Wrath of Dagon

US only shot at people who were shooting at them. For Saddam to be removed, no other solution would've worked. It's true we messed up by letting the situation get out of control right after the invasion, sure we get the blame for it, but it's not like anyone really knows the exact correct way to replace a government in a hostile country.

The actual war against Saddam had relatively low casualties. The real violence took place due to terrorism afterwards, which was largely unexpected and was where the miscalculation took place. US certainly didn't intend for all those poeple to die, but such are the uintended consequences of war. Had the result been known, I believe most people involved would've decided on a different course of action, or at least would've handled things very differently. Was it worth it? I don't think any one person can judge, we have to leave it to the judgment of history.

I don't think it's proved yet that his injuries happened later. Bush's press secretary suffered a black eye too, does that mean she was beaten up?

Neural networks in animal brains are very different from the phony little neural networks your computer simulates. And you can't get any more universal than a Turing machine as far as computers are concerned. A human is only a machine empirically. You just said it is. Probably why it's called the Theory of Evolution. Anyway, I don't mix up philosophy and science.

A human is not a machine. If you need me to define those terms for you, you need to study up on computer science, I'm not a tutor for whiny brats. And yes, I do approach this from a philosophical, you could say religious, perspective, so having no further discussions with you is an extra bonus.

What do you do, Krezak, sit in some basement and read about other people's accomplishments on the internet all day?

A machine can not be self-aware, thus no true AI.

Summer should be a good time to release a game like this, it'll get more attention that way. Of course in a couple of months it'll probably become a Christmas release.

You could argue outsourcing helps employment by creating greater economic efficiency, thus promoting growth. It's kind of like you'd think technology would hurt employment, since it replaces a lot of manual labor, but historically just the opposite has been true.

A complete lie, as is most of that article. Tenet told Bush unequivocally that it was a slam dunk Iraq had WMD's.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Of course US tries to do the right thing, I didn't mean to suggest we should do whatever we feel like, but without power that would be irrelevant. Edit: @taks, yes, except I had more contemporary rival powers in mind.

Very little of what the federal government does is actually constitutional, starting with the Supreme Soviet, er, I mean Federal Reserve as an example. Of course to decide to actually follow the constitution at this point would cause complete havoc, that's why there's a principle of stare decisis (yes, I watched the entire Robert Bork hearing). As far as foreign policy, what you have to realize is there are two overriding principles in foreign relations 1) Might makes right and 2) Whose ox got gored. You can whine and complain and bellyache all you want, but that's just a fact. The rest of the world is just lucky it's US that has the might right now, not a couple of other countries I can think of. If they did, you'd find out what murder, torture and repression really mean.

If he did this to Saddam, they'd stick him into an industrial paper shredder.

Huh? The .223 round is exactly .22 caliber, and is used in M16 and M4 assault rifles. The difference, as has been mentioned, is a longer, heavier bullet and a much more powerful cartridge. With all that, the M16 actually has less recoil than 9 mm pistol, and much less than a .357 (same caliber), which can actually hurt your hand it kicks so hard. The reason is a much smaller bullet to gun mass ratio of the M16. Also the power of a bullet mostly depends on its energy, which is proporitonal to its mass and to velocity squared. Thus a relatively light bullet like the .223 has a tremendous amount of energy because of the velocity it is able to achieve. Nevertheless, I completely agree with your idea of doing what works best for the game, instead of what's most realistic.

Huh, where do you get that? Generally, no weapon is less accurate and weaker than a pistol.

Sounds like dual-wielding is purely cosmetic anyway. Sure no one uses dual SMG's in real life, but this is a game and they want it to look cool. It's just like no one hand carries a heavy machine gun like Rambo, but it's OK in a movie, and this game isn't any more realistic.

Submachine guns have a longer barrel, thus are more powerful and more accurate, even using the same ammo. Don't know specifically about MicroUzi.

Sub-machine guns are both more accurate and more powerful than pistols in single shot mode, hence their use by commando teams.

Does dual-wield mean that you have to pull both triggers, or is it just a cosmetic thing? I used to kind of dislike dual-wielding, but now I'm used to it because of Halo.

It's a game, games should be fun, I should be able to bring along whatever equipment I'm skilled in because I don't know what I'll run into. Edit: Or else why did I invest all those skillpoints? /edit Trying to make games make complete sense is beyond silly unless it's a sim.

The difference is that I could see having to choose between mobility and firepower among loadouts as a potentially fun and game-balancing mechanic, whereas I find looking for ammo or bringing enough with me to kill 50 guys logistically boring. That's already taken care of by the skill system, you should be able to bring along any equipment you're skilled in, without suffering additional penalties.

Are they also going to show him carrying a giant sack with all of his other equipment? If he needs a giant sack to carry all the equipment, makes sense to me. Santa Protocol

Are they also going to show him carrying a giant sack with all of his other equipment?

I find that screenshot very disconcerting, it makes it look like the stance is the only thing you select, unless the line on the bottom is indeed what you're about to say. That line looks like it's from the intimidate option though. Also they chose to display all the weapons you're carrying, which I think looks a bit silly.

In Beyond Good and Evil, if you die in a battle you just re-start in the beginning of the battle, without loading, which I thought worked perfectly well for that type of game. This system sounds very similar. Usually Ubisoft errs on the side of making checkpoints too frustrating, or not being able to save checkpoints, or some other screwy mechanism designed to punish you for not being hardcore enough.