Xard

Not so, if reports of 80,000+ protests lodged and wide-spread corruption are to be believed. The CCP is a huge organization - most people don't understand how huge. It's got some 70+ million members. There are bound to be internal conflicts, cliques, and the like. The Hu/Wen team is also not going to be in control forever. He is expected to retire around 2012, if I'm not mistaken. Protesters and such in China are mere drop in the ocean when it comes to numbers. The defining years and power struggles happened back in 90's, especially in year 1997, that was truly defining year. The old conservative guard lost (and as it seems, once and for all when it comes to Big Matters) and reformists have ran country ever since. Only real big source of failure so far has been enviromental issues and STILL China has done A LOT work for it and their goverment is definetly not shutting their eyes for the problem. In other matters progress has been steady and promising. Nothing happens fast in China. There are hard trials, such as the problem with countryside-city unbalance but you know what, that has been pretty much number one on their issue lists and already they've done a lot to fix the problem. It is long road, but plans are sound and about as good as they can get when governing as big country as that with multitude of nationalities. and ever since 90's attacks on corruption, "dear brother" systems and questionable bank and law matters have been vast. The "large corruption" in CCP is nothing but myth in western media. And believe it or not human rights are in today's China BETTER than ever in history

I was about to make thread about this I am absolutely stunned and under mixed feelings of confusion, disbelief and worry. I never could've seen THIS happening. Sure, Russian bear likes to rattle its weapons and arms as that (esp. NUKLIAR WEAPONZ) is their greatest single remaining thing from their superpower days, but I couldn't imagine they'd go beyond that stage (and using energy weapon aka Gazpro) to actual war Very worrysome Good luck Georgia! You need it

If country survives Culture Revolution it survives everything I wouldn't worry about China too much. Especially around the change of millenium western world was chockful of books by economical experts with "deep knowledge about China" who predicted the downfall of China. In fact it is still cycle that repeats once in few years or so. lol Not surprisingly these economists were uniformly americans and brittons, working from antiqued and off the wall simplified understanding of China. Really, amount of poor information and black and whiteness even in such magazines as The Times when it comes to China is really quite horrible. Among those who have worked for years in China tend to be really ashamed about their homeland media and their understanding of that vast country. Which is nigh-uniformly very lacking and very biased What might be even more funny are these famed experts giving suggestions to China how they should proceed. Too bad Chinese goverment has always incorporated the very same things said in their plans about year or so earlier on average, based on reports of their own, highly capable, group of experts I really like the part about "Too much rests on the internal conflicts within the CCP" because as we all know China's goverment barely does anything more than fights for power and position. Really, that has no basis. Hu Jintao has the country firmly in his grasp as it is. edit: What I'm saying is: There is no doom scenario in horizon that stops China's eventual rise to biggest powerplayer of the world

We could as well name these games as "Start Of Chinese Century" , because historians in future are going to try to pin point some event anyway.

No way No way Only country with enough resources and people is U.S of A It was utterly mad and not in small part due to China's rich cultural heritage. Mad lighting events and no one is going to top that lighting the olympic torch without shooting it into moon with a frickin' rocket

The opening was ****ing mad, mad Screw the riots and ****, China will do epically well in this whole show!

And it shows lol Anyway, I on the other hand have not seen the movie Sounds fun. Considered the possibility this is reversing the tired Hollywood tropes like black guy always survives and second lead character is wise crackin' black? Considering the movie's ending (which is different from the book) I'd bet this is just another case of turning cliches upside down, not part of some KKK paranoia conspiracy They can't be the soldiers from the military base, because military base was utterly ****ed up. They're National Guard from somewhere else nearby. burned himself...with a mop? Anyway, that's the way deranged fanatics are Having not seen the movie I can't comment on burning yourself with a mop, but apparently if you saw something like that in skiing documentary it isn't over the laws of physics lol paranoid umm what? btw, they're not aliens at all People are good at blinding themselves when some weird **** happens contrary to their worldviews. Self deception ftw Well, apparently they do block (all or nearly all, depending on truth value of certain phares in novella) radio waves etc. so who knows Then again this is propably blurp due to changed ending. Original ending was very different. Movies ending is great As for 10th... eheheh

and on top of that confusion on how someone who looks like Jesus can be so popular I mean hello, we're not in 70's are we?!?!?!?!?!?

