Evening Reading: Dragon Fade

I started Dragon Age a couple weeks back and immediately got really into it (PC for those wondering and I highly recommend this route). This past weekend I got to a section named the fade and boy did they hit the nail on the head calling it that. My obsessive night-in and night-out roll playing the game came to a halt and while I'll get past this section it will be by force of will.

It so happened that over the weekend I also saw The Men Who Stare at Goats. Now this show's worst problem was that it wandered off aimlessly into the desert but the way the final cut wound up didn't do it any favors either. Wondering about what was left on the cutting room floor and whether it could have come together any better led to me thinking about how the whole movie post-production process could be examined to improve video games.

Okay, so clearly film is a whole other sort of media. It's one thing to shoot a number of different angles and takes for a scene but quite another to do something similar in a game. That doesn't mean the concept doesn't work; it just needs to be adjusted to the game production cycle. In the case of Dragon Age: Origins somewhere before the time got invested in creating all the Fade area someone needed to storyboard it or play it in a prototype or something and say, wait, this really disrupts the flow. Then they could have come back at and figured out how to get across the cool mystical parallel world element of the Fade as it relates to the game world without breaking the pacing of the overall experience.

Here's the best stories that helped us hit our stride today:

I knew he was popular but I wouldn't have guessed that Eminem takes the title of best-selling artist of the decade.

How did CBS come to the conclusion that perverting Frosty was a good way to promote Christmas classics and their shows in one?

From The Chatty
  • reply
    December 9, 2009 5:14 PM

    [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:15 PM

      i'm waiting till he devolves into talking about stuff that sucks

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:15 PM

      This early chatty stuff is awesome.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:16 PM

      I like the fact that his posts are lengthy. I mean you really only have to read it once then you're going straight to the chatty

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:16 PM

      commas are for pussies

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:16 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:16 PM

      Garnettin'

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 5:19 PM

        Mansmells likes this.

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 5:28 PM

          hey I think I played against you in MW2 recently, Mosh Pit playlist? I was [EMU]Dudeman (with a bunch of other equally colorful friends) and I felt bad because I was using my retarded One Man Army Noob Tube kit and blasted someone with your name, and felt a pang of remorse for potentially killing a fellow shacker in such a disgraceful way :(

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 5:40 PM

            Don't feel bad, I use the thumper all the time. I deserve all the toobing I get.

            • reply
              December 9, 2009 5:42 PM

              Also yes it probably was me. I play mosh pit most of the time.

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 5:36 PM

        [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:17 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:20 PM

      Makes me grateful for twitters character limit.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:22 PM

      What exactly would you like him to talk about?

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:29 PM

      like sponge doesn't !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:31 PM

      as opposed to the comments however, which are always topical, interesting, and relevant to current times

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 5:34 PM

        That's why they're Comments, and not Front Page News. I don't mind Garnett Lee's posts -- just sayin'.

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 5:35 PM

          Garnett's posts are not front page news either.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:34 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:41 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 5:42 PM

      It's amazing that people are so hostile to him. Is it because he often writes about games' (perceived) faults? Because he puts opinions in a personal and vivid context? He's definitely the most expressive writer to do these posts in a long time, but I guess people want squids and funny links instead.

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 6:00 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 6:03 PM

          Not at all. There are an endless number of them queued up at the station. :)

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 6:11 PM

            [deleted]

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 6:23 PM

            I just wish the station was Swiss so it would be punctual :(

            • reply
              December 9, 2009 6:25 PM

              It was this time! It's fantastic.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:27 PM

                7:13 is not punctual, it's too early. I was stuck in the last chatty for 45 minutes >:( Last night was 8:45. This rape train ain't got no brakes.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 6:30 PM

                  I've taken to clicking the chat thread button instead of mashing refresh long ago to avoid such embarrassment.

            • reply
              December 9, 2009 6:34 PM

              [deleted]

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:41 PM

                [deleted]

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:42 PM

                How do you feel about regularly participating in such a parasitic and poorly designed system?

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 6:47 PM

                  [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 6:55 PM

                    I was just curious, I liked the post :(

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:02 PM

                      [deleted]

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 7:07 PM

                        I think he meant as a commenter/user, rather than progenitor - which is an interesting question. You obviously don't hate it enough to not post here and read the comments.

                        • reply
                          December 9, 2009 7:11 PM

                          There was a bit of this, but I think the answer to that is more obvious, since Shacknews is a pretty solid group of folks as far as internet communities go.

