Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: female
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:6/08/2011
Last Login:10/04/2013
Content Thumbs: 352 total,  530 ,  178
Comment Thumbs: 2251 total,  3391 ,  1140
Content Level Progress: 20% (2/10)
Level 35 Content: Peasant → Level 36 Content: Peasant
Comment Level Progress: 50% (50/100)
Level 222 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 223 Comments: Mind Blower
Content Views:14473
Times Content Favorited:5 times
Total Comments Made:957
FJ Points:2719
I do comments and stuff.

latest user's comments

#17 - **** that. My children will have proper childhoods. I will not…  [+] (20 replies) 02/14/2013 on Babies and gentlemen +129
#222 - anon (02/14/2013) [-]
this has been said by probably all parents in the world
words are one thing, but doing it properly outside of the internet is the other thing
#214 - anon (02/14/2013) [-]
Keep dreaming bro, I thought almost the same, never happen. I ended up playing LOL with my son(7 y old) every evening and he's already through his 2nd tablet.
Sorry to ruin your dream, but these are the days we're living in.
User avatar
#213 - boydaranga (02/14/2013) [-]
Wot about single player non online computer games. like games like the old harry potter games, dungeon siege, pokemon, mario, charlie the duck, worms (I grew up with all of these, except pokemon and mario, i just think it's cruel not to let them play those at least, i was never interested myself but it seems alot of people grew up with it.)
#188 - virtigo (02/14/2013) [-]
No videogames, even?
User avatar
#110 - cshp (02/14/2013) [-]
No video games until they are 12? That seems kind of ridiculous.
User avatar
#67 - jinjo (02/14/2013) [-]
Kinda closed minded. I like your ideas, but the ;that's how I grew up' mentality is never good.
User avatar
#72 - lunacy (02/14/2013) [-]
I disagree. I think it'd be close minded to just go with the flow and do what every parent is gonna do and just give their kids unnecessary electronics. And like I've been saying all over this thread. Its only while they are children (which pretty much means 12 and under) and it's not like I'm gonna keep them from all things technological. I just plan on minimizing their interaction with technology for the early years of their life so they have a chance to be children and use their imagination. And the reason why I say "the way I grew up" is because my best memories are from playing outside with my siblings and friends, not watching TV or playing video games in the living room, which I did too.
User avatar
#80 - jinjo (02/14/2013) [-]
Okay, fair enough. I obviously will not be spoiling my kids.. but I really liked video games growing up, as well as sports music and everything else. I don't think video games are too bad in moderation,
User avatar
#41 - ovehnine (02/14/2013) [-]
Don't take this the wrong way, but wouldn't that be limiting the amount of things they get to play with and enjoy? I'm not really trying to get you to have "gamer" kids. I just wanna know what you think is wrong with them growing up differently than you.
User avatar
#46 - lunacy (02/14/2013) [-]
Not really, I mean its only for a few years. They'd start playing games at what? 6? 8?I'm just trying to hold off until they are around 12.
I wouldn't have a problem with them playing games at a young age, if it wasn't something that they'd get hooked on and spend all their time doing.The problem with how advanced video games are now-a-days, they aren't something you pick up casually, once you start playing, it's kind of something you do almost every day. I just don't want to deal with fighting my kids to get them to go play outside because they wanna sit on their butts and game. Once they get to be teenagers, they can sit on their butts and game all they like, what else do they have to do?
User avatar
#53 - ovehnine (02/14/2013) [-]
I get it. Thanks for answering instead of thumbing down.
User avatar
#56 - lunacy (02/14/2013) [-]
No problem buddy. I posted this well knowing not everyone has the same opinion. It'd be real shitty of me to just thumb everyone down that disagreed with me.
#37 - meistarijoi (02/14/2013) [-]
"But daaaaaad Chris and Steve have iPads!"
User avatar
#38 - lunacy (02/14/2013) [-]
"Shut the fuck up (insert child's name here), and go outside. You can have one when you're older."
#177 - anonyrnoose (02/14/2013) [-]
Your kids are going to hate you. Maybe not when they're 20 or so, but at that age they are going to hate you.
#178 - anonyrnoose (02/14/2013) [-]
Sorry, by "at that age" I meant like 10-12 years old.
User avatar
#129 - rockamekishiko (02/14/2013) [-]
bit harsh for kids...
User avatar
#130 - lunacy (02/14/2013) [-]
Not my kids.
#29 - kirokan (02/14/2013) [-]
#27 - flamerun (02/14/2013) [-]
have my babies
#36 - Picture  [+] (1 reply) 02/13/2013 on How to be a spy +12
#41 - imnotawesome (02/14/2013) [-]
#34 - Which fallout is best fallout and why?  [+] (13 replies) 02/12/2013 on Evolution According to Fallout +2
#84 - themarineelite has deleted their comment.
User avatar
#76 - thamuz (02/13/2013) [-]
Once I started looking at the story,Fallout 3s was a turd. So many plotholes..New Vegas was uch better in terms of the story,most of the way. There needed to be a lot more expansion on some characters(Like Ulysses and Joshua Graham and some of the companions) There was so much room. But the Devs I feel rushed new Vegas to beat the baby of Skyrim.