Really, Shryke must be some sort of an android bot deviced to make psychological test on internet geeks. Subjects: jealousy, disbelief

it's not RTS, it was typo

Overall best games rated on how many mentions (up to Jaesun's post), I didn't bother up making weighted meter with different points value depending on game's number (besides, some didn't put them in any order so it would've been impossible all the same). I took the 5 games that got most mentions: 4. Baldur's Gate 1: 10 entries 4. Fallout 2: 10 entries 3. Planescape Torment: 11 entries 2. Fallout: 12 entries And the winner is... 1. Baldur's Gate 2: 21 entries Very tight competition for other spots but BG2 really crushes others

no no no no What's next, Godfather must be banned?

nope, it was created because of the failure of the Interplay

Thanks Sand. Surprisingly I didn't put that much thought into it before writing, it just flowed out naturally. I guess that was because of certain (american) document about different prison systems across the globe I saw some months ago and the Scott Peck's book which I mentioned. It is worth noting I can be just as bitter and cynical about humans as you - not rare thing to happen - but main difference is I recognize (or then I just believe in it, says the utter cynic) the potential in our species that may or may not be realized. Plus my ire stems from somewhat different source(s). And it's not like I can't see where you're coming from. For example I wouldn't bat a eyelash or feel pity if Fritzl was killed by his inmates in prison. So I could see the thing in the light of poetic justice. BUT it is crucial goverment and society are not given arbitary right to end conscious life (my feelings on abortion and euthanazing are very mixed, though they have nothing to do with religion. ) (Hell Kitty, I didn't say that! Edit your quotebox ) Fine, then so is the death penalty. If the purpose of justice is rehabilitation, why not let someone go if they won't do it again? If the purpose is deterrence, why not put everybody who comes into court on supicion in jail? If there's a fair case against them, why not just automatically send them to jail? It'd deter people better, since they would believe that it's much easier for them to go to jail. Hypothetical situation: after an extensive psychological evaluation, it is determined that a convicted murderer has a negligible chance to kill again (similar to or less than any random Joe on the street). Should we let him go free? Really? A person who is in prison for life has nothing left to lose if you abolish the death penalty. What's to keep them from killing a guard or fellow inmate? No, that is not purpose of justice. Rehabilation is part of A) giving second chance (good and just thing towards the person) B) good pragmatism of society's structure (good and just thing towards community). It does cost money feeding prisoners and this money comes in form of taxes. That is why it is most important to get him/her into status of normal, taxpaying citizen. He doesn't burden society plus it is good for him also. This does not happen in America's model very often. Most of the criminals in your prisons end up there too again and again and again. It takes resources and fills your prisons. For the record do you know America has most prisoners in the world when compared against population? No other country comes close. It is becoming HUGE problem due to your law scenarios. For example in Europe there are many small crimes for which you'd survive with surcharge that would get you in prison in America. Not to mention the off the wall "three ticks" system that has grown in popularity over the years. It is becoming big social problem in States. As for what IS justice? Might as well look for the definition: 1. The quality of being just; fairness. 2. 1. The principle of moral rightness; equity. 2. Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness. 3. 1. The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law. 2. Law. The administration and procedure of law. 4. Conformity to truth, fact, or sound reason: The overcharged customer was angry, and with justice. 5. (Abbr. J.) Law. 1. A judge. 2. A justice of the peace. Now as we know morals are ambiguous things, so basing justice on 2. is hard thing to do. But ultimately it is about being fair. What is not fair is killing individual. Poetic justice is different thing. And when society is considered justice is above all upholding the law. This however does not mean laws are instrictly just aka fair. For example law that doesn't fit under this category is that of death penalty But as I already said, point of legal systems is above all pragmatism. As for the latter part "why not let someone go if they won't do it again?"... Simple: it is not justice. The victims (alive or dead, depending on nature of crime) have right to "see" "moral judgement" passed on offender. Plus it undermines and destroys the whole pragmatic undercurrents that are the real reason for society's justice system (instead of using, say, system based on poetic justice that really would easily just lead to never ending cycle of vendettas and such) If crime is not punished it doesn't send the message to other people pondering on if they shall commit a crime or not. However death penalty is immoral and wrong and as it doesn't have any positive effect on crime rates (and indeed, some studies might claim the contrary in certain sociological scenarios) making it useless even from pragmatic pov. Plus if managing to change killer to contributing member of society (not easy task and not even nearly always succesful) the rewards for system from pragmatic pov are greater than those of simply killing him. Plus: as any criminologists woud tell you chance of criminal repeating his crime rises expotentially with each crime he commits. If there's no punishment for it it really wouldn't be matter of chance, it would be simply what'd happen. Besides, rehabilating process and prison cuts convict off his previous form of life and gives opportunity to study etc. he wouldn't otherwise have Tell me this isn't real argument? You're not dumb. "Fair case" includes evidence and pleading guilty, at which point suspect is no longer suspect. Duh No, that fails utterly on level of justness/fairness (and people really, really don't like unjust laws you know) AND on pragmatic level too. Can you imagine the expenditure for sending each single suspect for crime to jail? Geez Well don't worry, that isn't the case. And even if the thesis of hypothetical situation was true it wouldn't change anything for reasons I expanded on above

