Tale

Then it wouldn't really be Knights of the Old Republic, would it?

I'm saying that if you're going to generalize something, try and generalize it right. Resistance is not the greatest fount of originality, but it's not burdened by the overuse of large, angry enemies with big guns. The descriptors don't match up. Unless you're looking for a game where the enemies are midgets in swimwear.

w-hat? Next you'll be saying you saw big black men. "I've just got to find some way to shoehorn fighting aliens in the 1950s into a generic macho shooter."

Wait, this game has coop, don't you hate it? I think you misunderstood one of my previous posts.

Circuit City or Amazon.com. When I purchased my Nintendo DS at Circuit City, they gave me a Gamer's Club 10% off card. So I try to use them as much as possible when purchasing. Amazon is who I use if I decide to pre-order anything.

I refuse to believe several of those shots. There's another one, very much like that, except it features two of those walkers, and planes flying in the background. You will not convince me that those planes are not painted on there. Which causes me to be highly suspect of the rest of the image.

Your only an Arch-Mage now. Ooh, the writers for Gearbox's game were writers for DS9 and BSG. Ooh, one of them did the Kobol's Last Gleaming episodes.

It is kind of sucky, to be honest. But not enough to ruin the game for me. I can live with the backtracking if it involves fun combat along the way. What about the platforming? Does it even dwell within the realm of frustration? Some of NG's platforming was just horrid, especially given the 3D camera. The platforming borders on nonexistant.

You can't be a real poster. Whose alt are you?

You don't have to own an IP to work on it. Unless they parted on not good terms, it could very well happen.

Indeed, it looks very exciting. I just hope they balance out the encounters some more. The original seemed cheap sometimes. However much I love it, it was frustrating to feel that the only way to win a level was by luck or trial and error.

The sequel was developed by Black Isle. O_o

Whichever of you recommended Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei (wooh, typed it right my first try), I'm going to hold you responsible if I spit out my tea all over my monitor and keyboards. Tears. Tears of laughter.

I've done that 8900 times. Can we qualify for over a mile now?

Just because one man can set his sights on conquering the world does not mean conquering all of Europe is to be scoffed at. It is ludicrous. Not ludicrous to aspire to such a thing. Ludicrous to count a grandiose aspiration as the only thing that is significant. Lacking perfection is not the same as achieving nothing. Just a small step forward is still a small step. We haven't evolved much from the jungle until we're gotten several steps further. And I've already pointed out many steps. That you completely ignore. Heck, what you're saying here isn't even addressing the point I just made. Does using the words "small steps" somehow justify ignorance of anything but the grandiose? Or does it only demonstrate it?

Just because one man can set his sights on conquering the world does not mean conquering all of Europe is to be scoffed at. It is ludicrous. Not ludicrous to aspire to such a thing. Ludicrous to count a grandiose aspiration as the only thing that is significant. Lacking perfection is not the same as achieving nothing.

You didn't read my post properly. I never suggested that humans are the only ones capable of committing murder of any kind. Humans are even more vicious than animals, as in humans can kill without the need of expanding territory, greed or survival. We just do because we can without any previous external stimuli. And that is my point, as in we haven't truly evolved as a species until we stop killing one and another. Civilizations with human rights are only the first baby-step, and can be easily taken away by a huge disaster. To set the bar of social evolution at the stage where no killing occurs is absolutely ludicrous. And to say that "humans are more vicious than animals" when there are animals who eat their own young with a manner of regularity is just ignorant. Established rights is not a "baby-step" over civilizations of the past or animals. Abolishment of slavery, establishment of democracies, abolishment of torture and maiming for petty crimes is not a "baby-step." These are BIG things. These have profound effects.

