It was; back when I had the game on PS3, Snoop was my announcer, and he honestly did a fine job with callouts and stuff; pretty good alternative for people that didn't like the default announcers (Rorke and Merrick) for whatever reason.
I think Ghosts had muted colors so the light green would be more noticeable if you paid attention. In that, I cannot tell you how many encounters I've faced where I point blanked found somebody wearing some stupid ass cosmetic.
Yeah, the muted color palette really made a difference when it came to spotting people; proper camo and some stealth perks allowed you to sneak right up to people, depending on the map.
I will say, though, that it ended up helping out the CoD kiddie campers a ton; the meta build then was the ghillie suit with either a Honey Badger AR with the Thermal Hybrid Scope and Grip, or the M27 LMG with the same attachments - classic stealth setup, made all the more noteworthy given that the ghillie suit requires 850 kills with a sniper with the Chrome Barrel attachment to equip and wear. Seriously, it was EVERYWHERE back then; even after the DLCs came out it never really vanished, and it's still a solid build even today. Even with the meta changing to "female character with Extinction Wraith head and UDT Assault/Tactical uniform with a suppressed AR with ACOG Scope" - a low-profile build, basically - the ghillie is still a solid gear piece; the fact that you get a Classified Assignment patch for knifing a guy wearing a ghillie says a lot.
The most recent CoD I played was MW2019, and I only played that one to see if it could match up to the glorious OG Trilogy. (Seriously, I spent years playing MW 2&3 back in the day and loved them.)
Spoiler Alert: It couldn't.
The maps sucked, the guns were P2W, and the cosmetics were retarded beyond all measure. It's safe to say that unless IW changes up it's formula in a DRASTIC way, MW2019 will the LAST CoD I ever play.
Hell, even the default operators in blops 6/the past few MWs have zero team recognition. Everyone looks the same. There have been so many instances of running face first into an enemy and we'd both have no idea because the red nameplate was out of view, which is just shitty for a game that is so fast paced. Eventually you learn which generic model is on what team, but then cosmetics muddy the waters.
The last Battlefield was even worse with this because you could play as the same operator on BOTH teams. There was an operator who wore American gear and had an American flag patch on his chest. He could be played on both the US and Russian sides. It was so confusing. Anyway, fuck the people that buy these cosmetics and encourage it.
I enjoy the base foundation of what Call of Duty provides, but the surrounding factors with Call of Duty ruin that base foundation. In fact, I feel that way with modern gaming in general.
I reinstalled MW2022 to try out some different upscaling technology, and was immediately reminded of why I disliked that game so much, even in bot matches. The red nameplates appear above enemies almost immediately, and it subtly changes the entire feel of the game, where you really don't have to look at the environment, just for red icons.
COD nearly loses all of Black Ops 6 launch numbers on Steam just one month after launch. Massive decline as players abandon a sinking ship. Horrible fortnite skins, cheating & monetization is taking it's toll. Microsoft is desperately trying to get those billions that they did blow on COD back. This might be the start of the end for COD.
I reinstalled MW2022 to try out some different upscaling technology, and was immediately reminded of why I disliked that game so much, even in bot matches.
If you have MWII, does progress from weapons carry over to MWIII? I know MWIII was meant to be DLC for MWII; I ask because you could unlock and progress MWII weapons in MWIII. What is the point of MWII as its own other than campaign and DMZ?
I know MW3 caught flak for being a copy/paste of MW2 back then, but even MW3 managed to stand on its own as a CoD title and its own entity.
So, apparently Activision has some kind of code in BO6 that makes part of the game still run even when you cut to desktop on Steam; granted, not exactly certain on how accurate all this is - pretty sure Blame Truth's got a rep for exaggeration - but it wouldn't surprise me if Activision's done something like this to inflate the numbers a bit.
Thoughts?
Also, this is going to be EXTREMELY autistic and late, but; is anyone interested in me doing a bit of a rant over Vanguard's story? I dunno, just figured that, since we've all been talking about the current state of the CoD franchise, I might as well take the piss out of the worst CoD game to date.
So, MWIII officially recognizes "quickscoping" as a gameplay mechanic, according to a prestige challenge. Never mind that quickscoping was just exploiting the strong aim assist with a hitscan weapon, it doesn't even bother to specify what a "quickscope" IS. You're not supposed to use a sniper to run and gun, let alone as an instant kill weapon.
