Bartimaeus

Really disagree there, though I agree with the cut bit. 'Realistic weapon' mods in Stalker are a misnomer in many ways. If it were 'realistic' to always hit where you aimed at everyone would be White Death and there would be no point having shooting medals at the Olympics or specialist snipers. You miss what you aim at all (well, a lot of) the time in reality despite thinking that you've aimed perfectly. To get an actual realistic result from shooting you need either bullet spray or gun wobble. The sort of thing you sometimes get with bullets going off at 30 degree angles or being unable to fire some guns at all due to skill limitations which come from RPG mechanics in fp perspective is stupid, but that doesn't happen in Stalker anyway. Guns in, at least Shadow of Chernobyl, were just *absurd* on the low-end of things, though. Shotguns that shot pellets at impossible (and ridiculously inaccurate) angles, bullets coming out of rifle barrels at variances just not possible (you say this didn't happen in Stalker, but I think it did in at least ShoC with the vanilla weapons), bullet velocities that just totally and utterly wrong (they were unrealistically slow by a bit, perhaps to show off the bullet physics, but it was just too much - it's silly that you can visibly track the path of every bullet, even ones you're shooting at near point blank range), RPMs that were just flat-out incorrect for some weapons, etc. If they wanted to simulate more of the difficulties of shooting, I would say they probably would've been better off using the more typical route of adding a little bit of sway* - not a lot, not nearly as ridiculous as some other games go, but just a little bit - while also making bullets a little bit erratic mid-flight. It doesn't make sense for bullets to immediately and visibly verge off in seemingly random directions right as they come out of the barrel. *I personally don't like gun swaying, but S.T.A.L.K.E.R. isn't a competitive FPS, and it's too easy to, as you said, become basically the White Death in a game like this without any handicaps, and so I'd be O.K. with just a little, to at least make quick-scoping harder. An option for it, at least, for those of us pretty good at FPSes wouldn't be remiss. I already disable crosshairs and the minimap when I play, so I wouldn't mind a little more difficulty.

Yeah, Stalker's guns were a little wonky - the devs were definitely trying to "RPG"-ize them (i.e. provide different tiers of weapons by making some unrealistically weaker than others). The game only becomes better if you get a "realistic weapons" mod on top of it, and can then appreciate how well the bullet physics engine works, especially when you realize that most other shooters don't bother with bullet physics to begin with and just make almost everything hitscan.

I've heard Metro increases everyone's DPS on higher difficulty levels. Yep. You got a way better experience playing on the higher difficulties.

For most games, it usually doesn't matter, though, because the higher difficulties are terrible, and offer very little in the way of making things more difficult outside of increasing the damage sponginess of enemies. If, however, the best experience comes on one of the higher difficulties (...and for Hitman, I believe it does for at least a certain segment of its players), then you'd just be shooting yourself in the foot by locking it away. So of course, that's exactly what they did.

I hate games that lock difficulties behind other difficulties, and it's especially garbage to do it on a Hitman game, of all game series.

Whoa, whoa, hold on a second here...you have to beat all these challenges (and presumably the level) to unlock higher difficulties?

That sounds a little tedious, if I'm being honest...

Ahhhhhhh...Metacritic! The place where 13 year old kids gather around from time to time to p*ss on the single good game that they don't happen to own. What better source to use for a research when it comes to video games, eh?! It's funny because I usually end up reading the reviews that are rated 6 when I check out Metacritic, those tend to be the neutral ones, at least they let you know how the game plays... Also 2001? Seriously!!! What the hell happened to 2007 then?! Just check out ACG, EasyAllies or GiantBomb. Most of these guys have been in the video games industry since forever and based on what they say, I really don't think there will be a video games industry crash...unless Steam and its collection of games become vaporware or something. I am pretty sure they're using the actual critic reviews (aka the metascore), not the user score.

I'd say motherboard. I have a similar problem with my ASUS Maximus in regards to the "failure at boot", and always assumed it was the motherboard. Not a big enough of a deal for me to bother replacing it. The RAM problem, on the other hand, I don't have, and that would probably be a big enough of a deal for me to want to replace it.

For players getting arrested this off-season:

I'm not sure that's ever established one way or another, and Baldur's Gate 2 doesn't illuminate the matter any further, as far as I remember. I think the Harper leadership, seeing as Elminster and Gorion both knew, were aware of it, but who knows whether that info was passed down to all the other members. As I recall, Harpers ascribed to the "we tell you only what you need to know" philosophy in regards to its general members, so I would personally say they probably do not know*. It's hard to say for sure, though, because NPCs in BG1 are more or less totally silent: when your lineage is finally revealed, there's no reaction from any party members, but I wouldn't necessary assume that a lack of a reaction meant that they knew, given that nobody else reacted, either. *Although I suppose Gorion could've very well told them...but I don't know - with what little they said in BG1, I never really got the impression that they knew. Still, impossible to say for sure if there's nothing concrete.

