Cycloneman

It seems likely, considering this:

There. Way to ruin the joke.

I figured it'd be proper to start this thread off now, since the latest episode is fantastic. Go check out "Good Soldier" on hulu.com. Burn Notice is a show about a CIA agent, Michael Westen, who is framed for a wide variety of crimes and subsequently burned by the CIA. He attempts to earn money via freelancing, while simultaneously piecing together information on who framed him. It's also extremely good, and entertaining show. Westen deals with the various problems with ingenuity and skill, and it's extremely entertaining to watch him do so. Man, was the last episode good or what? "As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens another man." I laughed so hard.

Oh, wait. Do you [OP] mean is jumping skill based? Oh, then that's not confirmed. Sorry.

Mr. Smith from Shoot 'Em Up.

It is confirmed to be skill based; there are ten skills total.

And that could be nerf gun that he's holding, disguised as a real gun.

Pretty sure climbing is in; otherwise, how would Thorton have gotten here?

Sorry, I must've removed it in my editing of that post; that was sarcastic. I play Hitman stealthy, and a pair of "assault rifle pistols" is no match for the dozens upon dozens of enemies you will encounter over the course of them all coming to try to kill you. And even if you manage to, the sheer wastefulness of it will cause your notoriety to rise significantly (something similar will apparently happen in this game) and make subsequent missions more difficult.

Much like how syringes, hand-to-hand and fiber wire were rather useless in Hitman: Blood Money because... well... you can make your Silverballers a pair of hundred-bullet assault rifles, and it's not that hard.

Reloading forces a lull in your attack, allowing enemies to take advantage of the opportunity to get closer/shoot at you. It's a good reason not to run-and-gun. Because they want the game to focus on things other than ammunition conservation/counting.

This is about discussing the design decision, not about whining to the devs or asking them for anything, okay? I personally think it's a design decision that won't have a lot of effect on the game. Most shooters involve throwing so much ammo at you through a bunch of really ****ty enemies that you don't have to worry about conservation; this just sidesteps the "bunch of really ****ty enemies" part. Feel free to discuss water guns, how it will make your OCD act up, and anything else you want to.

Jesus Christ people, can we just get all this complaining/arguing about how infinite ammo is so terrible into one thread somewhere?

Let me just check the magic 8-Ball... Oh darn. Sorry, mate.

I don't think you know what that word means. A sociopath is someone with heavily restricted (or no) feelings of emotions or empathy. On the contrary: http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html I know what a sociopath is. The most defining characteristics of a sociopath are lack of emotion and empathy, not manipulative behavior or promiscuity; those are merely results of the complete disregard for others sociopaths have.

I don't think you know what that word means. A sociopath is someone with heavily restricted (or no) feelings of emotions or empathy.

Wow, that was actually really good. "So frightening you cry blood from your own eyes." lol I laughed at the woman licking the Wiimote, too.

Andrew Jackson led the same government that Abraham Lincoln did. Does that mean we should hold Lincoln responsible for the Trail of Tears? I do hold the US government, as a whole, responsible for the treatment of the native populations, so yes. Still? Because, uh, that's a bit of a stretch.

Andrew Jackson led the same government that Abraham Lincoln did. Does that mean we should hold Lincoln responsible for the Trail of Tears?

Like we did with the 1936 Olympics? Great Leap Forward 2.0.

I know you typed up that big long post, but beyond pragmatism in justice, it can be boiled down to this: Pretty arbitrary. I just looked up the definition of "fair" and it doesn't say anything about not killing people. Why is killing people unfair? If I say the death penalty is vengeance then so is life in prison, if I say life in prison is punishment then so is the death penalty? Are you actually going somewhere with this, or is it just an attempt at playing devil's advocate? The two occupy a similar position: punishing people for doing wrong. This I can get behind. But what about the unfixable problems going to prison pose? You could be killed, it could turn you into a criminal if you weren't already, you could end up killing someone, you could get raped, you could get AIDS and die, et cetera.

Dude. Jailbait.

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?

Let me guess, you are a native English speaker? Yeah, I am. On further consideration, I've come to the conclusion that I was overly harsh on my post, and would thus like to apologize to Moatilliatta for its tone. I'm not really sure why I got annoyed by that in particular. Sorry.

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.