ktchong

Source: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150401/west-village/nypd-detective-who-screamed-at-uber-driver-video-wont-be-fired-sources If it has happened only once, yeah, then he should not be fired. However, if it has happened at least ten times before, then it was not an isolated incident. It was the first time he was caught doing it on the video. Now we are talking about a persistent abusive behavioral pattern. He has done similar things at least ten times before. He will most definitively do it again. He needs to be fired, but of course that is exactly what the NYPD would not do. The NYPD never ever fire one of their own, not even a corrupted officer. Especially not a corrupted officer - because the NYPD has become an extremely corrupted organization. I am just glad I do not live in that ****hole of a city policed by a mafia.

Patrick Cherry (the police in the video) is a high-ranking officer. Seth (who recorded and posted the video) reported the incident to the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB). The board did not want to deal with it and transferred the complaint to the Internal Affair Bureau (IAB). The IAB decided they did not want to deal with it, and transferred the case back to CCRB. I'm calling it right now: nothing will happen to the cop. He'll get a few weeks paid suspension/vacation at most. That's how it rolls nowadays with the cops.

Patrick Cherry should be fired, which would never happen. The NYPD would never ever fire or actually discipline one of their own, even if a police has murdered, killed, assaulted, etc.

"In an unmarked car, the policeman was allegedly attempting to park without using his blinker at a green light. (His reverse lights weren't on. Likely double parked without hazards on.) The Uber driver pulled around and gestured that he should use his blinker, casually and non-offensively, and kept driving us. The policeman quickly pulls up behind us and this is what happens..." "This occurred just before 2pm on the West side of Manhattan, in police precinct 6, on March 30th, 2015. The officer did not identify himself, but he had a New York license plate: GSS 8891..." P.S. The New York Daily News has identified the police officer as Patrick Cherry.

I love these:

She is a halfie, i.e., half-English, half-Chinese. Looks more Chinese than English, tho.

Yeah, let's talk Game of Thrones.

I would never vote for Ron Paul. He has many ideas that I like. The main ones being his "Prime Directive" non-interference stance on foreign policy. And we need to stop giving money to Israel, Egypt and other foreign nations. Overall, I like his stance on foreign policy. However, He has some ideas that I really do not like. Those are the "big ones" - the major ones - for me. He opposes and wants to repel Civil Right Act, (which I understand most white people - who make up most of his fan base - could care less; but it is obviously a deal-breaker for most any non-white and minority voters.) He is also obsessed with enforcing his religion on everyone - regardless they are Christian or not: he opposes the separation of church and state, he does not believe in evolution, and he made it clear that his aim was to repel Roe vs. Wade (i.e., the anti-abortion "pro-life" movement is really just a Christian fundamentalist thing.) Most of all, I do not like the cult-like herd mentality of his fanboys. I already see a few in here. I'm gonna promptly put them on ignore/block/whatever as soon as I'm done with this post - I am just so sick and tired of them so I would not even bother. Ron Paul is really a niche appeal. He has a small but significant cult of very hardcore supporters, who go around and troll people who disagree with Ron Paul on anything. Outside that little cult, he has very little support, which is why he had never made it past the GOP primary, and why he would never have won the presidential race even if he had made it past a GOP primary. Anyway, Ron Paul is already irrelevant. His time has passed. He will never run for President again, (and good riddance to that.) His son will be running. He is not gonna jump into the race and run against his son.

A Canadian will be running in the next US presidential primaries. Hilarity ensues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIPNqosSGI8

WRONG! Here, from the Wasteland 2 Gamepedia FAQ: But didn't Electronic Arts own it? The rights to the title were owned by Electronic Arts, but when they expired, Konami registered the trademark for use with their Yu-Gi-Oh series. In 2003, InXile acquired the rights to the Wasteland title from Konami. http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Wasteland_2_FAQ I buy EA games. I have no problem with EA in general. I just do not think EA - as a major corporation and publisher - should be able to "free ride" and use Kickstarter to fund their corporate businesses. I'd be equally upset if Activision or Ubisoft attempts to hijack Kickstarter to fund their game or a game that is owned by them. Kickstarter should be OFF LIMIT for big corporations.