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 7:09 PM

                        I've never had to contend with site design, so the width changes and such never even occurred to me. Interesting nonetheless, now that you've pointed it out. Still, considering how deeply rooted the problems of running a community with this comments system appear to be, I'm interested to see what your solution is.

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 10:27 PM

                        There is yakety sax going on all over the site

                        i couldn't help but laugh at this

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:19 PM

                    ahaha

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:45 PM

                I've been reading Shack comments for longer than I care to admit, and this was fascinating.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:57 PM

                ... and what would the differences be?

                It's a pretty clear problem, with a bunch of possible solutions, none of which seems particularly great.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 6:59 PM

                even if it is a stupid system with a stupid reason for existing, i kinda like it, each chatty is a little different from the last and it's interesting to see how they go, but i also don't have to support any of it

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:02 PM

                Love to hear your thoughts if you're up for sharing.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 7:18 PM

                  [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:21 PM

                    pay haiku to do this right now please

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:24 PM

                    I like this idea. I really only check out news stories when I haven't banned anyone in awhile. They get out of hand after they sit for awhile and we forget about them.

                    What about people who are just popping in all "HAY! I like Mario Brothers! Let me mention that to people! OH GOD WHY IS THIS GUY POSTING PICTURES OF HIS BALLS????" Do you think this would draw more lurkers/casual posters in or run them off? I think it would definitely bring the heavy posters to the news stories.

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:29 PM

                      The comments already run people off like that; I can't see how his solution would be any worse.

                      Also, imagine that the "article comments" are links to a specific thread, just like clicking the "Permalink" icon on the left side of any thread. That way the casual commenters wouldn't see the rest of the threads unless they specifically wanted to.

                    • reply
                      December 10, 2009 12:14 AM

                      no no no! just make the front page article an OP in latestchatty.x and all the comments to that article a subthread.

                      So latestchatty sees all the frontpage article bumps in latestchatty, but if some dummy brings political/nws/stupid into that thread they are automatically filtered from the frontpage article and/or nuked

                      • reply
                        December 10, 2009 12:16 AM

                        and when we reply to an article OP, it should show up in the front page comments.

                        it would probably task the mods for a minute while they proved they won't take latestchatty random comment in a front page OP, but it could be pretty damn cool.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:29 PM

                    This sounds pretty slick. For clarity's sake, you mean clicking on the "comment" button for a news story would link you to only that news story's thread? I know I'm not alone in thinking that the current format of latest chatty shields us from some of the more frighteningly stupid internet denizens (see: latestchatty app and hoverboards), though isolated linking of story chatties from the front page would protect against most of that.

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:30 PM

                      Stupid internet denizens would also be more actively moderated by virtue of their presence in the "main forum".

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:30 PM

                      Though I guess J4NUS makes a good point in respect to this.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:36 PM

                    I am behind this idea.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:38 PM

                    [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:39 PM

                    In case it wasn't clear, I think this is a great improvement.

                    It's certainly not guaranteed to solve either of the "unsustainability" problems you identified downthread, but it's a move in the right direction. It certainly prevents Gamefly from deciding to "just stop posting those chatty threads" in the future.

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:42 PM

                      certainly, certainly

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 7:44 PM

                      Which is much more concerning now that our benefactors are beginning to encroach good ol' Shacknews. I too hope this gets implemented.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:39 PM

                    [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:41 PM

                    make it so.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:44 PM

                    Awesome idea.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:44 PM

                    Agree with this.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:44 PM

                    This is a really good idea

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:56 PM

                    I like this. Is there an internet petition I can sign to further your cause?

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 8:11 PM

                    [deleted]

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 8:16 PM

                      I think most of us understand the danger of opening the floodgates, but this solution deals nicely with the possibility that Gamefly'll shut the chatties down. To them we are just excessive bandwidth, after all.

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 8:21 PM

                        More than excess bandwidth: porn, gross-out websites, fukung, every kind of imaginable obscenity.

                        • reply
                          December 9, 2009 8:23 PM

                          All that is good in life :D

                          • reply
                            December 9, 2009 9:08 PM

                            To crush your enemies, see them driven before you... and to hear the lamentation of their women!

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 8:28 PM

                        [deleted]

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 8:19 PM

                      For me, this has nothing to do with Garnett's writing. I like his writing. He's experimenting, trying to find a style that works for him and the audience, and it's noticeably different every week.

                      Haiku's idea is good for all the reasons he articulated, none of which are "getting rid of chatty posts". That's part of the solution, but not the reason for it.

