Colbinile

Members
  • Content Count

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Sentient

About Colbinile

  • Rank
    Chicken Lover [Level 1]
  1. Add me, I have a 99 gold skull Industrialist and almost all the characters. Always up for any type of way you wanna play. Gilgamesh101
  2. I got the pink knight DLC when it first came out back in early 2011 and I had to get a new PS3. I got the new PS3 and now I'm back into Castle Crashers, but when I try to download the DLC it tells me I need to buy it. This didn't happen with the Fat Roles DLC for Fat Princess, so why for CC?
  3. Found a vid showing the weapons, magic, and a dual to show damage
  4. My squishy chicken has broken parts....glue cant fix everything, I learned this today
  5. Just bought it, thanks for the lolipop my brother was going crazy with theories on getting it. Enjoy the Pink Knight..... RAINBOW POWERS FTW!
  6. OMG! I got my package today THANK YOU BEHEMOTH! I love my chicken, my lanyard, my charm, I LOVE IT ALL!!!!!
  7. You serious? It'll be easy for TB to do that. Really, "that fancy" Just made my day.
  8. True. Although Stove Face is sexy.
  9. Got level 99 on my Industrialist from the Catfish. Best way without trying to boomerang everything to level up with a great magic person.
  10. What's up Gil?! Of course I remember you. Our Insane Mode runs were legendary. Well, legendary in my own mind anyway. I still can't get past insane Full Moon. I'm glad that you both agree and disagree. That's the hallmark of a strong thinker. So what do you think? Are the secrets of Castle Crashers to be found in our own minds, or in Tom Fulp's? Or should we dispense with the snobspeak and shut up and play? Here's the secret that I want to know: where is all the missing weaponry? And why does that 2x4 thing keep vanishing from my frog? Use the ladder trick ie...go up ladder use splash magic or lvl 50 combo,go down ladder lvl 50 combo etc...simple and effective. They might have patched that if it's a glitch. If not, then I'm guessing it's a strategy. I'll try it, Castle Crashers master (no-life).
  11. Gilgamesh101, Level 99 Industrialist. I'm bad at PVP, and htis might be good practice.
  12. What's up Gil?! Of course I remember you. Our Insane Mode runs were legendary. Well, legendary in my own mind anyway. I still can't get past insane Full Moon. I'm glad that you both agree and disagree. That's the hallmark of a strong thinker. So what do you think? Are the secrets of Castle Crashers to be found in our own minds, or in Tom Fulp's? Or should we dispense with the snobspeak and shut up and play? Here's the secret that I want to know: where is all the missing weaponry? And why does that 2x4 thing keep vanishing from my frog? Legendary indeed. It's a glitch, I think that Kelly said that, along with why the treasure music never plays. I think a weapon disappearing is just a glitch, not some horrible invention from TB itself. Also, I do agree that people can listen to Tom Fulp, but I think everyone has a part of their mind where they want to have a crazy guess. Then there is the logic part of your brain, which makes you just wanna state the truth, instead of some crazy thing. But, if you very imaginative, you are completely able to express your opinion.
  13. I'd have to respectfully disagree. As someone who draws petty webcomics, I like it when my readers come up with theories, but I don't like it when they try to change the story on me. In a way, it kinda makes it look like the readers think they can do a better job at writing than the actual author. Of course, this only applies when the author doesn't want the story interpreted differently, which very often isn't the case. Of course, you have a point. Tom Fulp also told me the game was open to interpretations (technically, he answered 'it could go either way' for a bunch of my questions, but that's pretty much the same thing), but most of us aren't looking for interpretations more than we're looking to discover the secrets of the actual story. Yes, some consumers of art find genetic or author-centered interpretations to be more convincing than formalist or affective interpretations, and while I have no quarrel with them, I also have no quarrel with other interpretive dispositions. I try to apply a healthy dose of relativism to my own considerations of such matters, meaning that everyone's interpretation is correct, but only from their own point of view. This means that someone whose evaluative criteria for an interpretation are compatible with the assumptions that attend a bias towards genetic criticism will find the author's intent to be quite useful. But it is also true that once an artist publishes his or her work, it in some sense becomes the intellectual property of the consumer, though not in any legal sense; what I mean is that the consumer asserts his or her right to contribute to the act of interpretation, without which the work ceases to have any meaning whatsoever (an unread text is meaningless, and it is only in the act of engagement with that text that the text has a meaning). And the consequence of this joint ownership between author and consumer is that the dichotomy between "looking for interpretations" and "looking to discover the secrets of the actual story" is revealed as a false dichotomy. All meanings, including the author's, are interpretations. There are many "actual stories," and the author's version of the artwork's meaning is only one of these. Take Milton's poem Paradise Lost, for example. Milton wrote it thinking that he was going to "justify the ways of God to man," but anyone who reads that poem immediately realizes that Milton's God is an overbearing tyrant, and the poem ends up justifying the ways of Satan. Milton's intent is a minor afterthought, because the poem simply doesn't do what he wanted it to do, or what he thought it did. The poet William Blake was the first to announce that Milton "was a true poet and of the Devil's party without knowing it," and no one has been able to convincingly refute that in the 200 years since it was written. The history of art is teeming with similar examples, in which artworks take on new life with each new interpretation, many of which directly contradict the author's announced intent. We're not always fully aware of what we're doing when we make art, and sometimes we find that we've done something far different from what we thought we were doing. That's not a comforting thought for those of us that are actively creating artworks, but not all truths are comforting. I will say that if an interpretation can't be supported with examples from the artwork, I'm unlikely to find it convincing. So, for example, if someone said that CC was about the history of basket weaving or the collapse of the Soviet Union, I'd be resistant to those interpretations. But the original poster points to some compelling pieces of textual evidence to lend legitimacy to his reading. So yeah, in the end our viewpoints might be incommensurable, but look at how much fun it is to debate this! Not as much fun as actually crashing castles, of course, but fun in its own way. Best of luck on the comics, by the way. I must agree, but then disagree. I'm Gilgamesh101, remember me? Well, I mean I added you, or whatever. But you remember me, right?