Still does not matter. It does not matter who has the "control over everything": EA or BioWare. I know I am not buying any BioWare product -- because BioWare products are the ones with those business policies and practices in place. I actually DO buy other products from other EA studios - because other EA studios are not pulling the same BS as BioWare does. So it is only BioWare with whom I am NOT dealing due to their exploitative business practices. Other EA studios and products do not seem to have the same problems.

Those are EA business practices . You dunno about that. It's hard to say whose business decisions were those. However, let's look at how those business practices have been implemented: Many of those business practices are exclusively implemented by BioWare and NOT by other EA business units. Examples: (1) the "BioWare Points" BS. Only BioWarew was forcing customers to buy "points" - which were overpriced and over-bundled - to pay for their DLC. DICE, Criterion and other EA studios are NOT doing that to force customers to buy points or credits. (2) BioWare no longer releases any "Game of the Year", "Gold", "Platinum", or any sort of "complete" edition that bundles the main games and all the DLC. The last "complete" package released by BioWare was for the first Dragon Age. BioWare wants customer to pay for every single piece of DLC, at full price, ALWAYS. The other EA studios, ALL OF THEM, still release "complete" package a year or two after the initial releases. It is only BioWare that does not. BioWare is currently the ONLY developer in the industry that does not release "complete" or GOTY edition for their games. So that is also a BioWare-only business practice. (3) I have also observed that BioWare DLC is NEVER discounted, ever, (for the PC.) It's been five years since Mass Effect 2 was released, yet its DLC were still selling at the full price as they were first released. They were NEVER discounted. The same goes for ALL the Dragon Age and Mass Effect series DLC. All the other EA studios have discounted their DLC from time and tme. EXCEPT BioWare. It is like BioWare think they are special or something. (They are NOT.) BioWare would sell you the main game at heavily discounted price, but then the DLC are always sold at full "first-year" price. It's like selling you the laser printer for cheap but then make you pay for all the overpriced cartridges. Except in BioWare's case, you cannot get any "third-party" cartridges for cheap. I gave you three examples. But there are a few more. Reasonably, I think those are business decisions made by BioWare, NOT EA. If those are business directives from EA, I would expect ALL EA studios and business units to implement the same business policies. That is not what I have observed. It is only BioWare that have been pulling those BS. So I blame BioWare rather than EA. I know people love to blame EA for everything. BUT, if you use logics and reasons, if you think critically, then you should come to the conclusion that it's BioWare, NOT EA, who made and implemented those business decisions. (Otherwise, if it was EA's decisions, then all the other EA business units would have implemented the same things.) Honestly, it really does not matter if those business decisions were made by EA or BioWare. BioWare is the one that is implementing them. And I am not going to support those exploitative business practices.b

I am no longer buying any BioWare game, (have not since Mass Effect 1 on Xbox 360, which I did not complete because my 360 burned out; and then BioWare started their nickle-and-dime DLC business model, compounded with Origin spyware and a bunch of other appalling business decisions. Which have made me refuse to support or buy anything from BioWare. It's just the matter of principle. Anyway. I will likely play this one. In the past few years, many BioWare employees left the company to start their own things, and so far they have not picked up BioWare's disgusting business practices. So they will get my support and money.

Then the title and topic of the OP is incorrect. The kickstarter is NOT for a sequel to Ultima® Underworld.

Are you suggesting that this is an EA project? If not, then your opinion doesn't seem relevant. Then it is NOT actually a "sequel" to Ultima Underworld, because EA still holds the trademark for Ultima. Whoever is making this "sequel" cannot just use the Ultima name without EA's explicit permission or authorization. And EA, being as they are, certainly ain't gonna let some Kickstarter use the Ultima brand without monetary compensation. Which means if it is an "Ultima" Underworld, then EA is getting involved and getting a cut. This is legal common sense, and I do not know rjshae could be so ignorant and/or stupid about it. Or, the topic title or the Kickstarter title is misleading: the Kickstarter is NOT for an actual Ultima Underworld sequel; it is more of a "spiritual" successor to Ultima Underworld. In which case, we already had at least one spiritual successor: Arx Fatalis. (Which was a pretty darn good one.) Okay, so it is another spiritual successor to Ultima Underworld. Yeah, whoopie. Whatever. Of, the Kickstarter will go ahead and call it an Ultima Underworld sequel without getting the permission from EA. In which case, the project will get a cease and desist letter from EA lawyers soon, and then the project will be dead, or forced to drop the Ultima name, or forced to let EA in on the Kickstarter. So we're back to my original point. Then again, it is nott a bad way to rip off people like rishae: get his money first, and then tell him, "oh, we're sorry, EA lawyers tell us that we have to stop the development, but we're keeping the Kickstarter money!" Maybe that *is* the plan. Ubisoft owns the Might & Magic trademark. And guess what? Ubisoft was involved with Might & Magic X. Ubisoft is the publisher. Might & Magic X requires UPlay activation. BTW, I looked through the Might & Magic X wiki page on information about its development, and it does not say anything M&M X being a crowd-funded project. I do not think it is. I know Ubisoft partially if not entirely funded the game. Where did you get the information that M&M X was crowd-funded?