COD nearly loses all of Black Ops 6 launch numbers on Steam just one month after launch. Massive decline as players abandon a sinking ship. Horrible fortnite skins, cheating & monetization is taking it's toll. Microsoft is desperately trying to get those billions that they did blow on COD back. This might be the start of the end for COD.
I bought BO6 cause I was sick of playing with third-worlders on BO2. The zombies mode is piss easy and the maps kind of blow. Multi-player is pure slop. Each update they had just ended up breaking more shit, they patch fun stuff, and the replayability just isn't there. No fucking wonder they lost everyone. That's not to mention like 70% of the playerbase got it through GamePass. I find it hard to believe they're making a good profit off this shit.
Also, this is going to be EXTREMELY autistic and late, but; is anyone interested in me doing a bit of a rant over Vanguard's story? I dunno, just figured that, since we've all been talking about the current state of the CoD franchise, I might as well take the piss out of the worst CoD game to date.
So, apparently Activision has some kind of code in BO6 that makes part of the game still run even when you cut to desktop on Steam; granted, not exactly certain on how accurate all this is - pretty sure Blame Truth's got a rep for exaggeration - but it wouldn't surprise me if Activision's done something like this to inflate the numbers a bit.
-Game is riddled with cheaters with broken anti cheat
-Game is blatantly lying about the player base
-Microtransactions out the wa-zoo in a $70 premium game
-Innocent players are getting banned
-unbearable SBMM
-The Game is flat out broken, but the shop is working with no issues.
This shit just oozed soul, its part of the reason why I shit on Blametruth and roll my eyes when you guys still thinks he a good youtuber, that guy was a cod shill and even defended Black Ops 4 then MW2019 comes out and he hates it and noticed his viewership rise over it. He got mentally mind broken over MW2019 like other codtubers and act like it ruined the franchise when at this point lets just admit it saved the franchise for at least another 15 years.
People have been telling us blackops6 was still running even when they shut the game down, and they have been stacking hours of game time without playing, now we know why. AI bots have been spotted in game using players profiles.
People have been telling us blackops6 was still running even when they shut the game down, and they have been stacking hours of game time without playing, now we know why. AI bots have been spotted in game using players profiles.
Remember when people called BT a conspiracy theorist for saying that MWIII had AI bots, even after he provided proof? 30+GameOvers(brought to you by Mark Mann, a pedophile) remembers!
If even a mainline Treyarch game they had 3+ years to work on, that actually introduced a new gameplay feature(last time that happened was in 2014 with jetpacks, maybe the "tactical movement" in 2019 with MW2019 if we want to be generous) is flopping, then this franchise is doomed. Do you think nu-IW will do better with MWIV? How about Sledgehammer "We made Vanguard!" Games, devs so incompetent their last game barely even worked at the best of times?
Remember when people called BT a conspiracy theorist for saying that MWIII had AI bots, even after he provided proof? 30+GameOvers(brought to you by Mark Mann, a pedophile) remembers!
If even a mainline Treyarch game they had 3+ years to work on, that actually introduced a new gameplay feature(last time that happened was in 2014 with jetpacks, maybe the "tactical movement" in 2019 with MW2019 if we want to be generous) is flopping, then this franchise is doomed. Do you think nu-IW will do better with MWIV? How about Sledgehammer "We made Vanguard!" Games, devs so incompetent their last game barely even worked at the best of times?
All IW needs to do for me and I know they will is make the TTK not slightly longer and thats it, Bo6 is usual treyarch balancing with SMGs dominating everything with like one or two ARS, and annoying fucking snipers while everything else sucks ass.
Speaking of CoD and profit: there has been a unearthing of development costs and sold copies of three CoD titles.
Black Ops III (2015): “Treyarch developed the game over three years with a creative team of hundreds of people, and invested over $450 million in development costs over the game’s lifecycle.” (Kelly also discloses that it has sold 43 million copies.)
Modern Warfare (2019): “Infinity Ward developed the game over several years and has spent over $640 million in development costs throughout the game’s lifecycle.” (41 million copies sold)
Black Ops Cold War (2020): “Treyarch and Raven Software took years to create the game with a team of hundreds of creatives. They ultimately spent over $700 million in development costs over the game’s lifecycle.” (30 million copies sold)
I expected MW2019 to sell more since it was a reboot. I guess because of Warzone being free with microtransactions, the lower sales for Cold War meant that people were happy with MW2019 or just downloaded Warzone for their CoD (Covid) fix.
