Istima Loke

Hey, There's a sale of AP on Steam. I was going to get but then I thought maybe I won't be able to apply fixes like the ones discussed in this thread (like altering .ini files and whatnot). I'm worried that Steam will reverse the changes. Are my fears justified? Or not?

I never claimed it does, you keep arguing against something you think I'm saying instead of what I'm actually saying. As far as Wals's sequence, those would only be the odds he first predicted that specific sequence, getting some sequence means nothing since you'll always get some sequence. The only way this wouldn't be true if you pulled some pattern that's much rarer, like your example of a 100 Aces from 100 decks of cards. Any sequence of only one value would be much more rare than a sequence of mixed values, thus the odds that you'd pull all the same value instead of mixed would be appropriately lower. Edit: Actually I take that back. If I understand you correctly and you actually got the same number 7 times in a row, those are indeed incredible odds. I would have to assume that either the roulette was fixed, or everyone was too drunk to know the difference. This is what you don't understand: The significance of the aces or generally the significance of any pattern you see in a bunch of cards is completely unrelated to probabilities and is a construction of the human mind. The human mind sees patters. It, like, feeds on them. When you say: "Oh my god I got 12 aces out of 4 decks. The chance of this happening is one in a trillion!" this is your mind seeing a pattern. It sees order and finds it incredible. The chance of getting 12 aces out of 4 decks is exactly the same as getting any other combination. The moment you set 4 decks of cards down and draw four cards from each deck is the moment that will very certainly reveal a combination that has a one in a trillion chance of happening (actually (1/(52*51*50*49))^4 which is about 6 /10000000000000000000000000000). There is no such thing as a "rarer pattern". This is something your mind sees. It loads significance to something that from a probabilistic viewpoint doesn't have any. Probabilities don't care if the card shows number one or number 2 or a queen. And so, the moment you draw the cards, is the moment your so called miracle happens. And I'm not discussing here. I'm just telling you how probabilities work.

I rage-unistalled the game after losing my 90 level sorceress and a third tal rasha's set. I was playing in Europe. I can check my stash characters and give you what's left on them if they're not deleted if you want. EDIT: What's left on them (if they are not deleted) is not very good, but not rubbish neither

greed is a moral concept and as such, whether or not it is "evil" depends upon individual moral beliefs. ... Wait is this a joke? There is no real world definition of the world "evil"? Damn, and I thought that through taks everything would be real world defined, but it seems that the taks-(real world defined) terms are exactly those needed to "prove" what his ideological bias wants him to (I put the word "prove" in quotation marks, since the way taks argues makes it look like he hardly ever even looked at a proof). Oh, and by the way the question whether someone should rape, kill and steal is a matter of one's morality, yet the real world definitions sure do seem to cover the (again real world defined) stealing part of it.

You can also use the steam backup function, though I'm uncertain of how that works. Right click on any game and then press backup game. It will give you a menu with all the games and you choose which you can backup.

*casts raise dead* So, I have 8 invitations for this thingie's preview (beta) and being the misanthrope that I am, I have nobody to give them to. Anyone wants to try it out? If you do, just PM me your email address.

I think Sand/Killian Kalthorne/(whatever his name is) is an essential part of this place. Also Volourn. So I nominate these two. EDIT: Maybe 213374U as well. EDIT2: I also think we should add Shryke.

Or like this: DA ≥ BG, DA ≠ NWN1 Translation for any who may have need of it: Or more like: ∀x∃y(x≥DA → Release(y)=2002∧x<y)

My english failed me so did taks say that he thinks that liberties and rights are defined/provided by the state or the opposite?

What part of story was incoherent in TW1? The main story was incoherent. First of all I guess you agree that the story was not there for 90% of the game. I was hunting down that Salamander people for like 70 hours. Like many others around chapter 2 I couldn't remember what I was doing but I kept playing. There were other things you were doing in the game, but they were really unrelated to my character (and even my character couldn't stop saying how he didn't care about them, making things even more unbearable). So, SPOILERS AHEAD. You have been warned people and all that ('m not using tags since it's kind of a big paragraph and would make it hard to read): Alvin/the grandmaster made no sense. The main story was about how he could see some prophecy about an ice age coming and his attempt to stop it. Also, he was the commander of the order of the flaming rose. Why did he order his men to attack and create havoc? There are way subtler ways to get specimens for his experiments to create a human race that will withstand cold without creating wars between the races (his men attacked like 3 times the elves-dwarves openly and were the reason Geralt actually reached him and killed him). So the whole game, the war between the races didn't make sense. It was pointless and was not explained in the game and it was what we were forced to see for 80 hours or so. Also, he knew about the prophecy in a world of magic, it would make sense that he would go to the Witchers' stronghold and talk about his visions (it's not like there are no such things in the world) to get the Witchers actually help him with the mutations. He could help the king return and establish order and then talk to him about the prophesy and ask for his help. And I'm sure there are other reasonable ways he could deal with that prophecy. Though instead of doing all these things, he decided to start racial wars. Funnily enough he was aware of the hate towards himself he would create to Geralt because Alvin was with him for a long time in the beginning of the game. And why didn't he tell Geralt who he was? Also, let's not get into time travel paradoxes, since he was hunting himself literally. I don't think that characters in mediums should be always perfect and absolutely logical, since making mistakes makes them human, but there cannot be drawn any connection between the racial war and his reasons behind them, nor did he tried to explain them in the game. So he was just a character, whose motives had absolutely nothing to do his actions and the only reason this is so, is because CD project red wanted an adversary with "good" motives in order to show the shades of grey. The rest of the (almost unrelated to the main plot) events occurring were boring with the exceptions of the beginning of the investigation (the end with the tower was anticlimactic and irrelevant) and the village with the marriage (which was the only part of the game I liked). And that's what I think that hurt the Witcher most (apart from the appalling combat that was what I was forced to do in the game). That the developers (at least look like) were trying to put choices and consequences, lesser than two evil situations, questionable morals and complex issues, without actually caring to find out what they really mean or about why people want that stuff in a game or in a movie or a book. It's not that they are cool, it's that they create consistency and realism in the game world. If choices and consequences are like: I order a pizza, they ask me if I want coke with it, I say yes and then the orange juice in my fridge disappears then it's not fun, it's frustrating. I'm not talking about telling me every 3 seconds "If you choose this the following will happen". The unexpected is good and fun as long as it makes sense. And the same applies to lesser than two evil situations when obvious better solutions exist and I don't have the option to try them out (and maybe fail), but I'm forced to either kill half the population or all of the population (that's an exaggeration to make a point). The morals and maturity were kind of annoying at first, but you just have to realise that they aren't in the game and were just a marketing trick and keep playing without expecting anything related to them. So that's my rant, I guess.

It sure looks like they captured the essence of maturity once again. I bet the game will be full of those complex issues, just like the first one! Well, irony aside, I'm not really expecting much of this game. Let's just hope they manage to make a coherent story this time (since it doesn't look like they are changing the combat) in order to actually make a playable game.

I'm very fond of this description of art, by Alfred North Whitehead:

Yes, but invalid and defaced votes can be a protest against the political parties that are given as choices to vote for. Not voting can be a protest against the process of voting itself. I'm not going to comment on whether that's good or bad since we're already kind of off topic.

I do that too. If I posted every post that I type, I'd look like I actually participate in the forums. Also I'm sure I would have been banned by now. :\

It's because of the filter. Replace the stars in "bull****" with what it meant to say.