I actually do not give @#$%& about donating money to charity. I just want cheap games.

Seems to me that Blizzard is the only company that is actually earning real money from MMO. Yet all the other idiots still got into - or want to get into - the MMO business, and then got their arses handed to them by Blizzard, (i.e., BioWare, Bethesda.) Seriously, MMO is an over-saturated market. The MMO total market share is not growing. Everyone who wants to play MMO is married to World of WarCraft. Then there are the rest of us who absolutely refuse to play MMO. BioWare, Bethesda or whatever companies that try their hands on MMO would never get a dime or minute out of us for their MMO.

EA still owns the Ultima registered trademark. Be careful: you do not want to kickstart an EA project. EA has been talking forever about finding some way to get money from consumers to kickstart their products. As if EA has not already ripped off people enough already, The thought of giving money to a Kickstarter that benefits EA makes me want to vomit.

P.S. This would be the perfect job for me. I love playing games, and I hate Muslims. I certainly will NOT have any mental issue or qualm with killing Muslims. I'd be the perfect candidate.

I have tried their last game and first attempt to make an RPG, Mars: War Logs, on Steam. I did not finish it but I will if I ever get the time to play it again. It was not great, but it was not too bad either. I actually think most of you would enjoy it. In some ways Mars: War Logs was quite reminiscent of the early 3D RPG from Troika and BioWare back in the early 2000s. A very interesting/unique premise and world. (Started as a prison escape on a cyberpunk Mars, and then got dragged into some sort of planetary politics and civil war over the limited water resource - that is unique.) So much potentials, yet flawed due to limited budget, overreaching and uneven gameplay. But it was a good attempt. I think they are making a sequel called Technomancer. Hopefully their will do better because the world they had created for the first game was definitely a unique and very interesting one.

I own both on GOG. Have not played Papers, Please. I have just returned to playing Aarklash: Legacy. I started playing the game in May of 2014. It was fun for awhile. However, soon after my characters reached the level cap of 20, I lost the motivation to continue playing even though I was near the end of game. (I did not know the game had a level cap so I grinded quite a bit.) The biggest reward and satisfaction of that game was earning levels and skills, and it stopped. The level cap was an extremely bad design decision. Level 20 was such an odd place to set the cap because each character could max out two of their four skill trees, but the third skill tree was left stuck in the middle. I could still re-spec the skill trees at any moment, and frequent re-spec is required to deal with different high-level enemies that have different strengths and weaknesses. However, the constant re-spec became very tiresome. It was such a chore to micro-manage the skill trees for my eight different characters, and to keep switching their skills back and forth for different enemies. At that point the game ceased to be fun. It was just a whole lot of micro-management of skill trees. My last saved game was made on May 30, 2014. So I moved on to playing XCOM: Enemy Within, Dungeon Siege III, Majesty Gold HD, and Tomb Raider. All which I have finished and were fun to play until the very end. Yesterday, (i.e., Friday,) I just returned to Aarklash: Legacy. I will try to force myself to finish the game even though it is no longer fun: my character can no longer gain level, and the micro-management of re-spec'ing skill trees has become very tiresome and annoying. I will have to force myself to finish the game because I am close to the end. The level cap was just a horrible design decision. IMO, the game should have allowed players to max out all four skill trees, (we would still have to make choices because the four skill trees still branch out at various points;) so we could focus on tactical combat and playing the game instead of the endless, pointless micro-managing of skill trees.