Thread:Stryzzar/@comment-1037137-20141228235252/@comment-24152851-20150104045138

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love development. It's one of the main things I look out for in a character. My two favorite characters are known to have some of the most phenomenal development in the series. It's just with Gwen they never seem to be able to get it right. If they are to give her development, it needs to be someone who is capable of handling her. The recent writing style seems to have difficulty differentiating development from derailment.

I'm still curious what would happen if someone just said "You know, Silent B, Beverley. That big fellow from Revenge of the Island who was a genius inventor, and best friends with Dawn."

I think the only reason why Scottney had some fans is: 1. people liked derailed TDAS Scott, and 2. it kept the love triangle apart (sort of). I know the latter reason was why I tolerated it at first, because Courtney would finally stop obsessing over getting revenge on Duncan. But yeah, I agree it's the most nonsensical canon pairing ever. Maybe they thought since villain couple Aleheather was so successful, they'd try it again with two other antagonists. Well that sure worked out well.

They haven't aired anything since the original Avatar series, which was like 7 years ago. I think no channels have bought the rights to air it. You can only get it on pay TV, which I don't have. If only this show could get the same quality writing as Avatar.

Totally agree. It was so stupid how everything revolved around them for two seasons straight. Just can't get over how every character had to get ploughed through to clear a path for them to the finale. On tvtropes section for "Fan Nickname" apparently TDAS had been given the nickname "The Mal and Zoey Show".

It was one of those games which had big promotions and made to look great, but didn't quite deliver. One of the reasons it didn't turn out well was the bar was raised too high. The game reviewers I watch are not one of those big names who are paid to make the game look good, so they're fairly honest with how a game is. Anyway, the game was too repetitive, the graphics weren't impressive, and the plots weren't engaging until very late to the end. Also the dog thing that was used to market the game didn't play that huge a role.

Okay, I'll take your word for it. I suspected there mightve be some bias in it's bashing. Though I have heard COD 2 is generally accepted as the best one. I'll have a look at MW3, never had a chance to judge that one.

Yeah, that's one of the complaints I've heard, which was one of the major flaws with COD Ghosts. To little variety, and the game holds your hand too often.

Personally I would've thought it was like your standard shooter, but just seen a bad stigma around it. I'll have to look more deeply into the series to get a better picture though.