BOth are amazingly good games(even more so on PC with mods) but they have their highs and lows. Enviroment? Fallout 3 wins by a huge margin. Gameplay? new Vegas. DLCs? A bit of both. I loved the Sierra Madre and Old World Blues.

I honestly hope that they learned and make Fallout 4 the best of both. Strong gameplay and a strong storyline. Something easily done if Obisidan sticks to storyline and Bethseda sticks to the codework.
User avatar
#72 - fizzor (02/12/2013) [-]
I've only played 3 and New Vegas. Story-wise, I'd pick 3. I liked it because it was simple, and yet it managed to keep you going as you ventured forth on your quest on finding your father, and ultimately, deciding the fate of Capital Wasteland. However, New Vegas had better weapons in large quantities, more perks and traits to choose from, more levels the more DLC's you have, with the possibility of having a max level cap of 50, while in F3 the max level cap was only 30, and the ability to choose from either siding with House, the NCR, Caesar's Legion, or with none of the aforementioned, and just dominating everything by yourself gave you more choices and more possible endings. It's hard to pick between the two, to be honest.
User avatar
#74 - fizzor (02/12/2013) [-]
Oh, and New Vegas has some pretty fucking good DLC's. Old World Blues is my favorite, with Honest Hearts being the least favorite.
User avatar
#54 - mustlol (02/12/2013) [-]
3 because i loved every single moment of the game and new vegas was kinda too easy and i never felt for any of the characters
#50 - scorpioman (02/12/2013) [-]
2 because it had the best dialogue and the most memorable characters.
User avatar
#43 - unoletmehavename (02/12/2013) [-]
I only played third and new vegas and i liked the third one becauce the map was i think bigger but new vegas had better guns
User avatar
#45 - deviousdanish (02/12/2013) [-]
New Vegas' map was much bigger than 3's.
User avatar
#81 - bigmitchninetyfive (02/15/2013) [-]
the invisible walls changed that
User avatar
#78 - unoletmehavename (02/13/2013) [-]
It didn't feel big to me :/ had more locations yes but i think one part of the map was cout out by the mountains and other by big ass cazadors
User avatar
#36 - rbpwn (02/12/2013) [-]
New Vegas

Because it shows you the product of your actions in 1 and 2, and actually has conflict
User avatar
#42 - deviousdanish (02/12/2013) [-]
Honestly, I wish I could say I liked New Vegas more than I did. But, I honestly didn't find at as good as 1 or 2. Or even 3. Now, of the numbered part of the series, I like 3 the most. But, 1 and 2 aren't far behind.
User avatar
#62 - ddemiddon (02/12/2013) [-]
I really enjoy New Vegas the most, dark, gritty, and I played it first. But I like all of them so much it's hard to decide