What's driving me to play BO6 MP is the camo/battle pass grind. It almost feels like work. I don't remember being this committed to challenges for older CoDs until Cold War or WWII. I would just play and the challenges would organically progress through natural play.
Right. Well, I'll be the first to admit; a pretty good chunk of what I've said has (probably) already been said elsewhere, but... in all honesty, as a fan of WW2 history myself, Vanguard managed to hit just about every button of mine. Call me MATI, because it's genuinely accurate, but it's very much true.
THE PREMISE
I'm going to be blunt; one of the two premises of Vanguard - that of learning/celebrating the lives of unsung heroes of WW2 - is something that I adore. I've looked quite a bit into WW2's battles and such, and I honestly think that there's quite a few individuals of renown on both sides of the conflict that could use a bit more recognition in the modern day. The CoD series as a whole hasn't shied away from using real-world historical figures beforehand, and bringing in lesser-known individuals for a WW2 game could make for an interesting premise. Hell, given how the current CoD franchise seems to be whoring themselves out to just about everything with a pulse, they could've collab 'ed with Sabaton; those guys hate the Nazis more than anything else, and it would've at least been more respectful than putting anime and Snoop Dog into the game. Seriously, there were the Wehrmacht's 9th and 12th Divisions, the Battle for Castle Itter, Franz Stigler's sparing of Charles Brown...
The second premise, that of stopping a secret Nazi plan during the twilight hours of the war, is... admittedly, it's pretty cliche at this point, but even the most cliche of plots could be interesting as long as they're handled well. It would also tie fairly well into the "unsung heroes" bit from above; IRL, there were quite a few people in Germany, even high-ranked Nazis themselves, that weren't all that fond of the more "evil" bits of the group, and I naively thought back before the game came out that the devs would go into this. Would make sense; I mean, the Allies were known for recruiting Nazi officials after the war ended for their space program, and the German Werwolf plot could've been a good influence.
Put simply, there was so much that the devs could've done with this premise; instead, they didn't so much as "drop the ball" as they did fire it out of a cannon into the core of the Earth.
THE MAIN COURSE
So, I'm going to be going into the main parts that I have issues with, starting with the campaign. I'm not going to go into every single detail: I get that games often cut corners or try to spice things up for the sake of gameplay/plot/tension, but even keeping that in mind there's still a LOT to complain about in regards to historical accuracy. There's a very fine line between merely trying to "spice up" history for the sake of gameplay/plot, and outright historical revisionism... and Vanguard fell VERY fucking hard to the latter.
I'm going to be breaking this down mission by mission; again, not going to be hitting every single detail, like specific gun models and such, but I will be hitting the major issues that I have with each. Forewarning that I can't remember everything; I only had Vanguard for a day or so before I dropped that shit-pile, and I haven't looked at the campaign since the game first came out. So, keep that in mind.
Prepare for some autism...
PROLOGUE
The first mission, starting with the Vanguard crew on a train headed into the heart of Hamburg to try and retrieve intel on "Project Phoenix", a Nazi plot that the Allies apparently don't have all that much intel about. Not the worst set-up for a mission overall - as I mentioned previously, Sniper Elite did those multiple times - but the real issue is Team Vanguard; the way the plot is written seems to indicate that this is apparently their first mission together as a crew... which, given the potential risk of whatever the hell Phoenix is, you'd think you'd want a group that at least has had some prior experience with each other. Also, the idea of a multinational group like this in WW2 is admittedly laughable; sure, the Americans and the Brits were allies at this point, but I highly doubt Russia would be sending one of their snipers to assist, given the tensions between countries at the time, and having a Czech and an Australian in the group just felt forced.
Likewise, the main villain introduced at the end of the pilot, Hermann Freisinger, comes across as a complete strawman; he's stereotypically evil and racist, kills the PC Milos Novak after getting insulted by black leader Kingsley, and generally comes across as one-dimensional. I get that this is the pilot, and that CoD didn't always have the deepest of villains, but even guys like Kravchenko has some level of character; Freisinger comes across as a caricature more than anything, and he never develops.