Yeah, that is a pretty good idea, except for the Alaskan people who have to leave when they build it. Kill 'em all and let God sort them out? I like that! I like it too. Yeah, I say we take you with time machine back to Babylon and after month of ragged life and clinging unto your life you steal apple and end up getting caught and losing hand. Proper justice ehh? i don't think there are many true pro-lifers that see things this way (which is different than the "activists," IMO), but you're confusing moralities here. in one case the subject made a choice, in the other the subject was incapable of making a choice. apples and oranges. right or wrong is not my point, and quite immaterial as well. taks We might debate more on this but suffice to say that notion arose from the quick sarcastic mention in Scott Peck's book "People of the Lie: Psychology of Evil" in portion about moral hypocrisy and such. I'd say that it is still very hypocritical as they oppose murdering a living person, but are ok with murdering a living person in other situation of life. Okay, what is putting a murderer in prison if not vengeance? That could also be used to describe putting a man who will never commit another crime in jail. Plus, the death penalty has several practical benefits, like dissuading lifer violence and motivating criminals to take plea bargains. As Hell Kitty said it is not vengeance, it is the punishment for breaking the laws of society. Justice system is build upon pragmatism. It is not case of "you're evil person so take that!", it is case of "we must must discourage others by giving you this punishment which you deserve, but punishing you isn't the main point." and just as important is the trying to change "criminal back into contributing member of society". He is jail for his own good too. That last part is in theory, american judgement system has some...curious aspects, death penalty being worst of them. As I said before death penalty is utterly ineffective in discouraging crime and in some cases may even have contrary effects. and as for plea bargains, the system largerly used in most of the western world (esp. here in northern countries) of investing a lot resources in changing the criminals nature is ten times more efficient.