I've been waiting for Vega for forever. I usually go with the brand that's doing worse at the time in regards to market share, which seems to almost always be AMD, and this will be a very hard buy for me if the worst-case scenario comes to fruition.

no good reason for ignoring our later comments. *shrug* your whole point were 'bout this kinda thing biting folks in the keister. is a smallish chance o' this kinda thing coming back to haunt the republicans anytime soon. to bite in the arse, need have opposition in control of the senate during a Presidential election year when a Justice dies or becomes incapacitated. should be obvious why mcconnell and other republicans weren't worried seeing as how they had nothing to lose. even then, five times in 100 years would still be extreme rare, no? with medical tech being what it is nowadays, the complete unexpected death o' a Justice is actual becoming less likely. kennedy and ginsburg is the folks most likely to retire or die soonish. am suspecting ginsburg will hold onto the bench with cold dead hands for as long as possible. any similar scenario involving antagonistic President and senate is at least three years remote. "it often comes back to bite you in the butt later on." nope. chances is possible but pretty darn slim for any current serving senator to need face a butt mangling. HA! Good Fun! "no good reason for ignoring our later comments." Well, uh, isn't that kind of exactly what you're doing to me? From the rest of my post, it was clear that I understood what you were getting at and agreed, right? "It is pretty unlikely, though, that the Democrats will ever make them pay for it, that I'll agree to." After that, I even said things were more likely to get worse for the dems in this area than anything else (as I also mentioned, as you just did, that Ginsburg and Kennedy are the most likely to go, either of which would hurt the dems, Ginsburg especially). I mean, I didn't know if you knew off-hand that it had happened five times over the past hundred years, which is why I mentioned it when you said it hadn't...and then I proceeded to agree with you in the rest of my post.

I agreed to that already - your original statement did not include the "opposing party" bit, which is what I was replying to with that: "the likelihood o' a Court Justice dying or becoming incapacitated during an election year is smallish."

Definitely small, but given that it's happened five times in the last hundred years or so (most recently under Reagan), it's probably likely to happen again...unless the SC gets more politicized than it is, and justices start resigning early in order to help pack the court - as of now, that doesn't seem to be the case, though, as justices seem to (wisely) hold themselves separate from any party or political leanings. It is pretty unlikely, though, that the Democrats will ever make them pay for it, that I'll agree to. It's actually more likely that they'll lose even more ground in the SC unless things hold as they are until around 2021, at the very earliest (...assuming a Democrat presidency). That's a lot to ask for of both Kennedy and especially Ginsberg, and, well, the odds are against it. If something like this were to happen again, it's probably most likely during the Trump/Pence presidency, actually, if the Dems manage to wrestle control of the Senate this upcoming election cycle: I could see them going full obstructionist with any new picks. An unfortunate sign for the state of our democracy if that ends up being the case...but hey, we were obviously already there before any such scenario. As for McConnell...that's the unfortunate truth, I suppose.

Yeah...that's not a good solution. These dummies never realize the simple fact that once you set a precedent...for example, stealing a supreme court justice...it often comes back to bite you in the butt later on, and devolves the state of politics even further than it already is. Set up this "committee" and you may well find yourself on the other end of that blade somewhere down the road. It's irrelevant, anyways, since it won't pass: if enough Republicans felt comfortable with this "committee" to vote for it, they'd just signal their support for impeachment to begin with, rendering it moot. Perhaps there should be a way of determining if a president is still sane, but having it be a political process - which it would be, as is obvious from any other Congressional committee - is not the way to go.

Dual-classing is pretty overpowered in BG, too. A fighter or swashbuckler (thief kit - you lose the ability to backstab, but get the THAC0 of a fighter and an AC bonus to go along with it, and you can specialize in weapons as well) dual-classing to a cleric or mage at level 7 or 8 makes them pretty good warriors for pretty much the rest of the game while still giving them the full benefit of spellcasting abilities...as opposed to multiclasses, where the only multiclass I would really seriously consider is a mage-cleric. Multiclasses with a fighter-type class are almost universally inferior to a good dual-class in terms of effectiveness - you're giving up too many levels in your spellcasting class for too many near-useless fighter levels, and your character is permanently underleveled.

Yeah, it's pretty child-friendly for the most part...right up until the end of the game, anyways - and that's not really "mature" in the normal sense (it's not violent or sexual or anything), but nevertheless, it might still qualify*. To be honest, I'm not sure that en eight year old will "get" Undertale, especially if they've played a lot of other games already, but I guess it doesn't hurt to try. *

That's likely because of the fan kicking in harder as it reaches higher temperatures...and then dropping again when it gets so low. If that's the case, then yeah, that probably suggests you need better cooling, and replacing the thermal paste would certainly be a good idea to start with.

Wheel of Time. I think GD's comment on it is pretty spot on. Sadly, I haven't read any of the others, so I can't really comment upon them.

How much do you enjoy reading about women tugging their hair and smoothing out their clothes?

Most places - not all, but most - won't hesitate for very long to get rid of you if they felt it was the best move. Business is business, right?

I finished Broken Age. Good game with a great first half, and with a not-quite-as-good-but-still-good second half, and an ending that was a little disappointing, and which didn't really solve or explain much - if anything. Also, again, thanks to ShadySands for giving it to me!

Could you send them to me when you finish? For personal use only of course. Sure. I'll do that for IR as soon as I figure out what the heck is screwing up the damage of a few bows for IR (something in the mod is giving like three bows ridiculous damage damage bonuses, and I have no idea what, because it's nothing that I changed - haven't tracked down the bug yet, but I'm working on it). SR will take a little longer, especially because I'll be having surgery on my wrist soon, which will make doing anything pretty difficult for a couple of weeks at the very least.