe...again, it depends on one&#039;s point of view, I suppose.  Could this cutthroat behavior from all parties involved be guilty of lowering the &quot;fun&quot; level for the sake of winning?  Possibly.  We all know winning is fun, and is the object of the game.  However, a good match or a good game can be fun...even in defeat.  

Scorpio also wonders if his own win-at-any-cost doctrine (often marked by nefarious explosives in opportune areas or ambushing unaware adversaries from a dark corner) is a relic of a bygone era, and was inappropriately utilized when tactics lately had to be reforged from something that generally brought gross losses into cutthroat tactics that put points on the board at the expense of slowing the action down and possibly diluting the fun factor.

Winning is nice, but at what cost?  Will Guild tactics eventually devolve into two combatants facing each other at gunpoint with a brick wall between them, each waiting for the other to make a move?

Perhaps two sets of &#039;rules&#039; should be established:  the &#039;fun&#039; rule set that is more akin to the old days where there was more running and gunning and less hiding, waiting, and watching and results in a lot more gun play and dead bodies littering the field; and a second &#039;tactical&#039; rule set that is generally slower-paced and utilizes all resources and tactics available?  I don&#039;t know.

Maybe we&#039;ve been spoiled by new possibilities, or they didn&#039;t fit as well into old playstyles as we previously thought might.  Or perhaps we&#039;re just seeing chinks in the Crysis armor we didn&#039;t notice before, or hadn&#039;t been noteworthy before.  I don&#039;t know; I don&#039;t have the answers.  

*shrugs*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First off, this particular Guildsman regrets any derogative language that hasb een said in heated discussions on this topic.</p>
<p>It seems to me that the root issue isn&#8217;t in the use of either party&#8217;s &#8220;tactics&#8221; (for sake of saving argument on what is tactical and what isn&#8217;t, I&#8217;ll use this term, albeit loosely to quell any possible disagreements on that particular subject; I feel it to be irrelevant to this post), but rather two competing schools of thought that have emerged in these two unique battlegrounds that opened up new possibilities and abilities we never had dealt with before&#8230;and to compound matters further, there were some changes between the two  that were for better or worse, depending on one&#8217;s point of view.  </p>
<p>In the old days (with the exception of the Rainbow Six games, which were generally slower paced and more deliberate in all but the smallest of maps *cough*Killhouse*ahem*), deathmatch play was simpler, and generally more frantic more often.  Which is odd considering in those older games, we didn&#8217;t have the degree of agility and free-movement that the nanosuit in Crysis gives.  That isn&#8217;t to say that Crysis doesn&#8217;t have frantic gunfights (heavens no!), or that those older games didn&#8217;t fall into creeping around campfests either every so often.</p>
<p>Crysis does a lot of things we didn&#8217;t have back then:  we can move faster than before, jump higher, crawl around on your belly, turn invisible temporarily, modify your weapons on the fly, drive not only land but also aerial vehicles, beat someone senseless with super-strength, etc.  Parts of the battlefield can not be utilized that couldn&#8217;t have before without a ladder or a pile of boxes present.  The battlefields are generally much more open than in the old days, but not &#8220;arenas&#8221;; instead, realistic outdoor battlefields with cover and obstacles that consists more of pillars, buildings, and courtyards.  There&#8217;s a day/night cycle that actually influences things for once, as well as weather.</p>
<p>I think we&#8217;ve all been adjusting to it, whether we realize it or not, and in different ways, for better or worse.  Do I think I&#8217;ve utilized tactics that were a bit on the cheap side?  Yes, perhaps, depending on how one looks at things.  Why?  To win, of course&#8230;or to at least close the gap.  Have others done the same?  Maybe&#8230;again, it depends on one&#8217;s point of view, I suppose.  Could this cutthroat behavior from all parties involved be guilty of lowering the &#8220;fun&#8221; level for the sake of winning?  Possibly.  We all know winning is fun, and is the object of the game.  However, a good match or a good game can be fun&#8230;even in defeat.  </p>
<p>Scorpio also wonders if his own win-at-any-cost doctrine (often marked by nefarious explosives in opportune areas or ambushing unaware adversaries from a dark corner) is a relic of a bygone era, and was inappropriately utilized when tactics lately had to be reforged from something that generally brought gross losses into cutthroat tactics that put points on the board at the expense of slowing the action down and possibly diluting the fun factor.</p>
<p>Winning is nice, but at what cost?  Will Guild tactics eventually devolve into two combatants facing each other at gunpoint with a brick wall between them, each waiting for the other to make a move?</p>
<p>Perhaps two sets of &#8216;rules&#8217; should be established:  the &#8216;fun&#8217; rule set that is more akin to the old days where there was more running and gunning and less hiding, waiting, and watching and results in a lot more gun play and dead bodies littering the field; and a second &#8216;tactical&#8217; rule set that is generally slower-paced and utilizes all resources and tactics available?  I don&#8217;t know.</p>
<p>Maybe we&#8217;ve been spoiled by new possibilities, or they didn&#8217;t fit as well into old playstyles as we previously thought might.  Or perhaps we&#8217;re just seeing chinks in the Crysis armor we didn&#8217;t notice before, or hadn&#8217;t been noteworthy before.  I don&#8217;t know; I don&#8217;t have the answers.  </p>
<p>*shrugs*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I hate people by 2Cold Scorpio</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1308&#038;cpage=1#comment-5978</link>
		<dc:creator>2Cold Scorpio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:29:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1308#comment-5978</guid>
		<description>+1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>+1</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! by 2Cold Scorpio</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045&#038;cpage=1#comment-5977</link>
		<dc:creator>2Cold Scorpio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045#comment-5977</guid>
		<description>As was my tongue-in-cheek reply.   I guess I need to start adding in sarcasm tags for the folk like you, friend.  ;-)

