[20:13] Insanemarine: **** (f)
[20:13] Insanemarine: dis this
[20:13] Insanemarine: is
[20:13] Insanemarine: pimp
[20:13] buffaloaf: which song? da one i linked?
[20:13] Insanemarine: no this food lol
[20:13] buffaloaf: oh wow rofl
[20:13] buffaloaf: i read dis song
[20:13] buffaloaf: and not
[20:13] buffaloaf: dis this
[20:13] Insanemarine: ive been eating peanut butter out of the jar like all day
[20:14] Insanemarine: LOL
[20:14] Insanemarine: i thought i wrote
[20:14] Insanemarine: **** (s)
[20:14] Insanemarine: rofl
[20:14] Insanemarine: dis this
[20:14] buffaloaf: lol
[20:14] Insanemarine: rofl
[20:14] buffaloaf: looks like
[20:14] buffaloaf: we're both
[20:14] Insanemarine: we both
[20:14] buffaloaf: retarded
[20:14] Insanemarine: yeah
[20:14] Insanemarine: rofl

As you all are probably very much aware, the King of Pop died yesterday. Say what you want about his personal life, and I know the later years of his life were full of negative media attention, etc, but regardless of all of these things, Michael Jackson is still an utter legend. May he rest in peace.

In other news, I've been playing Call of Duty: World at War for the past few days. I've finished the single player campaign, and I must say that I had quite a bit of fun with it. My last blog post about the grenades was just me poking a bit of silly fun at the ridiculousness of the AI's grenade spam in the single player. I honestly think I have died more times from grenades in this game than every other FPS I have ever played combined. Apparently this has been a "problem" in Call of Duty games since Call of Duty 2 though... (I have only ever played and completed Call of Duty and Call of Duty: United Offense, both of which are awesome games, previously, but now I have also played and completed World at War). Still, not sure why Infinity Ward decided to turn Nazi's in walking mortar's, but oh well, World at War was still a fun game.

This leads me to another topic I wanted to briefly touch on. What's up with all the hate on Treyarch? I mean seriously people, really? I know Treyarch is "not Infinity Ward" and I know Call of Duty 4 is supposed to be amazing stuff (I haven't played it so cut me some slack here), but Call of Duty: World at War is not a bad game. Yeah, maybe it might not be as good as Infinity Ward's Call of Duty games, I don't know. I have only played Infinity Ward's original Call of Duty, and United Offensive which was created by Gray Matter Studios (which was eventually merged with Treyarch) and to be perfectly honest while I loved both games, I enjoyed United Offense more than Call of Duty. Now obviously Call of Duty 3 and World at War are two completely different subjects, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that at least HALF of the people who hate on Treyarch have probably never even PLAYED Call of Duty 3 OR World at War.

Look, I'm not trying to defend Treyarch and say they are this amazing game developer innovating the game industry, but if you're going to hate on anyone for them "dirtying" the Call of Duty franchise, hate on Activision. They're the ones who decided it would be a good idea to **** out a Call of Duty game every November, not Treyarch, they are just doing what they are told. Not like they went out of their way to say HEY GUYS LETS TAKE THIS GREAT GAME SERIES CREATED BY INFINITY WARD AND MAKE IT WORSE OLOLOLOL, they are doing their best to try and make great games for us, and it's no secret who the real innovators are behind this franchise, but the least thing people can do is at least give their games a chance before throwing them under the bus as a game developer. Call of Duty 3 may have been a total disappointment after Call of Duty 2, I really don't know. But Call of Duty: World at War is not a bad game. If you expect it to be Modern Warfare 2, then you will no doubt be disappointed. What it is is essentially a throwback to the way Call of Duty originated, similar to Call of Duty and United Offensive (and probably Call of Duty 2). So give this game a chance and you might actually be surprised that it's a great game. Does it innovate? Not at all, but I don't regret my $25 purchase (I got it on sale on Steam, still waiting for a Call of Duty 4 price drop which is the reason I haven't played it yet). Although I will go out on a limb and say that if you're still heavily into Call of Duty 4 then World at War probably isn't worth shelling out $50 or $60 for, but it's still fun, and the campaign is worth playing at some point in time.

Don't hate on Treyarch, you can tell from the production of World at War that Treyarch sincerly tried to "make up" for people being disappointed in Call of Duty 3, and I think they deserve a little bit of respect.

*dies from another grenade*