KINGSLEY'S SECTION: D-DAY
For starters, the jump itself; the IRL mission took place in total darkness, as opposed to the pitched ground-to-air fight happening in-game. IRL, the mission would've played more like Hunted or All Ghillied Up from CoD 4; sneaking through the darkness, avoiding patrols, engaging in combat only when necessary. But, as I said; sometimes some inaccuracies are made for the sake of action, which I can see and sort-of excuse here.
What I can't excuse comes next; while trying to regroup with his group after the jump goes wrong, Kingsley witnesses another paratrooper getting shot and bayonetted by a particularly bloodthirsty German, despite very visibly surrendering. There's a couple of issues with this; the big one being that Germany was actually pretty serious about following rules when it came to dealing with paratroopers. IRL, there's been a few stories of Wehrmacht officers executing their own men for killing surrendering paratroopers; it was part of the background for the Franz Stigler incident for instance, and while I could easily see a potential "panic shoot" in this situation, the bayonetting was just retarded. Also, the fact that the soldier just stands there and doesn't even bother looking around despite the paratrooper clearly and audibly motioning/whispering towards Kingsley before getting killed; pretty retarded.
Another issue is Kingsley and co. deciding to co-op a bunch of German vehicles and just drive them back to their line; you mean to tell me that the Brits just let a bunch of German vehicles into their encampment with little fanfare? And, you know, didn't light them up the moment they got spotted?
Also, the section where they assault the German fortifications on the cliff is retarded; for starters, Kingsley decides to use the vehicles that they have to blow a bunch of landmines... which alerts the Germans to their position. Next, after the Brits just barely make their way to a trench, Kingsley has all of them charge directly at a machine gun nest with no smoke coverage... which, predictably, gets a massive chunk of men killed. Not a great showing for Kingsley's supposed "leadership skills"; yes, they took the fortifications, but it was still fucking retarded.
Also, the guy Kingsely was based on was a runner; why the hell is our guy a stereotypical "leader" character again? In all honesty, playing as a runner sounds a lot more interesting; remember that an army travels on its stomach? I'd have taken a stealth mission over this, honestly.
PETROVA'S SECTION: RUSSIA
The token female's missions take place in Stalingrad, which in contrast to it's fairly accurate depiction in WaW as a bombed wreck with Russians guerilla fighting the Nazis, is instead portrayed as this peaceful first-world town with domestic life all over; shops are open, families are casually having breakfast, the works. IRL, Stalingrad had already been evacuated, with the Russian army all bunkering the hell down to fight the Germans; it certainly wasn't this peaceful domesticity.
A major issue I got with this is Petrova, the female MC; the game tries to portray Russia as "unwilling to have a woman be a soldier in the army", which... is beyond ridiculous. Russia had female snipers all the way back in World War 1, possibly earlier, and they had a number of not just snipers, but female units in all branches; anyone remember the 588th Airborne? If anything, Petrova would probably in charge of her own unit, given her gusto. But no; gotta go with "competent female held back with sexism by retarded men" here...
Another issue I have is the field hospital; for starters, it looks a lot more like a modern American field hospital than anything else. The tank and sandbag formations make me think of Modern Warfare, and the hospital being just out in the open instead of inside a building - especially since the game itself outright states that everyone knows the Germans are coming - is a tad bit odd. Also, where's the anti-air? German planes just flew right on in and bombed everything...
Anyways, after the Germans predictably fly right on in and mercilessly bomb the peaceful Russians - that sentence makes me want to gag - we get treated to another scene where Petrova is wandering through a bombed-out building, unarmed, when she gets spotted and cornered by a pair of German soldiers, who... order her inside a room, and don't even bother to watch her. Couple of issues here; for one, the Germans were harassing/executing every Russian they found, but they leave this one alone randomly? Two, as revealed at the end of the mission, Petrova was wearing a Russian Army uniform the entire time; again, the Germans were mass-executing unarmed civilians with little foresight, but they let a uniformed soldier live?
Moreover, the fact that the Germans had merely rounded up all of the Russian "resistance fighters" and had them inside a building under comparatively minimal guard; IRL, the Germans were known for slaughters in Stalingrad - remember Vendetta from WaW? Again, the Nazis were killing all civilians en-mass, but the actual combatants were merely captured?
