Jump to content

random n00b

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by random n00b

  1. They have no business making it.
    Funny you'd use that particular word, because business is what the game industry is all about. They outbid Troika or Obsidz or whoever was also interested in the license, and that's that. It's all about biz...



    It would be like saying, "Ok Mr. Lucas you're not going to make Return of the Jedi, we're going to pawn it off onto another studio with different writers and director."
    What, you mean how Lucas didn't direct ESB and it turned out better than anything he's done before or since?


    And for the record, he didn't direct ROTJ either...

  2. eagle eye




    very lame


    big computer thingy remote controlling things that are in no way electronic whatsoever = stupid

    I should have left my disbelief at home. Even if you are willing to accept the premise, it's still little more than a bunch of pursuits with a few character moments thrown in for flavor. I didn't doze off, so I guess I'm just easily entertained.




    What's good to watch in theatres at the moment? I saw Burn After Reading which was very funny, but aside from that I am out of the loop of movies at the moment.
    No idea really. The consensus in reviews seems to be that Righteous Killing doesn't offer much more than Pacino and De Niro... so I'll probably be passing on that one. I might go watch Max Payne next week, depending on how bored I am...
  3. 3:10 to Yuma - a solid 7/10. Kept me interested all the way through, which is enough. Bale's character is interesting and enigmatic, as opposed to Crowe's, which comes across somewhat corny... I think they tried too hard to make him neat.


    Equilibrium. I rate this one a lol/10.




    I thought it was a good lol/10 though.


    I came away entertained.

    Yeah, I enjoyed it quite a bit. But it's WAY over the top. It really is.




    Burn After Reading. Very enjoyable!
    Yeah, absurd yet credible humour.


    I think I've got enough time to get a run in before I'm off to watch Eagle Eye.

  4. I don't see why it is unreasonable to hold a suspect for a certain amount of time before levelling charges. I simply don't believe it is acceptable to hold people for more than a certain length of time.
    So, 28 days under police custody is "reasonable", but 29, 33, or 42 isn't? Please explain what's the difference.



    If circumstances arise (and they do) where a suspect is held on rather tenuous allegations from foreign intelligence, but we can't afford to have them running around loose, then there should be an actual trial/tribunal where just cause can be openly demonstrated. It certainly can't be put down to whichever random yahoo happens to be Home Secretary.
    And if the allegations are tenuous and possibly unreliable, why can't you afford to have said person running loose? That sounds awfully like police state-reasoning to me. If you absolutely can't have said person at large, then arrest him and formally charge him. Or is it that the justice system should apply for everyone but whomever happens to be conveniently labelled a "terrorist"?


    Also, you don't like this power on the hands of whoever happens to be the HS at the moment. It just so happens that I don't like it on the hands of the police chief or any other non-judicial officer either.

  5. I know someone personally who was held 2 months on trafficking suspicion without trial. If nothing comes of it you can sue for wrongful imprisonment and be pretty confident of a settlement, hardly makes it worth the while though.
    The fact that he didn't go to trial doesn't mean he hadn't been charged. Charges can be dropped.


    My point is that there's a fundamental difference in how that power is applied - laws make it so there's a very clearly defined way of doing things in judicial proceedings. When it's the police that's entrusted with that... not so much.

  6. Eh, I don't see what's all the fuss about. There seem to be some misconceptions, too.


    Mesh hit the nail earlier; this proposed measure is only a 50% increase on the already mind-boggling 28 day-detention limit, that is, detention at the police's exclusive discretion. Sorry Wals, but I think they already tossed civil liberties out the window sometime ago...


    The UK is notoriously heavy-handed in its legislation regarding this. Elsewhere, the limit is usually never more than 3-4 days. Yes, that includes the US. Elsewhere, suspects need to be charged with something before a magistrate can order more prolonged imprisonment.


    It's a good thing this bill or whatever it is wasn't approved. But considering how things are already set up, it's hardly a victory or something to celebrate.

  7. Just finished Force Unleashed. The story was great!
    Haven't played the game, but after reading the graphic novel, I think the story is just an excuse for implementing the over-the-top Force mechanics and effects of the game. It's pretty hilarious how they keep shoehorning these Gary Stus and the ludicrous plots they devise for them into the timeline, just so they can keep milking the SW cash cow.


    My verdict: suckage. :lol:


    (ofc, that does not mean the game isn't a blast to play...)

  8. I really doubt the FO MMO will ever see the light of day, at least not with Interplay developing it.
    Who knows. You do know about "Project V13", don't you?

    The last I checked, Herve and the rats were going whole hog down there.

    Well, apparently he and his rat entourage somehow managed to convince enough investors to keep shelling out the dough... they even have a message board over there now.



    The company also announced that Chris Taylor, a game designer who was a part of the original Fallout game development team at Interplay in 1994, has rejoined the company. Taylor will serve as Lead System Designer for
  9. You might want to call some fans 'rabid', but that 'rabidity' didn't appear overnight, and it didn't appear without a reason. But a lot of people seem to act as if that is the case.


    Oh there's always a reason, it's just never a good one, being that it comes from a sense of entitlement. This doesn't refer to just rabid Fallout fans, it's rabid fans of anything.

    You know, I was going to say exactly that. But I don't think I could word it any better.
  10. You're missing the point entirely. No MMOPOS that I've played (WoS, Everquest, Ultimata, WAR) have had a single remotely redeeming quality.
    No, it's you who's obviously missing the point, and I see that making a literary reference that isn't related to crappy SW literature was a wasted effort on my part. The bottom line is that your dislike of MMOs is completely unrelated to their quality, or to the enjoyment other people may derive from them.


    Further, you posted that your experience with MMOs was limited to playing "at a friend's" and stuff like that. So your "informed opinion" isn't even worth the electons you are wasting to convey it.


    Stop being so butthurt. A MMO is in the works. If you don't like it (how can you like or dislike something that doesn't even exist yet is beyond me), just ignore it. Is it so difficult to understand?

  11. Of course. But my point was that I don't see how even a "logic" failure can connect the two. There's no connection between DRM and what happened here. This is more like an internal security issue for a developer or something.
    And my point is that, to the pro-DRM crowd, the only things that matter are that another high-profile game is on the Internet for anyone to download, and it was 24 hours after it went gold - add to that the fact that it wasn't equipped with the last in customer****er DRM. Details, arguments and explanations will be ignored because those things undermine the proposed effectiveness of DRM.
  • Create New...