Humans can and have changed over the time. I'm not denying we have "dark" side in ourselves, but we are moral beings with freedom to choose what we do. Man has potential to be killer, but that doesn't mean he will become one. No one* WANTS to become murderer. Most killers are led to their wrong decision due to circumstances surrounding them. Blacks don't do more crimes and murders because they're blacks, the reasons when watching picture as a whole are sociological. I also find it very questionable how you judge and doom humanity to eternal bloodshed. We've made huge advance from the days of the old and cases like Nazi Germany show we must always fight against our "dark" side and that we're far from victory, but no one can deny progress. Progress on the other hand is 100 % tied to great thinkers and moral authorities that have existed throughout the centuries. I say Jesus was the greatest and most important of them, but he was far from only one. It is no coincidence less civilized, cultured and more ignorant people are more often human rights are tampered with. For example take the defeat of slavery as great example of progress compared to ancient times. Or much improved status of women. Or the fact we nowadays universally abhore killing person even if he wasn't part of our "tribe" or clique. None of these are "natural" fundamental truths about our nature. No, it is showcase of our slow, steady climb of our status and nature. What can change the nature of man so to speak? We both know the answer isn't "nothing". Our cultural and intellectual evolution is comparable to evolution of law. It started from (often religious) taboos, reached the state of Hammurabi's law - that in its day and when dealing with that day's people was only really working form of law code due to various reasons - and then in following milleniums evolved a lot forward. What you and many other people in this thread want is NOT JUSTICE, what you want is revenge, feel of moral righteouness being served and above all regress back 4000 years to Hammurabi's Code. Which is just ridiculous * Of course I left neurologically and mentally ill people such as psychopaths out of this. However I should add that with the great upheavals in scientific worldview that started with quantum mechanics and (if looking especially) in todaysurgance of self-directed neuroplasticity I won't rule out possibility of curing even people way beyond scope of medicine. We've just started to understand the power of mental effort and our ability to change ourselves (and it doesn't limit at all to neuroplasticity, for example despite lenghty history of placebo effects and faith healings that materialist prejudice have so long tried to, without success, explain away, the scientific worldview is just now started the sloow change) via consciousness. Change your mind, change your brain so to speak. The great breakthroughs in healing OCD with self-directed neuroplasticity are especially noteworthy, as well is the recently found capability to fix neural pathways via conscious attention, pathways that were thought to be destroyed forever. We've just started to understand the capabilities of neuroplasticity in healing and yet even know there have been great exhilirating achievements. I won't put away possibility that 100 years in future with much more effective and precise methods (and possibly with help of nano-machines) altering brains of such people might actually change their amorality. (Anyway this is off-topic, but I felt that I had to cover the fact I ignored mentally ill people in "no one") Murder is nothing but form of homicide which is simply act of killing another person, lawfully or not. The word "murder" came to be used on certan kind of act performed inside society, but nature of act - killing other human - has not changed a bit. Murder is nothing but a label. Indeed, in enough hard circumstances people usually regress backwards and fall far closer back to their animalistic instincts. But, I should add it is NOT determined what you said will happen. Sure, it is by far the most likely outcome but that has not been always the case, even in history. And I should add the whole purpose of modern civilization is to make sure such situation will not happen. Purpose is to minimize chance of regress in human societies. To use words of Freudian psychology (which I'm not supporter btw so don't go "lol penises" on me) Id thriumphs over Superego. One of the core aspects of humanity's intellectual evolution is shift from Id driven nature to Ego and Superego driven nature. No one is born "evil". Society's aim (or at least in theory) includes creating JUST system. In just system people have no reason to disrespect laws. When however economic collapse happens and preys upon you and especially on future of your own children, trust to laws (that were insufficient to protect them) dimishes in comparison with possibility of robbing a bank. I'm not saying it justifies the act (which it don't) or that they had no choice in the matter (which they had) but you can't put all blame on individual commiting the crime. We are, after all, shaped by our genes, enviroment and our hopes/beliefs/etc. If our enviroment is harsh and we carry genes making it likely for us to have aggressive behaviour and THEN all our motivation to improve ourselves and be contributing member of society as well as hope for better are snuff out, you're in very grave danger of not giving a **** about the laws. Criminals tend to have tough backgrounds with broken families and the like. You CAN'T blind your eyes from external forces shaping us. Sorry, Spinoza oversimplified things. Human nature does not have to be that of beast striving for survival. It CAN - and it isn't entirely unheard of - be that of respecting the life of others and ourselves, wanting to be a "good" person. Buddhists aiming for bettering themselves have no needs of laws to do that. They act as they do because they BELIEVE that is their nature or what is should be. Then again, if one BELIEVES that humans are barely constrained evil beasts and they'd take everything that is important to you if given chance...Well, you'd act like them, defending your turf and important ones with no hesitation to rip those throats of so called threats. Because as human you and they can't be nothing more than that....So you better try to fare as well as possible. Which reminds me so much of the Dogs that it isn't even funny. Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise. If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze? Deaf, dumb, and blind, you just keep on pretending That everyone's expendable and no-one has a real friend. And it seems to you the thing to do would be to isolate the winner And everything's done under the sun, And you believe at heart, everyone's a killer. The question whether humans are by nature good or evil... Among contemporary psychologists and other such people general answer tends to be "neither, but they have capability of being either or both". (not direct quotation per se) "Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." - Herman Goering That has no basis at all, you're merely commenting from your pov which in this case is anything but rational or beliavable. You have zero proof for that claim. Nada. Besides, ever considered the fact innocents are convicted too? Sorry, but goverments (especially USA's) have things they waste ****loads more resources on than prisons (in fact the money your goverment spends on rehabilating criminals back to norma society is pitiful). For example as long as the support and large scale deals with arms industry are such huge sinkhole for resources justifying death penalties (which is NOT justifiable by simple lack of money. What, businessman can kill his partner because he needed moar money? Any death penalty = saving funds pragmatic stance is immoral by its very nature) for lack of resources is ridiculous. And what is this "worthwile individual"? You? What about some convict who had change of heart (commonly with finding religion at the same time) and in latter years of life radiated caring, aid and compassion to everyone around him and travelled accross the country to help young people on danger to slip on the "dark" side (e.g drug usage) because of his path and his regret? Are you trying to say because of the mistakes he made in past choices and later regretted heavily he is worthless individual compared to average, law abiding citizen that only sees things related to him, perhaps sparing few bucks from his vast savings once or twice to comfort his conscience? Remember Jesus's story about fariseus and the poor widow? Yes we are. We've already little bit above this, but we have a lot of unfullfilled potential as species. I'm not saying we for sure ever reach "higher" (in philosophical sense, not literally) state of existence for sure but denying the possibilty and dismissing the beauty human lives have bestowed over the years is nothing but narrow minded, heavily attituted venomous cynicism, not objective look on possible futures we humans may choose to walk. And the mere existence of people like Mahadma Gandhi and his ilk of "philosophers" and members of "religious mumbo-jumbo" prove that each of us has potential. Yes, we do what all animals do. None of those doom us to petty life full of hate and dog eat dog scenarios, as far as killing is necessary evil only done for getting food. Or saving our life when locked up in room with raving lunatic with axe, though even then fatal damage is not - although justifiable - something that must be dealt. Aahh, but what kind of details they are! edit: corrected few obvious spelling mistakes