Moving on, into the winter section; I don't remember a damn thing about this one aside from two issues near the end. The first was Petrova's "boss fight" against a Nazi official; aside from being blatantly copied over from MW2019, you mean to tell me that a Russian soldier couldn't take a guy on in melee combat, despite having a knife and a stealth advantage? Also, I remember Kingsley's ending narration genuinely made me a bit ill; he tries to insist that Petrova "single-handedly rallied the entire Russian army" during WW2 against the Nazis, simultaneously talking shit about the entire rest of Russia's armed forces and acting as though this one soldier managed to accomplish everything by herself. It also ignores Russia's rather bloody policies during the war, which prior CoDs had been damn good with; again, the Russian missions from WaW and earlier CoDs did a far better job of portraying Russia accurately.
Comes across as stolen valor, honestly; I mean, Russia wasn't exactly winning any humanitarian awards during WW2, but at least respect the solders that fought for them...
JACKSON'S SECTION: JAPAN
Put simply, the main issue with this section is the 93rd Infantry Division, the all-black unit that rescues Jackson and his "latino" co-pilot from the Japanese. I will say, I am impressed that the devs put them in; the 93rd was a real unit, and just like in-game, it gets pointed out that they were mostly regulated to labor and rarely saw action. And to be completely fair, I wasn't aware of the group myself before Vanguard brought them up; most of my studies were about the Western Front.
However, I believe it's a reasonable thing to say that the 93rd was not this "super-secret" special forces group of all-black soldiers. IRL, the group was known for taking a high number of casualties whenever they were deployed; due to the politics of the time, they weren't always well-trained and were often passed over in favor of other units. However, Vanguard portrays them as a bunch of highly-trained idiots led by an asshole of a leader, with their very first scene involving them wandering right out into the middle of a pitched gunfight, and then neglecting to provide any form of proper medical check on the two hostages they just rescued, which the game tries to portray as reasonable.
Likewise, when the unit is forced to bring the two pilots along, the white PC is repeatedly portrayed as an idiot racist and overall dead weight; when Jackson admits that he never heard of the 93rd, he's gets mocked a bit by even his own partner... despite being a part of a completely different part of the military (Airborne vs. Infantry) and thus, logically, having no reason to know. Similarly, Jackson repeatedly points out that the 93rd is making a lot of risky calls, such as repeatedly trying to take a bridge and failing due to bad tactics; naturally, the co-pilot treats him as if he's a complete moron and the assault magically works this time due to the power of plot armor.
Aside from that, I don't remember all that much from this section of the plot, admittedly; aside from there being a ton of German guns in Japan - including STG-44s, which didn't get made until several years later - the only thing I really remember is the constant racism.
Also, is it just me, or does Jackson look like Dempsey from Zombies? Feels like they're kinda bashing those fans with how Jackson's portrayed; then again, that's just me being autistic.
RIGGS'S SECTION: TOBRUK
If Russia was sexism, and Japan was racism, then I guess this one would be... classism? Anyways, the main conflict in this setting - aside from the obsessive killing of Nazis of course - was conflict between the Australia military and their British counterparts. Riggs's unit was under the command of a British officer, which wasn't unheard of at the time IRL; there was a significant amount of overlap between the two militaries, with British commanders often leading entire units of Australian soldiers. That said, the relationship in-game isn't exactly accurate; in Vanguard, the Brits are constantly portrayed as inept and incompetent, going well out the way to hog all the glory and belittling the Australians at every opportunity. IRL, saying the relationship was "amicable" was evidently an understatement; the Brits adored their Australians teams, with reports often praising and bragging on them, to the point where I think at least one British commander moved to Australia post-war. The two militaries got along extremely well from what I've read, so the portrayal in Vanguard is... baffling.
I will admit, I don't remember much from this one, aside from a moment right at the start; the Australian crew is prepping an ambush for a German team, when the Brit officer insists on being the one to detonate the explosive trap. However, when the times comes to actually detonate the thing, the crew sees that the Germans are packing a lot stronger of a tank than expected, which means that their explosive would be less effective; IRL though, the team would've realistically packed a much stronger trap, explicitly because of the possibility shown in game.
Other than that, can't remember much; sorry!
FINALE: HAMBURG
Couple of issues here; for starters, given how the rest of the game portrayed Germany, I was surprised that the Vanguard team didn't immediately start lighting up the crowd of civilians that were cowering in the tunnel; IRL, there were a LOT of massacres of civilians by Russian and even some U.S. and British soldiers at that point in the war, it would've been accurate.
