Fierce_LiNk

Why not post in the drunken thread continuously. You can make the post male with or without male nè. At home you can make the post with your fingers with thinking to make interesting others. (hold the male nè with the kiel and eat the bread (breadbread))

Yeah, he knew the defence wasn't good enough and I'm not going to heap all of the blame entirely on him, just like I don't think the failings under Van Gaal were entirely his fault either. It's a combination of problems. Woodward is at fault, as are other sectors of the higher management. There has to be a reason or reasons why all of the players we seem to be bringing in aren't working out. I'm sure if we were to break down the signing post-Fergie, we would start to see some kind of pattern. Maybe the player we are targeting are not all the right players. Maybe the coaching methods aren't working. Maybe the "template" for how to run the club (not the business, the club) isn't the right one. Maybe it's the tactics that we're using. Maybe it's the man management. Maybe it's all of the above, or at least parts of it in various quantities. If the manager has a list of targets and the club don't bring in those targets, then what happens? I actually agree with Mourinho in this instance. We needed centrebacks...but we also needed a right back and a right winger. Also, we needed to move on players. United are becoming notoriously bad for buying players and for letting them stay at the club for too long. Jones is NEVER going to cut it, so why is he still here taking up a spot that could be going to someone who could improve us? It must be a dream to sign for us nowadays because we give out obscene wages and the players are being allowed to underperform. I've heard about that conference but I can't be arsed watching it. I know it's a part of what makes Jose the way he is, but I'd rather we just got on with it and doubled-down in training. Sometimes this just creates more ammo for the media to throw at the club later on. Why bother? I know what you mean. I watched the first half and thought that, yes, it was an improvement. But, it still wasn't really THAT great. There were a few odd moments, but we still didn't create enough and didn't take our chances. On the one hand, Mourinho has brought some success back to the club. The club has won the Europa League, the League Cup and has been in an FA Cup Final. Second in the league is also our highest finish post-Fergie. So, nobody can deny that these are good achievements. It's the style of football that is in question, particularly at points last season. For the players who he has at his disposal, the football just wasn't that great to watch. It's just not consistent. Part of this is down to the decision making of the players, but Mourinho has to take some of the flack for this as a motivator and manager. There are so many players that are underperforming. I find it a bit daft in a sense that millionaire footballers need motivating to do their job, but we are where we are. They need a kick up the arse. Now, the issue is what do you do if players aren't performing? You drop them, but then you've got a millionaire footballer taking their wages and are not playing. Maybe it's a wider issue at the club and they should be better at moving on these players elsewhere. Take Martial for instance. Is this the fault of the player for not performing better, is it the fault of the manager for not using him to his best ability, or is it the fault of the chairman for not selling him on? From a fan's perspective, I guess every football fan wants the same thing. They want 11 players who are committed to a cause, a team that play exciting football and a manager who makes the right changes and calls at the right time. The easiest solution is for Mourinho to turn it around. The easiest solution for the players is to work with the manager. If we change the manager again, we have to hit the restart button and it's another rebuilding process. I want Mourinho to be a success at the club and the barometer for that is how they compete in the league.

