King Kaom Fight Video (Spoilers)

"

Drumheller wrote:

"

monkuar wrote:

"

magpye wrote:

The fight seems reasonable, not sure how over/undergeared the exile was, but the mechanics look like the type of fight i want in this game.
Kaom seems to be lacking some of his unique equipment (or at least not using its benefits at all). His ring adds an endurance charge, but he doesn't use any form of charge generation during this video. Will he have culling strike from his axe? He did seem to have a lot of life, but no more than most bosses. His boots and especially armour give MASSIVE boosts to hp, so that IMO should be experienced in the fight.

Others have pointed out that this boss and everything else is still up for change, what with beta and all. Hopefully the flavour of Kaom will overwhelm the "Oak/Kole 2.0" feel some people have pointed out.

Eagerly awaiting the beta, but have i missed any news on the event happening alongside it?

Do you have problems with your memory? That's a boss, not an exile.

Holy herp derp.

Boss != Exile.

He was referring to the player, not the boss.

"

monkuar wrote:

"

Drumheller wrote:

He was referring to the player, not the boss.

What the hell are you talking about? Jonathan Rogers wasn't playing an EXILE, it was a duelist.

Holy shit.

"

Drumheller wrote:

"

monkuar wrote:

"

Drumheller wrote:

He was referring to the player, not the boss.

What the hell are you talking about? Jonathan Rogers wasn't playing an EXILE, it was a duelist.

Holy shit.

Every playable character is an Exile.

"

monkuar wrote:

Also @Chris Wilson, it's 'IGN has', not 'IGN have'.

Have is present tense, and you're saying they have posted the video, (if they already posted it, that is past tense). So the correct way is 'IGN has posted, etc, etc'.

Posted = past tense.

See: http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/prperfectense.htm

Present Perfect!

"

hondana wrote:

DON'T...<whisper>feed the troll</whisper>! :)

"

HikaruYami wrote:

"

monkuar wrote:

Also @Chris Wilson, it's 'IGN has', not 'IGN have'.

Have is present tense, and you're saying they have posted the video, (if they already posted it, that is past tense). So the correct way is 'IGN has posted, etc, etc'.

Posted = past tense.

See: http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/prperfectense.htm

Present Perfect!

Wow, you're really insistent on [Removed By Support] about everything today, huh?

Chris was referring to IGN as a plural entity, so his grammar is correct. If you think IGN is not a plural entity, take that up with them, because I hear them refer to themselves that way all the time.

And you still haven't responded to the correction that every player character is an exile.

"

hondana wrote:

DON'T...<whisper>feed the troll</whisper>! :)

Trolls with bad opinions are one thing, but I'm happy to feed any troll that is objectively wrong, [Removed By Support].

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

"

monkuar wrote:

What? Doesn't matter if it's a plural entity or not. It doesn't change the fact it's past tense? A good way to test this is to say it outloud and if it sounds weird or funky; it probably is...

In British English, we refer to companies in the plural. I say 'GGG have' all the time and you've never 'corrected' me.

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

Spoiler

That's why I put it in spoilers. The deaths were not necessary and artificially inflate the perceived awesomeness of Kaom by having Jonathan die to him three times. We all know most people wouldn't approach the fight the same way.