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 8:41 PM

                      I would prefer it because I think it would lead to more discussion of games. The Steam week of sales thing was great because there were so many gaming conversations

                    • reply
                      December 10, 2009 10:21 AM

                      you didn't understand what haiku meant when he said that the comments link for a story would only go to that story's thread

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 8:34 PM

                    another vote for do this please

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 8:53 PM

                    Yes, do this, it would be very beneficial to the site and community as a whole.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 8:57 PM

                    this is an excellent idea, and everyone would hate it.

                    • reply
                      December 9, 2009 9:00 PM

                      I suspect that the "ECO GameFly has destroyed the chatty!" posts would be inevitable.

                      • reply
                        December 9, 2009 9:03 PM

                        it's useless these days. any minute change is anathema to the hardcore chatty addicts. people went from barely paying attention to the ER and MD posts to first criticizing alice for her esoteric existential ramblings to bashing garnett for his "weird style". you can't win. so, good ideas need to just be implemented without regard to the community. they will adjust after many sessions of whinging.

                        • reply
                          December 10, 2009 10:23 AM

                          whinging? are you british or something?

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 12:06 AM

                    [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 12:10 AM

                    To interlace the news thread with the chatty thread is fucking brilliant. So, in between us showing shaven balls and asking for tits - we are forced to see,. in latestchatty, the bumps of the actual news articles in chatty. FUCK - this is brilliant.

                    We comment from chatty, front page posters comment from front page - and all are collated / interlaced into the visible chatty thread and into the front page post.

                    Good lord this is actually genius, haiku. For once I have to agree - BEST AT SHACKNEWS.

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 12:29 AM

                    Wow, fantastic idea.

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 1:06 AM

                    Paging ECO!

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 1:11 AM

                    +INF make this happen!

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 1:52 AM

                    [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 2:15 AM

                    Where can I donate my Mercury subscription to to make this happen?

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 2:44 AM

                    haiku you brilliant bastard.

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 5:45 AM

                    Sounds pretty good to me. But what happens to comment threads related to a news item if the news item is posted like 15 minutes before midnight? Do they automatically carry over to a new chatty until they have been there for x hours or something?

                    • reply
                      December 10, 2009 6:57 AM

                      there'd be no need to - they will still have a home, the link will still work, there's nothing wrong with it being in a day old chatty

                  • reply
                    December 10, 2009 10:20 AM

                    I'm RikiTiki2 and I endorse this message

                  • reply
                    February 15, 2011 6:55 PM

                    And so it was.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:10 PM

                I don't disagree with anything here. It's almost like we should have a separate "latest chatty" dedicated page with only a single visible page. Once a thread slips off that front page, it's gone, but the comments search would still bring it up if you really had to dig it up.

                The only problem is how to deal with megathreads that won't die and the thresshold for number of posts on that first page.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:12 PM

                Start it up Clay Haiku.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:13 PM

                I agree. I would have no issue with the chat thread just sticking around as one big thread so that people could bump old topics instead of reposting.

                That said, what little I know about the system we have here from years of posting makes me think that even if not for the community's sake, that the chatties would load very slowly and be a huge problem, especially for conversations that start to get into the hundreds of replies.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 7:14 PM

                  This comment system wouldn't work without archiving threads in some way; I don't think that's what haiku was suggesting.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 7:16 PM

                  You can't have a continuous chatty for that very reason. A page with an allotted number of threads would alleviate this. Bumping back onto the page once it's been bumped off (through a comment search) might be problematic as everyone who does a parent author search continues (or tries to continue) to converse in that thread, making it more or less "sticky", which goes against the very nature of what the current shack chatties are all about. Bumping lost threads should be avoided in such a system. Bumping active threads would be a-ok though.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 8:10 PM

                  don't you see the obvious angst it would create when half the people bitch that "we've already had that thread in this month's chat zomg go find it and reply to it stop starting a new one" as if it was reasonable for someone to have to dig beyond 3-5 of the current pages to find a thread topic.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:19 PM

                unsustainable? How could you imagine it is unsustainable? I think you were looking for a different word there.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 7:35 PM

                Why isn't there a single chatty post per day? If a single chatty can take this community through the entire weekend, why do we need two per weekday?

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 7:41 PM

                  [deleted]

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2009 7:42 PM

                    But then we wouldn't have a "shit on Garnett" thread every night. Woe.

                • reply
                  December 9, 2009 7:46 PM

                  Because we tried that and it was awful. The Chatty must be flushed twice daily to avoid it turning into the monkey cage at the zoo. The weekends are slow enough to not need it so much, but when Maarten tried it, the Chatties sucked hard.

