Wrath of Dagon

Even in that contest, the chances of someone winning (since there are like millions of people playing) are much better than the chances of a specific individual (you) winning. And no, it's possible for no one to win the lottery, so chances are not 1. The chances approach 1 as more and more lotteries are played, but technically never become 1. (Of course, once someone wins, the chance that he won is 1, as I said before).

IMO they stretched the idea as far as it would go, nothing would really be gained by a sequel, unless they made a completely different game.

OK, what are your chances of winning the next lottery? Not very good, right? What are the chances of someone in the world winning the lottery? People win somewhere every day, right?

I'll refute anyone who's wrong, and I'm not necessarily refuting him, just saying he wasn't asked the relevant question.

Again, it's not her chance of winning that matters, it's the chance of someone in the world winning. Also your professor is assuming she's spending 1 dollar in each lottery, the more correct statement would be she spend a total of $100 playing, not that she's played 100 times, but that's a relatively minor point. Also the probability of an event that already occurred is 1, either you misunderstood each other, or he doesn't know what he's talking about there.

Too late, already read it. But it was mostly meant as a joke, and you're wrong on both counts, but feel free to believe whatever you like. Edit: Btw, you won't sink to my level, but wasn't your changing your avatar meant as an insult to me? Not that I mind much, just find it ironic.

Hmm, someone went to town with photoshop. The Darkspawn don't look like Ninja Turtles any more, so I guess that's progress.

KOTOR2 had some of the most creative quests I've ever seen. Too bad no one mainstream does those any more.

I like the dialog wheel when done right. And no, I wasn't trying to start a bash, but I do enjoy it on occassion, like a fine cigar.

But she couldn't do it if Michael's goals weren't the same, it's not like she tricked you in any way. And there's no indication she wouldn't have saved you regardless, after all she hates it when you kill civilians (even whores on a gangster ship, what's up with that?)

Man, those dungeons are going to be endless! Hopefully it doesn't mean that... Longer dungeons are definitely not something needed. Yeah, but that would require Bioware to be creative. Which we all know is strictly forbidden by their corporate charter.

How is she responsible for you going rogue? After AP tried to kill you, you had no other choice, right? It's not like you could just go on working for them.

Man, those dungeons are going to be endless!

Yes, they kidnapped someone named Deadly Nightshade and stole his brain.

Can you imagine why someone disliking ME would like AP? Edit: Btw, they're completely different games, one has almost no relation to the other except in some superficial ways. For instance, ME story is ripped right from a Saturday morning cartoon. AP story is ripped right from some paranoid ranting on Pacifica Radio. See the difference?

No, you wind up as Vodka snacks.

I really don't think it was supposed to be interpreted as being that close of an analogue to real-world events - yeah, the "middle eastern terrorists but with a twist" plot has been beaten to death, but I really doubt the game was intended to indicate that the US is behind Al Qaeda. I'd give AP an 8.7/10 - for reference, I'd give ME1 a 9/10 and ME2 a 7.5/10. Because of the numerous references to real-life concepts, like the Patriot Act, and the critical nature of these references, it's quite clear to me they were intended as political statements. For reference I gave ME1 a 7/10 and a 5/10 to ME2 demo.

Probably for the best.

I give AP an 8.5 I would've given it a 9, but I wasn't very happy with the way the ending was handled, at least in my playthrough. And yes, it is offensive anti-American truther propaganda .

I didn't mean you, it was a particular group of people here I was referring to. Hah, hah, hah, hah, my credentials aren't in danger, and I'm independently wealthy, but thanks for you concern. Would it be unusual if everyone in the town had cancer, because that's the kind of odds I was talking about here. Anyway, the odds may not be that great, I'm thinking perhaps there are a 1000 people who've won twice already. Moreover, in some of the articles about them it mentions they spend huge amounts on the lottery, like hundreds every month or even week, may be even more after they win the first time. Obviously these are lottery addicts, spending most of their disposable income on the lottery, so spending $100,000 over 10 years wouldn't be out of the question. With that in mind, the odds one of them would win a 3rd and a 4th time are actually quite decent, on the order of 1 in 10, something you wouldn't be surprised to see in your lifetime. Now, how about that octopus?

You're right that 4 pre-selected individuals each winning once has the same odds as 1 pre-selected individual winning 4 times, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a non-pre-selected individual somewhere in the world winning 4 times. That is not the same as 4 non-preselected individuals somewhere in the world each winning once. Do you see the difference? Edit: Btw Oblarg, I do have to congratulate you on applying the Binomial probability correctly, even though you figured out the wrong probability. You, Balthamael and Amantep are the only guys arguing with me who've shown any understanding of probability at all. The others are a lot better at insults than math, and should be ashamed of themselves.

So you agree with alanschu that probability of an event that already happened is not 1? Also in his example the reason I said we know the probability of someone winning is 1 is not because someone already won, but that someone would have to win a lottery eventually, and I didn't mean exactly 1 but close enough to use in the calculation.

It's not a lot, that's only 20 tickets a week for 10 years. Some people spend a lot more than that, especially after she won the first lottery. That's the probabilty of a specific pot of $10000 winning the lottery, not the probability of any 10,000 pot in the world winning the lottery. Wrong, all based on your previous incorrect assumption I won't post if no one else does, but Krezack still owes me an answer.

Already did that but through the assumption that there are only a handful of people who have won 2 lotteries. May be it's not a handful, may be it's 1000 or so, hard to tell without knowing the total number of lottery winners in the world and how much they have spent playing lotteries on average.