Zoraptor

I'd take that with a grain of salt unless the people actually admit to it. Someone signed our Prime Minister up to the site, there's no authentication required.

The third pack is a bit weird. Menzobarranzan and Dungeon Hack? Does make me wonder if they were going to have Stone Prophet at least included as well.

I would have thought it was over 500k including kickstarter/ slacker backers, probably not quite if you exclude them though. In terms of GOG sales numbers, PoE is doing twice as well there relatively as DivOS is doing- DivOS has 2x the sales on steam but it and PoE have near identical sales ranking on GOG; and KS backers are excluded from those numbers for PoE but not DivOS as well. If we assume steamspy is correct and that Larian would announce one million sales that puts the upper limit of GOG sales for DivOS at around 100k and therefore the upper limit of PoE sales at around 100k as well or roughly 20% of Steam's sales numbers. Particular types of title certainly sell better on GOG than others, eg despite being steam key bundled multiple times System Shock 2 still has more sales on GOG than Steam. But even as someone who dislikes steam it's hard to see GOG getting much more than 20% of sales on a new release title unless there are very specific circumstances for it.

I said it last time this infographic turned up: Lehmann Brothers went bust when Bush jr was still president. I'd almost certainly vote for Sanders were I a citizen of libertyland and find Hillary to be... disingenuous, at best, but it is pretty misleading comparing Hillary's spending from a full term run in 2008 to someone else's spending in a race that hasn't even had a single primary yet.

They don't need the money because DivOS did badly though, they need the money because of other factors- Dragon Commander plus one cancelled game iirc. If DivOS made them $20 million dollars and they had debts of 20 million dollars then they'd only be back to parity despite DivOS's success, it would just have cancelled out the failures. It's like saying that Thief(s) and System Shock 2 failed because LGS went out of business or Saints Row 3 failed because THQ did; actually the companies failed because of self publishing Terra Nova/ a multi title deal with EA that saw no SS2 profits go to LGS and deciding a Wii peripheral would be awsum and a must have on other consoles. You're also misrepresenting things in, ironically, a positively Brucesque fashion. The kickstarted games are not Diablo killers in the way you mean, they just have the consequence that you don't 'have' to lease some festering AAA dreck because there are literally no other RPGs available, a situation which was pretty close to accurate a few years ago.

"YOU DO NOT NEED WOW NUMBERS TO BE A SUCCESS." NO, YOU NEED DIABLO NUMBERS TO BE A SUCCESS. IF YOU DON'T DO DIABLO NUMBERS YOUA RE FAILURE.

His inner Trump would probably have been clotheslining them off the stage, since Trump seems to be treating the entire race as an extended wrestling promo. It's pretty obvious why they chose to crash Bernie's rally, while it may get less attention they are a lot less likely to get stomped by security or be literally or figuratively clotheslined off the stage if they tried the same at a Republican rally or a Clinton Chardonnay Soirée. He's an easy target, basically, and precisely because he is more sympathetic to them.

I'll inevitably back this, despite not having played the first. I will though soon, glorious 150Mb/s connection with a half way sensible data cap means I won't be paying more for the download than for the game any more.

Steam keys have actually worked in some cases, but they aren't supposed to.

It's EA, clearly by 'taxing' they mean that they want to charge you a 'tax' every time you change your power management options- it's a microtransaction but they want to call it by a more acceptable name with better connotations; ie 'tax'.

I pretty much agree with certain differences in emphases, I'd observe that the reverse is also true and calling for censorship on a privately owned site is also baffling. While that isn't what you're doing it is what Bruce is doing. That may be a philosophical difference though as by and large I have far more sympathy with people complaining of censorship than those wanting for others be censored.

The problem with a 'friendly and welcoming community' is that all too often it goes far too far the other direction and becomes the forum equivalent of a Potemkin Village; merely an edifice of civility and niceness with no meaningful discussion at all. People 'getting along with each other' because everyone who doesn't agree with the consensus gets banned- per neogaf, the Bethesda forums etc. You must have the ability to offend when posting, because any opinion is likely to offend someone. And it isn't just about offending people just for the sake of it, it does serve a purpose of sorts. Anyone who gets offended easily will not be able to contribute anything but drama at the codex anyway, better for all concerned that they don't go there or don't stay long. Rather surprisingly it works well* to promote discussion precisely because the people there don't get offended at every little thing; about the only opinion you don't find there much at all is the censorious one, for obvious reasons. *So long as obvious drama threads and posters are avoided, at least.

In this case that is a point on a parallel argumentary line, since no one is saying that people have the right to say whatever they want wherever they want, just that censorship doesn't work. You can easily agree that someone has the right to do something without thinking that they should do that something. The fundamental difference between here and the codex is that the codex isn't trying to sell you games. Well, except its steam curator/ Infinitron and at least theoretically they don't benefit financially from that. Obsidian is though, they have a vested interest in not needlessly offending customers, conversely the codex revels in offending any and all delicate unique snowflakes as part of its unique appeal- and that is in very large part why people say those offensive things, precisely because people like Bruce will profess to have their panties bunched by it. Personally I always make the distinction between little c and big C censorship. If censorship is fairly applied and 'sensible' it almost always falls under the little c subset. I may think the naughty word filter is a bit silly for example but it isn't a big deal. And we can hardly say that there's no trolling going on on these forums.