Well, we played terribly against Brighton last week and, although we won our first game against Leicester, that performance wasn't particularly great either. I wasn't very confident going into this game and half-joking said to @Eenuh that I thought we'd lose 3-0. I say half joking, but I never once thought we'd win today. The team sheet was hilarious. The RedCafe caught wind of the lineup about an hour and a bit before kick-off and they were scratching their heads trying to figure out who would be playing where. Then, when it came out that we were playing 3 at the back, you could see that the confidence was disappearing out of the fans. Smalling and Jones brought back in and starting, the trio of Bailly, Mata and Martial not even making the bench, and McTominay making the bench before all three of them. It's fair to say that many weren't happy with that. It was well documented during the Summer that Mourinho wanted another centreback but didn't get one. Who knows what the true story is behind that one. I think Woodward didn't want to give him more money and that Mourinho would have to be content with the current squad. So, is that the higher-ups being tight with money or is that a lack of faith in the manager? First half wasn't too bad, although Spurs got better towards the end of it. Lukaku absolutely should have scored with THAT chance and the same thing pretty much has happened in all three games now. He's come back from the World Cup rusty. In any other squad, there would be another striker coming in to replace him or he'd at least be challenged for the starting spot. We have Rashford, Martial and Sanchez who just aren't doing it. Something is just not right there. I said at half-time with the score at 0-0 that we would still lose 3-0 and that Spurs would just trample us in that second half. Second half performance was abysmal. We had maybe one or two chances that looked decent, but we never recovered once that second goal went in. Once the second went in, that was it, tbh. The players aren't mentally strong enough to keep going, the substitutes did nothing, the shape was wrong (too many times Lukaku was deep and too many times Fellaini was the player picking the ball up on the right wing...correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't he be in the box on the receiving end of those crosses? Not supplying them. There was a distinct lack of leadership on the pitch. Pogba talked last week about his performances not being good enough, but he didn't improve this week. I thought our obvious best player was Luke Shaw, who did everything that could have been asked of him. Lingard comes close to him, too. I think that's that, tbh. There are far too many under-performing players and the "plan" just isn't working. Martial, Rashford, Shaw, Bailly, Lindelöf, Sanchez, Pogba, Pereira, and quite a few others could all benefit from the type of management that somebody like Pochettino could bring, or someone of that ilk. We need coaching and tons of it. There were so many moments where basic mistakes were made. Lukaku not showing his composure when taking his chances, players showing a lack of discipline sticking to their positions, Pogba's passing (I imagine his percentage was low today...), Jones losing his marker too many times, Lindelöf not putting enough weight on his back-pass, etc. These are all mistakes that could be reduced through better coaching. What I saw in that second half were a group of players who didn't fully know what they were meant to be doing. We'll see what happens, but I'm bracing myself for the possibility of Mourinho going. Wouldn't surprise or shock me if he went tomorrow, and it wouldn't surprise if he goes at Christmas. I don't think this can be written off as a one-off bad performance, because there have been many factors which have led to this performance. The exiling of Martial from the squad, the general unhappiness for certain key players, the lack of quality defenders (we have conceded 8 goals in three games), the general lack of fluid and attacking football, the poor pre-season, the "plan" of how we're meant to approach games. He gambled today and it just backfired badly. I don't particularly want Mourinho to fail, but something has to change. Whether we change our structure at the club, or we work our arses off in training to fix our glaring issues, or whether we bring in a new manager.

We started off the same. The first few episodes are enjoyable and there's not really a lot there that has you rolling. But, what makes it appealing are the quirks of each of the characters and how that's maintained over the seasons. E.g. Boyle's...well, everything tbh! Terry's love for his daughters (and yogurt), those sort of things. There are little odd-liners here and there that are cleverly worked in and lots of call-backs throughout the series to earlier episodes. Something could happen in one episode and then that's referred back to later, I guess the equivalent would be like when you're part of a group of friends and have your own "in-jokes" within that circe, it's a bit like that. I like it because there's a good core of characters there that you get to know really well, and they're all very likeable in their own unique way.

Have you got a team in the N-E fantasy football? You should join, it's been fun so far.

We're clearing out @Eenuh's old room in Belgium and she has a stack of NGC and N64 magazines. Some of them are in Dutch. Man, I've had a flick through them and it's been very fun reminiscing about that little period of time where the N64 was coming to its end and the Cube was on the horizon. Seeing screenshots, impressions and news for Luigi's Mansion, Xtreme G3 (what a game, laaaads) and Star Wars Rogue Leader has been great. Also, the magazines have got some excellent previews for Kameo and apparently Perfect Dark 2 has just been announced. Can't wait to see what they're like on the GC!!

I never played Shenmue back in the day, but I used to see footage or screenshots of it and it looked absolutely fantastic at the time. I was excited to play it because it looked like it could be a contender for one of the best games ever made. When I get around to playing it, I am going to go into it with my 1999 goggles on. Technology has, unfortunately, moved on very quickly. I say unfortunately, because maybe this game doesn't look so great anymore. But, times change. I'm interesting to see what similarities there are in Shenmue 1 and 2 compared with what's out there today.

I felt that De Gea wasn't going to get me many points this season due to the defence in front of him letting him down, so I've switched him for Ederson, as I can't see City conceding that many goals. Then, Wolves score a goal against City through a handball, so that's just great. No clean sheets for me.

Just noticed that The Nonary Games are in the same for just over a tenner. Tempted...

I'll happily pose as the nude model on Page 3. Wait, wha-

Just watched Season 2 Episode 2's Chocolate Milk episode.