Alone by the fact in PS:T (after I set combat difficulty to hardest) combat was harder because enemies delt so much damage. Then again, I haven't played FO on the hardest yet *shrug* Well, the point stands nonetheless

And PS:T's is better than FO's I found out. Which leads to strange conclusion Better the combat system, worse the actual combat lolwut

Now that I'm bored with MotB, I think I'll try DX next Getting bored with MotB is crime against humanity, tsk I too have never heard of this. In finnish mags the original Xbox version got a lot flak due to controls. PC version got on average about 20 points more than Xbox version in 0/100 scale and I'm sure major bugs would've brought that down

There are alot better older games you should've played THERE! edit: I've been wanting to play this game for ages

That is right. it is far more cost effective to use a bullet than clothe and feed a irredeemable murderer for 30 to 60 years. Because obviously money is the most important value in the world. It is also ok to spend trillions dollars on weapon industry but heaven forbid you use tax payer's money to, say, also how do you know who is irredeemable and who is not? Nothing inhumane about a bullet to the back of the head, he'd be dead before he could feel anything. Furthermore, after you kill someone, you evidently have no respect for human life, so why should you keep yours? Killing by itself is wrong. Always. It doesn't matter if you kill your kids by putting meds to their glass of water they get before night or do you torture enemy soldier to death. Or put bullet in head of convict. And maybe just system and human beings would thrive to be something BETTER than their antagonists, not to regress back on their level? That's the principle message of Jesus and countless other philosophers, religious figures and thinkers in human history. If you regress you're no better than they are. (off-topic: I find it very funny many "pro-life" activists who side against abortion on the other hand are just fine with death penalties)

ToEE but no Fallouts or PS:T? Anyway, my list is quite similar to many others in here 1. Planescape Torment What can I say... Best art I've encountered in game, fantastic soundtrack, great GUI and by far the best writing I've encountered in game. Puts most of the books I've read to shame. And in my latest playthrough I put the difficulty level as high as possible and lo; most of the time combat was actually fun and I could't just arse myself through it like in most of modern games. Modron Cube battles, some Curst encounters with guards and fighting bunch of raving xaositects were all great fun. If only encounter design would've rocked... So even the weakest aspect, combat, ranges mostly from passable to good. Best game ever 2. Fallout The quintessential RPG, nuff said 3. Fallout 2 Nearly as good as the first installment. However some of the designed areas just plain sucked too much (see: Raider Caves) so that gives small edge to considerably shorter (and easier) FO1 4. Deus Ex Best RPG-FPS hybrid ever 5. System Shock 2 Shodan. That is all 6. Baldur's Gate 2 GOOD Epicness. 7. NWN2: MotB Best plot since Planescape Torment. Fantastic narrative and writing. Although still overall too easy provided few very nice combat scenarios. 8. Civ 4 Best Civilization game and that is saying a lot. 9. Metal Gear Solid the original psone game is still best part of this fantastic series. 10. Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines Great setting + writing, meh combat.