              • reply
                December 9, 2009 8:08 PM

                TLDR:: We/they can't monetize the chatties effectively due to how they are designed, but they eat up a significant amount of resources and time and workforce, so they're incredibly draining to Shacknews.

                Just in case you wanted a one-sentence summary.

              • reply
                December 10, 2009 12:04 AM

                [deleted]

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 11:05 PM

            you are a dickassholeshitmotherfucker !!!

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 6:16 PM

          haiku, is this the first time you've felt bad about hitting someone with the hate train?

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 6:44 PM

          All you can do is hate, haiku. You haven't been programmed for anything else.

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 6:41 PM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 7:16 PM

        I think that his posts read very dry when this has always been a very wet, squishy kind of joint. We will see who break first, the Shack's unrelenting badgering or his writing style.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:09 PM

      I like it

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:11 PM

      He has the opposite problem Maarten did when starting here...lol

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:11 PM

      Garnett's comments work better in podcast form.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:17 PM

      Don't care about his posts really, evening reading started sucking balls when they stopped posting links to entertaining random news stories. When was that? Years ago?

      Uhm. Garnett, you didn't make it through the fade? How far is that into the game? 10 hours?

      You just missed 40 more hours of excellent story and play. Good job!

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 6:36 PM

        Garnett is posting random links again; I like that

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 7:00 PM

        good job at totally failing to comprehend what he was saying. He hasn't given up on the game, he's just saying the Fade is a hard slog and has destroyed the pace of the game for him, which is a valid complaint, since it is quite an abrubt change. Yeah it gets (much) better, but he'll find that out himself and maybe we'll get a followup post. :)

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 7:03 PM

          Oh definitely. I can't wait to get out of the Fade and back (as I see it) on track with the game.

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 7:07 PM

            The Fade disrupted my first playthrough a little bit, and it totally derailed my second one. It took me a couple weeks to get through (the second time) because it was frightfully boring.

            • reply
              December 9, 2009 9:02 PM

              I haven't played the game, what is this "Fade" area and what does it entail that is so controversial?

            • reply
              December 10, 2009 12:20 AM

              I loved the Fade. I think I'm the only one.

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 7:22 PM

            The Fade really was awful. I had to plow through it one sitting out of sheer willpower, because I knew if I stopped while inside that god forsaken abortion I would most likely have zero desire to load the game back up.

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 7:36 PM

            I don't get why everyone hated the fade so much. It wasn't awesome, but I don't think it deserves the hate.

            I enjoyed being able to transform into a giant rock dude and hurl boulders at whatever. The only part I really could have done without were the rat bits. Those were just annoying. Plus it was kind of fun to run around solo for a little while. It gave me a chance to break out of the routine I had fallen into when fighting enemies (pause, send my character out to collect enemies, let party auto attack, use morrigan to kill, rinse, repeat).

            It wasn't my favorite part of the game by a long shot, but it certainly wasn't my least favorite.

          • reply
            December 9, 2009 8:00 PM

            The Fade killed my mother and raped my family.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:27 PM

      the ER youtube link to perverted frosty is private

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 6:43 PM

      If I was compensated as much as Garnett Lee I'd probably be talking about whatever.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 7:05 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 7:15 PM

      Mr Garnett makes awesome posts.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 7:19 PM

      I like how he sort of meanders around with what he's saying. Not really how someone would say something, but more of how they would think it.

      Of course, since I have less than 400 posts, my opinion doesn't really carry much weight around these parts.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 8:02 PM

      I don't get his hate for the Fade part of the game. While I agree it was a bit slow, certainly not my favorite part of the game, it only took a few hours to get through, and it was reasonably interesting at least. I liked having to "wake up" my party members. So it's a relatively slow portion of an otherwise A+ game, so what?

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 8:04 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 8:04 PM

      See this giant thread of angst about Garnett? And we've had them before. Yet a couple weeks ago, i made a small comment about how his "Weekend Sighted" (or whatever his Friday night ER posts were being called) was getting confused with the actual Weekend chatty, with people thinking it was just posted a few hours early, as demonstrated by all the people who were posting their threads there thinking would be in latest chatty all weekend, only to find out that wasn't the case a few hours later when the actual Weekend chatty got posted.

      It was a brief observation that maybe he should think of a better title for his post. But the response was a bunch of people jumping all over me saying ZOMG WTF YOU JUST DUNNO, BUT BUT THAT WEEKEND SIGHTED IS A REALLY IMPORTANT CATCHPHRASE OF GARNETTS THAT HE'S USED AT SOME OTHER WEBSITE THAT WE ALL KNOW ABOUT AND STUFF SO SO SO UR WRONG AND GARNETT IS SO AWESOME AND FYAD AND GTFO AND HURRRR.

