User:Neeklamy

Doubtless a computer games enthusiast as well as a new wikipedian.

Thanks, that I am, this is such a coooooool site, check out my new Nintendo page, much needs to be added and checked though. Will put together a SEGA page soon. Oh and a Sonic Team.

Chris neeKlamy

April 1 2001

This is my third day at Wikipedia, and I'm finding myself a whole bunch of new pages and projects to work on..

Just put in place the basics for Year in Review, it is a new category scheme that just had to be done. I envision it being like the BBC Television series, I Love (year goes here), where they looked at art, pop, films and the general goings on in that particular year. It was an interesting series, they did the 1970s 1980s and are going to do the 1990s later this year, really!

Other than taking 2000 I shall also be heavily into the year 1977, my birth year, and I expect that birth years (and other, personal or not) landmarks will also be quickly wrote up.

My other big project in the making is Video game. There's plenty to be done there as well; listing the many developers, games, franchises and genres will take an age, but it'll be fun and I'll get to learn a whole bunch of new things about gaming.

Hey, we all love Neeklamy, and that is a known fact!

Yep, the year pages are a good idea, and the stuff you put up on video games is neat. But what's wrong with Zelda I? I like Zelda I...

Okay, a confession.

I have played Zelda I, not much really. Played Zelda II more. It was fun, but I got so far (somewhere deep within the mountains) and got stuck and gave up, bad I know, it's something I wouldn't do so readily now (maybe games are easier now though?).

The next Zelda game after that was IV DX, yes, I skipped III and went to Link's Awakening. From playing a little (again, not much, just like part I) I do feel confident in saying that III is really when the series took off.

So much to discover, so much to catch up on!

Please, tell us about Zelda I

Zelda II was an experiment. It was pretty neat, but it was more of an action RPG and less of a Zelda, and I found it too difficult. After that they returned to normal - most of the gameplay from III and IV, plus the very cool overworld music, are already in place in the first title. The world was big and fun to explore, absolutely stunning at the time and still fun to play (I think). So I would say the series took off from the beginning.

Zelda III is still a great improvement, though. Plus the monologues rock, throughout the series from then on (The well of three features...) What on earth are you doing spending time on Wikipedia if you haven't played Zelda III? ;)

I was thinking about putting up a page on The Legend of Zelda, but wasn't sure if it would cause others to start writing about hundreds of obscure games, or if maybe you wanted to do it. But I think I might get around to it soon. --JG :)

 Δ
Δ Δ

The ordinary language phrase might be "present nonexistence," but this doesn't distinguish things that did exist in the past from things that will exist in the future. --User:LMS

Ugh, I was not reading carefully enough, again. Sorry to so much as suspect you of plagiarism. --User:LMS

Just dropping by and greet my favorite Wikipedian! Hi Chris!

-No Fear

Hey neeKlamy, contact me when you're online again. I haven't spoken to you in ages!

-No Fear