[QUOTE="pav50"]

[QUOTE="shawn7324"] Your telling me you have a hard time sliding up & peering out of cover to see the next good hiding spot, can't say I ever had that problem.shawn7324

No, it's not a major flaw and doesn't cause much problems but it shouldn't be a factor at all when they already had a good system with the meter. You really shouldnt have to move out of the cover of darkness just to see where the next spot where you should be going is, especially when you want to slip past guards on a patrol pattern and there is little room for error. I think they just wanted to add a cool new feature ( to match the new game style)but didn't think of how it could be impractical.

If it doesn't make a difference to you then fair enough, i just think it's an unecessary feature that hinders the game rather than being useful and would of preferred the old style, i guess it comes down to how different people play the game in different ways and personal preference.

[QUOTE="pav50"]

I agree, the main flaw being that while the screen goes black and white it is impossible to see the lighting in the rest of the room as to determine the next dark spot to hide in- you have to just get to the next piece of cover hoping its dark enough to remain hidden. I would of much preferred the old meter system but this is one of the only flaws i see in the game.

shawn7324

No, it's not a major flaw and doesn't cause much problems but it shouldn't be a factor at all when they already had a good system with the meter. You really shouldnt have to move out of the cover of darkness just to see where the next spot where you should be going is, especially when you want to slip past guards on a patrol pattern and there is little room for error. I think they just wanted to add a cool new feature ( to match the new game style)but didn't think of how it could be impractical.

I agree, the main flaw being that while the screen goes black and white it is impossible to see the lighting in the rest of the room as to determine the next dark spot to hide in- you have to just get to the next piece of cover hoping its dark enough to remain hidden. I would of much preferred the old meter system but this is one of the only flaws i see in the game.

I learned that when a developer makes a multiplayer with flaws, people will forever hate it like it killed their first born child, instead of moving on to a multiplayer they like and letting it go :P. I also learned that games not designed to be realistic shooters are unrealistic :o.

Its far from being a console graphics king, but to say it looks like a ps2/xbox game is plain wrong. Believe it or not, some developers prefer to concentrate their time on more than just graphics.

I would of liked to be unschooled, mainly because i know i would of abused the system and played video games all day- of course it just goes to show that sometimes its a good thing that you don't get everything you want, something that these children might not understand when they go out into the real world for themselves. As many posters have stated, the main problem they will encounter is a lack of qualifications and therefore a lack of career opportunities.

[QUOTE="MushroomWig"][QUOTE="gamedude2020"] instead of 5 years down the line when they may have a nuke and may have started a military build up.gamedude2020

It depends whether Iran is willing to follow the rules of a nuclear nation, but I doubt the UN would stand for them having ICBM's. If everyone just started developing these weapons, the world would turn upside down. Their has to be a delicate balance of power, for peace to work.

True, but who gets to decide that balance of power - the western countries? ( UK, America), that is exactly why people in these countries resent us. It should be upto the UN and when they say no war, there should be no war.

Someone should bomb the hell out of them. I hope the US can pressure someone else into doing it because we can't handle another decade of war. wstfld

What is up with the people who make comments like this? - bombing a country only serves to kill civilians, the military have underground shelter. It is exactly why when invading Iraq and Afghanistan, our military forces used air support primarily on military instillation's and rarely on targets in major cities. Of course this means we need troops on the ground leading to inevitable casualties but isnt it every military's moral obligation to save civilian lives, not to bomb them in hopes of randomly hitting a HVT ( this is what makes us better than them!!!).

Lol, i'm enjoying all the mad paranoia in this thread- countries like north korea already have nukes and they haven't destroyed the world (yet) so why would it be a problem if Iran had one- there is already technology to shoot down long range missiles in-case this becomes a possibility however are Iran stupid enough to send one nuke that is shot down when everyone knows that the US and Russia have horded hundreds of nukes.

I just don't see the need to invade just because the possibilty that they have nearly created a nuke (how likely is it that they actually use it), they're gonna make one eventually- we should probably just give them one to stop their whining:P. Let them make their nuke- maybe if they feel they are on equal footing, diplomatic relations will improve.As for the comment about the Israeli military being one of the most restrained, you should probably try telling that to the hundreds of civilians that were indiscriminately bombed in Lebanon in an attempt to destroy terrorist HQ's ( which were probably unscratched underground).

[QUOTE="pav50"]

[QUOTE="deangallop"] Not my rottwieler he passed away about a year ago, looks very close tho. deangallop

Sorry to hear that- i was just curious because i just got as puppy rottweiler a few months ago, she's hard work but a really good guard dog already. Ever think about getting another one?

Ok, now i'm feeling abit bad for bringing it up, thanks for telling me though:).