Besides, you&#039;re a year late...  &gt;.&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As was my tongue-in-cheek reply.   I guess I need to start adding in sarcasm tags for the folk like you, friend.  <img src='http://www.guildcom.us/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Besides, you&#8217;re a year late&#8230;  >.></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Windows 7 For the People! by Bishop</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1290&#038;cpage=1#comment-5975</link>
		<dc:creator>Bishop</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1290#comment-5975</guid>
		<description>I can see your point, of course, Peter. Catch for guys like me is that the basic requirements for an OS like 7 are trivial next to requirements for other software that is already desirable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see your point, of course, Peter. Catch for guys like me is that the basic requirements for an OS like 7 are trivial next to requirements for other software that is already desirable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! by Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045&#038;cpage=1#comment-5966</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:36:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045#comment-5966</guid>
		<description>Maybe if you try real hard, you can figure it out, like the rest of us did way back in the &#039;60s.
It&#039;s not german, it&#039;s humor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe if you try real hard, you can figure it out, like the rest of us did way back in the &#8217;60s.<br />
It&#8217;s not german, it&#8217;s humor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! by Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045&#038;cpage=1#comment-5965</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1045#comment-5965</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-4368&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@2Cold Scorpio &lt;/a&gt; 
Oh brother - not too bright, are we?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="#comment-4368" rel="nofollow">@2Cold Scorpio </a><br />
Oh brother &#8211; not too bright, are we?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad choices by 2Cold Scorpio</title>
		<link>http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1307&#038;cpage=1#comment-5727</link>
		<dc:creator>2Cold Scorpio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.guildcom.us/?p=1307#comment-5727</guid>
		<description>At the most, I won&#039;t get it until the price has been greatly reduced, and that&#039;s only if it looks like the single-player campaign is worth the money.  I don&#039;t have much interest in the multi-player part of it (and even less now that dedicated servers and mod support, two things that make PC gaming great in the first place, have been taken away).  Sorry IW, but your greedy and idiotic publisher screwed things up for you with their asinine pricing.  You didn&#039;t help yourselves by removing features we PC gamers expect (and had with your previous game).  No thanks.  *If* I get your new game, it won&#039;t be until it has been massively reduced in price...a price that reflects the value of the product.

There&#039;s other games coming out that look to be a better use of my money.  The aforementioned Dragon Age: Origins for one.  Mass Effect 2, Bioshock 2, and Left 4 Dead 2 oughta fill up my year&#039;s quota of sequels.  The new Alien versus Predator might shape up to be a pleasant surprise too, as well as the recently released Borderlands.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the most, I won&#8217;t get it until the price has been greatly reduced, and that&#8217;s only if it looks like the single-player campaign is worth the money.  I don&#8217;t have much interest in the multi-player part of it (and even less now that dedicated servers and mod support, two things that make PC gaming great in the first place, have been taken away).  Sorry IW, but your greedy and idiotic publisher screwed things up for you with their asinine pricing.  You didn&#8217;t help yourselves by removing features we PC gamers expect (and had with your previous game).  No thanks.  *If* I get your new game, it won&#8217;t be until it has been massively reduced in price&#8230;a price that reflects the value of the product.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s other games coming out that look to be a better use of my money.  The aforementioned Dragon Age: Origins for one.  Mass Effect 2, Bioshock 2, and Left 4 Dead 2 oughta fill up my year&#8217;s quota of sequels.  The new Alien versus Predator might shape up to be a pleasant surprise too, as well as the recently released Borderlands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
