alanschu

Exactly.

Part of the game experience is realism, with me. If you are talking to a character, least they can do is look real and be able to do complex expressions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces to mimic expressions accurately. For example, why could you not have accurate facial expressions in a game such as Half-Life 2, compared to the girl in this nVidia demo?

I'm not familiar with what was cut from his plotline.

I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces (nor pretty faces) to mimic expressions accurately.

I agree with Gromnir and his assessment of non-linear gameplay. Very, very few games actually allow you to progress through the story in a non-linear fashion. And if you get down to the barebones of it and strip away a lot of the fluff, you could probably strip down most (if not all) plots into a linear story.

Anything to substantiate that this will actually work, and not cause more problems by disconnecting these people with realitity. "Logic" and "commonsense" make what you say seem true. But I've seen logic and commonsense be so absolutely wrong that I always view it with skepticism. And a recidivism rates as high as you make it out to be? A study done in 2003-2004 demonstrated that recidivism rates for sexual offenders has decreased since 1998 (and that a whopping 73% of sexual offenders are never arrested later on. But commonsense has told us that once a sexual predator, always a sexual predator. WTF!?!). Recidivism is overstated in the media. It makes for a juicy story. You don't hear about the guy that gets out of prison and never commits another crime again. It's just not interesting enough. I'm not sure recidivism is the problem. Yes, I really want you to die. Hear that woosh, that was the point flying over your head. Instead you decide to strawman and deflect the argument. No, I'm not saying you should die. But perhaps if it was you that had to suffer execution for the crimes of someone else, it may "enlighten" (since that's a word you seem to enjoy using) your perspective on the issue. The only way a death penalty is effective and just is if the system is indeed without flaw. I said no such thing. Here's my statement: Here's hoping you're wrongfully found guilty of a capital crime you didn't commit. Would you be content, knowing that it's an acceptable loss? Mere collateral damage? Since you seem to acknowledge that they don't only kill bad people, if it was your life that was accidentally deemed worthy to be executed, would you still support the death penalty? Is it an acceptable loss knowing that while your life will be forfeit, the fact that the majority of death row inmates deserve it and therefore you'll be okay with sacrificing yourself? A martyr of sorts? It's hyperbole for effect, and apparently it went way over your head. I didn't say what I said simply because you disagreed with me, I said what I said because it's much easier to make decisions about who should or should not live when it's not yourself in the equation. Furthermore, your idea of taking people into the back immediately after verdict with a shotgun to the back is what I would call "appalling." The idea of an express lane through death row is a bad idea as it will only increase the number of innocent people killed.

Which is part of the reason why I feel Casavir could have been a very interesting character. Paladins are stereotyped (both by players in the in game world) as being beacons of righteousness. But there's nothing saying that they have to be.

Unfortunately, that's not much of a guarantee. If the death penalty is not a deterrent, I doubt hanging out in a black 8x6 cell is going to help either. What I wouldn't be surprised with though, is how exceptionally harmful it would be to throw someone into complete isolation for 5 years. If you're going to do that, you might as well just keep him in prison. If someone wasn't already disconnected with reality and society, after that they might as well be. The wonderful media (which already is excessively sensationalist, and would depict murders and rapes as being the most common type of crime committed) is exceptionally quick to point out repeat offenders for crimes. So much so, that it overrepresents it and makes people think that once a criminal, always a criminal. Rehabilitation programs do work. It's just that the media doesn't find it particularly news worthy if a criminal gets out of prison and never commits another crime and integrates himself perfectly into society. Also, I think when it comes to prison sentences, people completely underrate freedom. They hear about how they have access to a library, get meals, and so on, and get all upset. If you don't think it's all that bad, then why don't you just go commit a crime and go down easy street? I like my freedom. I like not having to adhere to a particular schedule that someone else sets up for me. If I want to hang out with friends and go down to the mall I can. If I wish to go on a vacation, I can. If I don't like my job and want to go and get a new one, I can. If I don't like the place I live and want to move, I can. Maybe it's just me, but I'd much rather have autonomy in my life, then be told when to eat, when to sleep, and so on (for the record, it's 4 AM right now, because the job I have lets me make my own hours. As long as I work a 35 hour week, the boss is happy). Here's hoping you're wrongfully found guilty of a capital crime you didn't commit. Would you be content, knowing that it's an acceptable loss? Mere collateral damage? That is false. Unless a life sentence can be as short as 6 years, which is how long Timothy McVeigh was in prison prior to his execution. And how much exactly is "relatively few" for people that face the electric chair? There was 24 in Texas in 2006 alone, and 53 in the entire United States. 2 per month in texas, and 1 a week in the entire US. And even then, these numbers are 50% lower than they were 5 years ago. How exactly does killing someone protect the rights of the victim? Personally, I'd rather protect the rights of everyone.

I LOVED STARMAN!!!! The Backflip super move!!!

I wonder if there's more to the cutlist. Sounds like Casavir's is kind of bland because of some missing parts of his plotline.

The thing is, I don't expect all of my games to have to improve on each other. I wouldn't say that Double Agent is an improvement on Chao Theory, but Chaos Theory was a fantastic experience. So Double Agent was relegated to a great experience.

I have heard that executions aren't as cheap as we would think they are, but cannot offer anything to substantiate this claim one way or the other.

Since I'm someone that likes good games, as well as Fallout, I look forward to the game. If it sucks, I won't buy it. But if it rocks, then yay for us.

I'm pretty sure that that is not true. Instead you'll be issuing more apologies to families of the wrongfully accused that are now dead at the hands of the government. Then what's with all that talk about psychopathy? Psychopaths do not commit murders out of circumstance. I wouldn't be surprised if executions happened much more frequently in the dark ages. I'd certainly consider it more akin to the "dark ages" than putting someone in a cell. The death penalty does not serve as a deterrence, and I feel allowing it sends the wrong message to the rest of society. Furthermore, a disproportionate number of murder convicts that get executed tend to be both poor and from minorities. People without high quality legal counsel (i.e. public defenders) tend to have juries and judges consider their crimes more worthy of execution moreso than those that can afford higher quality attorneys. The judicial system is not perfect, and can never be perfect. And unless it is perfect, I'd never support the death penalty.

Just how near to WW3 are we?

I'm sure they can come up with something. I think torture is much too extreme however. I'm against the death penalty, but I'd rather the guy just be killed rather than tortured.

Welcome to the catch-22. Assuming the creative writing of the romances does not improve, should a company please those that want romances of any kind and include them, or should the company please those that don't like the poorly written romances, and allocate their time and resources elsewhere?

I agree wholeheartedly. Sometimes a character, like say Mira, just isn't a romancable option. And I don't think that that is a bad thing.

Meh, I think torturing him would be stooping to his level.

Hahaha people are too creative. Here's more Rory goodness:

Hahahahahaa:

The plot thickens!

Okay, it looks like a solid line on my craptastic moniter at 1600x1200. Is that better? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes yes, much better. And if you happen to own Chaos Theory, I'm game for some Coop Multiplayer!

I think that that is part of the problem. If you offer a romance, you're going to get people disappointed (or downright frothing at the mouth, depending on who you talk to) that it was only person X, but not person Y.

You mean the dotted line that separates the post from the sig, or am I missing something? EDIT: Nevermind, I see it now. It looks like a solid line at 1600x1200. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No it doesn't! In any case, I just finished the first 3 splinter cells. Saving the world is hard.