Also, about the crew catching up to and killing Freisinger; for starters, given that the guy mentions that he was surrendering to the Allies - i.e., Operation Paperclip - you'd think the crew would, you know, capture him for intel, though I do admit that Vanguard was wanting revenge for the deaths of two of their members earlier, so that's understandable. What's less understandable is Kingsley's decision to kill the guy by setting him on fire; given the crew was surrounded by explosive barrels and ordinance, I could easily see how that situation could've gotten a lot worse.
Again, I don't remember much on this one; the plot and characters were so bad that I just stopped caring at this point.
MULTIPLAYER
I talked a bit about this is a previous review, but to sum it up; the Multiplayer in this game is legit the worst I've ever seen in a CoD game. This boils on down to two main reasons; the gameplay and the characters.
On the gameplay side of things, it's flabbergasting just how clunky and generally broken the game is; hit registration feels completely off, and guns just all handle rather weirdly compared to prior games, including previous World War 2 titles. Melee combat is horrific as well; I've ran melee-only builds as far back as CoD 3, and Vanguard still managed to mess up even performing basic attacks - the katana, for instance, has both ridiculously slow swing speed and takes forever to properly ready again, compared to, say, Infinite Warfare. The maps have some cool ideas, admittedly; problem is, there's nothing really all that consistent with them in terms of tone. One minutes you'll be fighting on the Parisian rooftops, and the next you're either fighting in a post-apocalyptic ship or dealing with the aftermath of the Cloverfield Monster in New York; no, really.
The characters make all this so much worse. In order to not "trigger" any of the weak-minded, the devs instead tried to have both teams consist of the same operators, mostly women or minorities, with the sole Axis representation being either a copy of Takeo from Zombies or a female ex-Nazi who defected because she's a lesbian (again, could've easily seen plenty of Germans who'd have worked with the Allies in Vanguard; Castle Itter, or the 9th and 12th?). To further sell this, the devs justified the background of the Multiplayer all being a collection of "training exercises" between two Allied teams; why the hell there's two teams engaging in training during the Invasion of Paris or in the blown-up streets of New York is beyond me. Doesn't help that everyone looking the same results in a LOT of friendly fire incidents.
Also, why are the EM1 from Advanced Warfare and F2000 from Modern Warfare both in Multiplayer? I get that they were added to Warzone, but... why the Multiplayer side? Similarly, what's with all of the anime bullshit and future characters? Seriously, we got furries, Attack on Titan weapons, Terminators, and Raul Menedez, Gabriel Rorke, Seraph, and Al-Assad all in WW2.
Also, the voting screens are laughably cringe; watch the same monkey-faced people bash Nazis with the same broken animations. It's hilariously bad.
ZOMBIES
Somehow, Vanguard managed to fail at even this.
Put simply, there's basically nothing good here. Earning points was nerfed into the ground, making it much more difficult to actually grab anything. Everything was made significantly more expensive as well, making progression a complete slog. You can now get PaP'd guns out of the box, which is much cheaper and less risky than trying to get them from the PaP machine. PaP's guns are often designed extremely poorly, meaning that the smoke/muzzle flash with completely blind you when firing, and the guns themselves will take up the entire screen when sprinting. On top of that, perks also have to be upgraded, meaning that you have to buy them multiple times at inflated prices to get the same effect from prior games.
There's an armored zombie with a gun designed to shred your armor, adding a sense of artificial difficulty to keeping your health up. The game often spawns random explosive zombies in front of you, resulting in downs being more on bad luck rather than a lack of skill. Zombie pathing is often broken, meaning that it's quite possible for zombies to just stop chasing you for whatever reason.
On top of all that, the maps are more objective-based than round based, with the first map forcing you to complete missions to progress like a crappier version of Cold War's Outbreak. While I do know the Shi no Numa remake was round-based, I can't remember how the other maps progressed.
On top of all that, I can't remember the story at all; something about a stereotypically evil Nazi guy using dark magic to raise the dead, with a stereotypically evil demon thing working with him, while a couple of bland scientists and good spirits tried to support you/stop them.
Fucking hell, how'd they screw all that up?
Anyways, I think that's all I got for right now; anyone got anything they want to add?