      The Shack is so fickle and hypocritical. =|

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 8:16 PM

      The style Garnett is going for is tough to do, I think, but that he misspelled 'role' I think is telling. It is supposed to be role, right, and now roll, alluding to some RPG board game? Whatever, the "this made me think of this which made me think of this" can work and no doubt it could work well for this site and the chatty, but it does need to be looked over, read aloud, revised a bit.

      Ah, I don't have time to explain the changes -- 5-10 minute revision trying to keep the style -- I made but I hope they're self-explanatory. I don't dare assert it's flawless but I think it's a bit better--and, if anything, shows where I think his attempts to write in this style stumble a bit.

      I started Dragon Age a couple weeks back and immediately got really into it (PC for those wondering, and I'm happy with my choice). But boy did they hit the nail on the head calling the Fade the Fade. My obsessive night-in and night-out role playing came to a halt and I actually went to bed at a decent hour. If I bother finishing this section it will be because I know the game can't become this uninteresting and stay this uninteresting.

      The free time from Dragon Age I used to see The Men Who Stare at Goats. Now, the movie's worst problem is that the narrative wandered and the final cut of the film only made it more noticeable. But that made think about what the editors left on the cutting room floor and whether they could have cut the film better. You know, to somehow keep my interest from...fading.

      Despite the increasing similiarities -- games becoming more cinematic, movies becoming more game-like with CG -- film is a still a very different medium.. It's one thing to film many angles and takes for just one scene, leaving some on the cutting room floor, but it's quite another thing to do that when developing a game. That doesn't mean the Fade doesn't work; it just needs to be adapted to how people create games. With Dragon Age, perhaps they forgot to storyboard The Fade or, even, to play it and didn't realize how disruptive it is to the flow of the game. They could have come back and figured out what parts of this cool mystical parallel-world element of the Fade to keep and what parts might be better left on the floor.


      I hope I didn't make it more verbose :D That said, I love the game:movies parallel but I'm pretty sure games have storyboards and playtesters, so the comparison of editing doesn't work when you juts say ...someone needed to storyboard it.

      Just trying to be constructive.

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 8:16 PM

        *and not

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 8:55 PM

        I read that "roll" as in "being on a roll"

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 8:59 PM

          right or just read it as 'routine'

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 9:02 PM

          Which wouldn't make much more sense in a strict, proper grammar situation, but it does fit with Garnett's style of writing.

      • reply
        December 10, 2009 12:36 PM

        Well, role/role=ignore everything I say.

        Later.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 8:24 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 9:53 PM

      was he in the civil war?

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 10:49 PM

      Everyone's an English major now!

      • reply
        December 9, 2009 11:29 PM

        Just remember, english majors don't make any money!

        • reply
          December 9, 2009 11:49 PM

          One of my best friends got his BA in English and has been jobless for a year now.

        • reply
          December 10, 2009 12:50 AM

          so 10% of the American population are english majors?

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 11:04 PM

      haiku.

      just asking for it.

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 11:52 PM

      moshman. not giving a fuck

    • reply
      December 9, 2009 11:58 PM

      I'm a fan of his writing so far. It's a bit unorthodox compared to what we're used to around here, but it's lively and entertaining. I approve!

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 12:00 AM

      haiku, don't worry. I understood and I am important

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 1:26 AM

      I feel bad for the shit Garnett gets here, I was a fan of a lot of the 1up podcasts and I always liked that he just said what came to mind and how he never really held anything back.

      • reply
        December 10, 2009 4:26 AM

        I'm with you, I enjoyed his podcast at 1up and honestly I guess I don't pay attention to the front page enough to be horribly offended by his entries.

        The grammar police stuff is typical internet, so that's expected but I think certain shackers have a mancrush on Chris Remo and pretty much can't tolerate any deviation from that.

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 1:55 AM

      FUCK YEAH, GARNETT LEE FANCLUB RIGHT HERE BABY. I WANT TO HAVE YOUR BABIES! WILL YOU SIGN MY CHEST?!?!?!

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 1:57 AM

      god damn who cares hes doing fine

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 4:44 AM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 4:49 AM

      I dare you to do better, enlist in Starf Leet

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 6:35 AM

      personally think he's doing great, putting way more effort in to ER than anyone else around here has in a long time.

    • reply
      December 10, 2009 8:20 AM

      I wonder if the same scrutiny will be extended to all shack staff

Hello, Meet Lola