Wrath of Dagon

It was $10 million, a huge amount for a Polish game.

You buy it for $10, download and install it, and enter the serial number. DRM, no DRM, who knows, who cares?

This is the same kind of idiocy that lead some the yammering morons to say that there was no difference between Obama and McCain during the election. That's what makes it difficult for me to cry for them, although I do cry for myself. It'll probably take a few more kicks in the ass before Republicans come to their senses. Nothing wrong with holding on to your principles, so long as you don't form a circular firing line in the process.

Just roll down your car window and flash a wad of cash.

Hey, if you're going to make an accusation like that, at least show where I did that. My point was actually quite similar to yours, any solution proposed seems to introduce as many problems as it solves. I was referring to the whole "America subsidizing pharmaceutical research" argument. It's weaksauce. Yes, the U.S. is the only major country where individuals make the purchases and usually pay retail prices, while the rest of the world buys in bulk at a heavy discount. The argument implies that, were the U.S. to switch to the bulk-buying model, the pharma companies would cease or reduce their research, which is ludicrous-- research is their core moneymaking function. Their whole business model is to keep coming up with new treatments and make money on them before the patents expire and they have to compete with generics. What would really happen is that the bulk buying discount would decline for everyone around the world to make up for the loss of all the retail-price sales in America. I'm not sure what bulk-buying means in the context of national drug purchases. Do they guaranty a certain amount ahead of time in the way US can't? I believe it's more accurate to say that drug prices are government controlled, and I doubt the rest of the world would be willing to pay more if US suddenly starts paying less. Thus I would expect a decrease in expensive research.

Just bought Mysteries of Westgate. Graphics look good so far.

Why, does DX get a lot better later? All I saw were long textureless walls, match stick figures, and pretty boring and clumsy combat.

Hey, if you're going to make an accusation like that, at least show where I did that. My point was actually quite similar to yours, any solution proposed seems to introduce as many problems as it solves.

I tried to play it by taking it on its own value, it's still rubbish. Their attempts at a streamlined, more user-friendly interface ended up to be intrusive, convoluted, and I'm still not sure how it works. It's a giant circle that is planted around the center of the screen and has a slot-based inventory, except there are two "layers" of slots except you can only see the first layer unless you stop and open the full inventory, and all sorts of crazy garbage like that. You select from a circular menu, what's so hard about that? Ah, no, that's not the point at all. If you're not screwed when you run out of ammo, there's no point of having limited ammo. The point of universal ammo was so that it was up to you which gun you wanted to use in any situation, but more powerful weapons used a lot more ammo, so you weren't overpowered. I didn't have any of these problems, but then I played on the almighty Xbox. I thought the areas were pretty decent size, in fact about the same size as HL2, and loading was about the same. Also the areas although not terribly large were quite detailed. The gameplay was about siding with whomever, and having several options on how to do the mission. There is a bit of reputation actually, like the Illuminati will send Elite troopers after you if you don't do what they want. In any case, the game offered a lot more freedom than most.

Most people who played the original seem to hate it, most people who didn't seem to like it. The people who hate it never seem to give a reason other than "it wasn't like the original".

Do you know how many tens of billions of dollars it'll cost if schools have to be closed? Do you know that with 1% mortality rate we could lose millions of lives?

All the infections still seem to be coming from Mexico, except for the New York outbreak. Seems it was a big mistake not to close the border right away.

I know, but when you say that it's taken for granted everyone's in a union, while in US unionized workers are a small minority, union power is the issue. Btw, since we discussed this yesterday, here's a good article on the new labor law outlook (well, it's good because it agrees with me that the chances are now much better) : http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21847.html

Who said that?

30% of the country is conservative, someone's got to represent them. Having said that Republicans are completely routed and almost irrelevant right now. Their come back depends on the Democrats completely mucking everything up, which I can't root for either because it'll be disastrous for the country. Anyway, this looks like 1976 all over again, which is interesting because that's when I got here.

Yes, unions are much weaker in the US than in Europe. The only place they've been gaining is among government employees, of course that may all be about to change so they can do for our economy what they've done for GM.

No you wouldn't, because they make a lot more profit in US from a given drug than the rest of the world.

Way to fall for propaganda. How is the management going to get you to reveal how you're going to vote or have voted when the ballot is secret and federally supervised? Amazing how easy it is to brainwash people, it's happening all over again. The secret ballot is the cornerstone of democracy, an open ballot election is no different than a Soviet election, so no Enoch, it's not an extremist label. The graph you posted shows cloture votes increasing sharply in 1970, certainly way before Geoge HW Bush ever became president. Why don't you actually read that article, the history of the filibuster is quite a long one, as I said.

I heard hand sanitizer is really toxic.

No, I didn't say US does all the research, I said the US market is what makes that research profitable.

You might not agree with Labour unions for some reason or another, but there's nothing Stalinist about them. Perhaps this is an area you need to do some research on. Taking away the secret ballot is what's Stalinist, you're the one who needs to do some research. Cloture used to be a last a resort, the 'nuclear option' and the ultimate threat to force compromise on bills. No longer. Again, where are you getting your info, the filibuster is a long standing tradition in the Senate, it is the primary reason why change takes a long time in the US. Enoch, I have to disagree, EFCA is the number one legislative priority for unions, and what good is it to have a Democrat that doesn't vote their way? True, they can't very well support a Republican, but there are options in the primary, and certainly they could withhold cash and volunteers. I agree it's not a sure thing though, as they don't have all the cards.

Where a company is headquatered means nothing in a global market, what matters is where most of the profit is made. From your link

Well, that's his current position, but as a Democrat he'll be a lot more dependent on unions for campaign cash and volunteers, so it may just require some small cosmetic changes to get him to flip again (he was for it last year, when it had no chance).

Let's not foget currently US subsidizes drug research for the entire world, because US is pretty much the only country drugs can be sold for full price, thus making back the research investment.

The Employee Stalinist Choice Act just got a lot closer to passing. And what, cloture used to be rarely used? Where the hell to you get your info Krezack?