I loved Until Dawn, so I'm already interested. It does look a little odd in places, though. I think it's the facial animations? They don't look as refined as they could be, but I'm hopeful that it'll get cleaned up. In this sort of game where there are quite a few cut scenes, you don't want to be gawking at plastic-looking people. Excited, though. Played Until Dawn again recently and loved it even more the second time around.

I am a male continuously...but...there is an interesting thing.

Unfortunately, that may well be the same. This seems to be a bit of a problem with fighting games. It annoyed me with Street Fighter V. I wonder just how often this kind of practice has an adverse effect on gamers, who decide not to buy these sorts of games due to how they're "managed".

We have the same at our school. A few years back, they somehow managed to shatter the window in the door in one of the classrooms. The money people weren't too happy when I noticed it and reported it. I've made a to-do list of stuff for the Summer holidays. Things that I need to do ready for September, or for the up-coming inspection. Every now and again, I realise that maybe one thing requires 3 or 4 steps, so I break that down into smaller points. I've got a to-do list of 80 items. Kill me. Would've got way more done if it wasn't for the fucking heat over the last month or so!

Terry needs nutrients!

We're almost at the end of the season, too. Think we're on episode 19 or 20 of Season 1. Terry Crews is all that I need in life.

I've long buyed the bread bread and am aiming to buy the fruit continuously also. But is my home an acorn?

Hah, starting to get everyone's point about the lack of information now. Hmm.

I've got tons of questions about that. So, do you have to download the NES games to the system? Which games are available to start with? Are more added on a monthly basis? Or are there, say, 20 games available and it'll mainly be those 20 games for a long, long time? Will games be taken off the service, on a rotational basis? If you've already downloaded the game and it is taken off the service, can you still play the game or do you still lose access? If the Switch 2 comes out tomorrow, can I use the re-download the games with the subscription service on that? Or are they tied solely to the Switch? What happens if I stop my subscription? What happens if I stop and then restart? Will games other than NES games be added?

Haha, ok then. Are there plans for a Switch VC? Imo, it's only going to become easier when streaming in gaming really takes off. Ideally, you'd have a service that you sign up to and you use an account to log into and out of said service. The services works across a range of devices. E.g. you can sign up to Nintendo's VC, but this lets you sign into the Switch, the Switch's successor and also any additional hardware that Nintendo produce. Purchases are tied to the account. If you purchase Ocarina of Time, that purchase is tied to your account as long as you keep subscribing. You can then play that game on the hardware specified earlier by logging into the account. Gaming is a bit more complex than music and tv due to the architecture involved. I know that's been a problem with the switch from PS2 to PS3 and then to PS4 hardware, with the change in architecture. The benefit of streaming is that it works independently of the hardware. The limiting factor of that is broadband speed. Broadband speeds are just not good enough in so many parts of the UK, so it's hindering gaming that respect. We also can't have a situation where hardware doesn't advance because it'll create BC issues because that just creates more issues at the other end of the scale. I've used PSNow and I found that it worked great for me, so I'm particularly excited about what that can mean for the future. It would be great if we could sign up to a service and have access to, say, all of the SEGA Saturn catalogue to then stream and play on multiple devices.

This is like a teaser trailer before the main one drops. I'm fully expecting demgiaredv to return later, whereby they shall unleash their full campaign of bread, rice and acne-acorn-based products. I'm finding the "male nè" to be particularly interesting, as well as mysterious. Hashtag, what is it?

I have no idea what the current Virtual Console options are on Switch, so I can't comment. But, I remember I bought two VC games on Wii (Sim City and Golden Axe) and have been a bit dubious about the whole thing since. Ideally, I want to be able to access my old games on my current console, but also know that I can access them on the next console and potentially the one after that. THAT should be the future. The whole point of buying Golden Axe was so that I didn't need my MegaDrive to play/access the game (since I already owned it, but the console is in Wales). Now...I've got two games locked behind old hardware that I'm no longer using. How is that progressive? I think many gamers want to experience the game but are hindered by the platform that it features on. Ideally, a virtual console would not be so tied in with the platform, like how Netflix can appear on many platforms. It's also important that it is the SAME service, and not a variation of it. If I can watch a tv show on my tv, I should be able to watch the exact same show on my tablet, phone, console, or a friend's tv if I log into my account there. Nintendo miss the point sometimes with closing down these websites. The gamers clearly WANT to play these games, otherwise they wouldn't go to all of this trouble to do so. I think it is so important that these big companies keep in touch with what the fans want. If a thousand gamers started downloading, say, Lufia and the Fortress of Doom from a filesharing website, that should be telling them something. Gamers are ultimately fans who just want to experience new and old forms of gaming.