As for TV shows, I was never arguing against them. They're far more likely (to the point where I'd argue it's assured) to have their primary success come from downloads. I don't really know how to argue against but it does have me ask a question. If an HD movie is only 2.5 GB, why are we not seeing them being sold at the store on DVDs which hold nearly 5 GB on a single layer? You could fit both the HD and the SD version on a single layer DVD that way. If you honestly believe the home movie market has no interest in moving into better quality picture and sound, that's something we'll have to disagree on. And that's the only way to keep your movies at the sizes you cite. Heavy compression and limited sound options. Extras and bonus features I think we can do without. I agree they would. But I sincerely doubt we'll be seeing the infrastructure to support the majority* of the developed world downloading 2.5GB files at 5MB/s simultaneously on Friday nights anytime soon. Later is a whole other issue. *exaggeration of the large movie renting/purchasing crowds that occur on Friday nights I never really said anything about hard drive space except it being a requirement for the entertainment center box. That was more a descriptor than a qualifier. Are you honestly trying to argue that the majority of movie watches will convert to watching a small handheld screen for their regular movie viewing? Or are you simply reiterating the existance of a niche success that I never argued against? I never made the point that nobody will buy digital downloads. My point is that it won't become the dominant form relatively soon. This is the main jist of what I was saying. They haven't even really started. I never said it won't ever happen. Just that it's not on the verge of replacing disc media. This is all of course, ignoring the simple concept of ownership that is present in our consumerist society. Something to hold is more tangible and valuable to many than data. Music could have very well not taken off at all if it hadn't been for the ability to select individual tracks instead of albums and increased portability, two things not applicable to movies. The sole advantage that comes to mind (a very big advantage, huge even) is the lack of shelfspace for digital downloads. More important at the storefront than the homefront because it means more room for available movie choices. And that's going to be legally downloading's biggest hindrance to overcome, demonstrating a clear advantage for consumer adoption over discs. Which aside from that single one I mentioned, it doesn't really have.

Watched an episode of Code Geass yesterday. Surprisingly dark and looking good.

Felt short. But many games do when you play them nonstop.

Dear Silent Hill, Oh yeah, that's real mature. You know how I feel about basements, so you make it the top floor this time. Real ****ing funny. What's next, front doors? Save points? Whenever I raise my gun? Die, Tale

Dear Silent Hill, Why are you sending me into the Hospital's basement? I still firmly recall what happened when you sent me into the school's basement. I should think your recollection is as good as mine, but in the event that it is not allow me to remind you. . So, I ask, why are you doing this again? Certainly you do not think a repeat of our last excursion is due. How about sending me to a bright sunny park? I do think I would enjoy that. Or just about any place other than another basement. Filled with monsters. I hate you, Tale P.S. Oh, what's this I see on the map of the basement? A morgue? P.P.S.

Well, the thing is your suggestion explicitly infringes on second amendment rights of law abiding US citizens. You are talking about practically criminalizing the abnormal. Probably worse is that you're talking about publishing a list of the abnormal with wich to discriminate by. But, y'know, only a particular subset of the abnormal. That's okay. There is no answer to be found in knee jerk single focus responses. This guy was depressed, lets limit the rights of all depressed people! This guy played video games, lets limit video games! This guy voted for the green party, lets outlaw non-republican or democratic voters! Gorth pointed it out best. It's not just one thing. Many things contribute and it's improper to just pick and choose the aspects you think are okay to isolate. Violent media, healthcare, social problems, guns, and much else. Many of these are problems we already know about and work on. However, other people choose to play a blame / defensive-blame game that only serves to confuse the issues instead of look at them. The two most important things I think should be done are better education systems in regards to making the public aware of topics of social problems, mental health, and violent media beyond the media arguments. And more responsive state and local governments that implement more trial measure laws with guaranteed expirations should they not show the desired effects.

That's just an exaggeration. 2 days is reasonable for freedom.

What kind of mental illness? Are we talking the schizophrenic, the depressed, the manic, ODD, ADHD, CD, ASBD, OCD, autistic, those with irrational fears? Postpartum depression, PTSD? Enuresis? 90% of the people who are critical of the government can fit or be shoehorned into quite a number of these categories. I can think of at least 4 I am able to fit you into. Criteria for a diagnosis of any particular mental illness is not meant to be used to exclude people in the fashion you think it is.