I know that it's my job to delete this, but I don't really want to. This is one of my favourite posts ever. Acne...if your home has acorn...

Just to offer a slightly different take on the discussion surrounding subscription services, particularly with the part Miyamoto mentioned about the music industry. For my post, I'm mainly going to talk about it from the music perspective because that's where I have the most knowledge and experience of: I was there during the rise (and fall in usage) of sites such as Napster, Kazaa and all that. At the time, you could walk into your HMV store and find albums with a RRP of up to £15. In some cases, maybe slightly more than that. That's a looooot of money to pay for music, so I used to find that I'd walk into HMV, browse the album selection, and walk straight back out. I remember it became a joke amongst other internet users that HMV was the type of store that you'd never actually buy anything from! I went through a period of at least four or five years where I didn't purchase a single album due to the cost being too high...so my interest in music waned. So, it's a no brainer that many turned to downloading the music illegally. This was just before the big internet shopping boom took off. At home, you could have access to any album, by any band, for free. For many teenagers or people in their early twenties who were perhaps still studying or earning very little money early on in their careers, £15 to spend on one solitary album is a lot of money to spend. The downside, of course, is the lack of money going to the artist and people behind the album. How much of that £15 album fee goes back to the original recording artist anyway? I always remember that being one for debate. I used to download a few tracks here and there and even remember my first time using Napster. Tbh, I didn't really enjoy doing it this way because it felt like "cheating". There was nothing satisfying about downloading a song by, say, U2 and looking at the file name being "WIth or WITHOUT YOU GOOD QUALITY REAL VERSION". I wanted to enjoy music, discover new music, but the price point was just ridiculously too high. I remember this amazing, amazing quote from Dave Grohl who said that music should be made available to all who want to listen to it. So, it's about making it accessible to the audience. If you make the price point too high, you're making it inaccessible to many. If it's limited formats, then it's inaccessible, too. I've met and known tons and tons of people who used to download excessively mainly due to the points that I mentioned. The thing is that they were fans, many were hardcore and would follow tours or go to tons of live shows. They were downloading because they wanted the music. The issue was purely the price point and the accessibility. Ultimately, it comes down to three key points: 1. People want to have the ability to access a large catalogue of music in a range of formats. Having it solely on a CD is a bit limiting. Nobody wanted albums on tape, either. What's great about buying an album but not being album to listen to it in your car because you don't have a CD/Tape player? Nothing is great about that. 2. People want to pay that "magic price point" - that Goldilocks zone where it isn't too expensive so that they can spend the money on other essential goods. 3. People ultimately (the fans in particular) want to support the artist who is responsible for the music. You buy the music because you like the music, but you always want to show your support for that artist. There's a synergy between fans and artists, which is evident at live shows. One of my favourite ever live performances was seeing The Flaming Lips, purely because of the way that they get the crowd going. You buy the album, you go to the live shows, because you want to show your support and experience the music in a multitude of ways. Streaming came along and it has changed everything. You can access it across a number of devices, so that settles point number 1. I can access the same playlist on my laptop when I'm working. I can then access the exact same playlist or album on my phone when I'm exercising, or in the car on the way to work, or on my PS4 when I'm gaming. I could only dream of that as a kid! For point number 2, a Spotify subscription costs £9.99 or something close to that...for you to be able to access EVERYTHING on the platform. That is insanely good value for money. Point number 3 is the debatable one, as it is still is questionable how much of the fee goes to the original recording artist. The other side of the coin is that it can act as a gateway to introduce people to new music that they never would have come across. I could list you 100+ bands or artists that I am now aware of through Spotify that I would not have been beforehand, which could then lead to supporting them at live venues or festivals, which is another avenue for making money. The world is moving towards streaming and subscription based services. Ultimately, this is healthy as it shows that people DO want to pay for their goods. They just want to ensure that those three points are addressed beforehand, especially the accessibility. Netflix is, imo, great value for money and it is so, so accessible. It's also about the way that music and other forms of entertainment are consumed. People no longer want to be dictated to by live tv schedules, or what song is playing on the radio. Choice is very good for the consumer. I've heard people talk about a Virtual Console service similar to Netflix and, yeah, provided the price point was right, it's something that I imagine will interest many.