I very much doubt that he actually has the 'core beliefs' that would allow such a progression. He was never an actual nazi, he just said stuff at the codex to seem cool- and failed at that, given that a lot of the codex 'nazism' is people taking the mick out of the few people there who do believe in it or people who take enazism dead serious and get offended. Similarly he almost certainly was never an actual sjw, he swapped sides after GG attacked his income streams/ advertising and pointed out some... potential irregularities in his competitions. It was almost immediately after that he went silent on the sjw stuff. His prior behaviour has also shown a propensity towards broad commercial interests over beliefs, eg his contributions to reddit where he was caught shilling and his about face on Hellgate: London.

Yeah, Rex is a weathervane, that's really his only significance and always has been. His volte face simply means that he sees the proGG- or perhaps anti sjw more accurately- as 'winning' in the area which is important to him, nothing more.

The Soros style attacks don't work unless the government props up the currency artificially, as with trying to keep the pound in the ERM. Given the disaster that the Euro is the UK should probably be saying thank you to Soros anyway, I know I would be. We had an attack on our currency a few years ago, our reserve bank let them run out of steam then bought up lots of nzd at 60USc to sell off when the currency reached 87USc; nice profit, thanks guys. Same thing happened with Russia late last year/ early this year. Do it right and while there may be some short term problems longer term the country makes money because the currency is being artificially devalued and will rebound.

Exactly the same thing is happening here. My sister's house has appreciated 30% in a year, theoretically great for her except all the houses have appreciated near that much or more so unless she wants to cash up and move to Nightcaps* it's only of theoretical benefit to her. The government refuses completely to monitor who is buying the houses so it's pretty obvious they know what is happening, and there is an artificial housing/ accommodation crisis. The real problem is that the Chinese investor class is greater than our entire population, plus our lack of capital gains tax or stamp duty; first is an absolute must and has been for ages but it's political poison because property owners as a whole are selfish morons. Plus, because cow juice has fallen in price we keep getting interest rate cuts. I wish the effects of the Chinese government's need to meddle was limited to their own market and their own very obvious bubble share market- which has only dropped to its value in March/ April, and is still up around 70%, year on year- and wasn't infecting everywhere else as well. I don't know if there is going to be an actual crash, it seems more likely that China will simply shut down the market or otherwise apply controls but China has always been a rather contrived success story. Not at the bottom end where very genuine improvements have happened, but their insistence on constant extreme growth rates via artificial mechanisms is likely to make the correction a lot more extreme, when it does happen. *famous for selling houses for $50, no missing zeroes, in the 1980s.

If you truly believe that then boy, you've swallowed the Antizionist narrative deeply. David ben-Gurion admitted to it being a matter of policy in his book, and he certainly wasn't an antizionist. And Israel regularly voted in Lehi/ Stern Gang members- overt ethnic cleansers and overt terrorists- into positions as high as Prime Minister; Menachem Begen and Yitzhak Shamir, as well as Ariel Sharon who was found guilty of complicity in actual genocide against Palestinians.

I've got to admit that i'm quite impressed by Mr Cain's journalism during this last year or so Guys, it's Kain with a K, not Cain with a C. It is in the URL plus on the page... I've been impressed by him for more than a year, I don't always agree with him but he uses proper reasoning and always has a cogent argument that is not sensationalised- far more than can be said for the vast majority of gaming journalists. The main criticism of him is that he's not actually a core Forbes journo and is outside Forbes' editorial control, which while true is also pretty weak as a criticism, unlike many he doesn't need that control and that criticism doesn't address the quality of his writing.

Genocide ain't even slightly correct. I don't like Israel much at all, but hyperbole is hyperbole, and that is pretty hyperbolic hyperbole. The Bantustan accusation is far more accurate than genocide, there's certainly no organised attempt at exterminating an ethno-religious group from Israel.

What about Albanian albinos then? Have to admit that I personally have some Wight privilege, due to having relatives off the coast of Hampshire.

It's a classic left/ right agnostic debating tactic. Privilege arguments suggest you should be embarrassed by accidents of birth, the rightest equivalent is to suggest that any poor person is such because they just don't try and just don't work hard enough- or there's the classic Randian 'parasite' label if you prefer. Same rhetorical coin, different face. White privilege is simply the politically correct term for "racism vs white people" Nah, it is at least in part real and not just racism vs white people. That there are certain inherent biases in society is obvious, in the end that is all that privilege theory itself is about, and so far as that goes it's valid to examine. The zealots tend to take things to extremes and make the word a caricature and apologists tend to use it to make excuses, but they do that for all sorts of things not just white/ male/ whatever privilege labels. Really though, Ineth was right posts back in that money is the biggest 'privilege' there is and trumps anything else.

I was talking about the JPost article Grommy posted there- title "ISIS estimates Iran could build a bomb within a month". That article doesn't cite the IAEA at all, only ISIS. I agree that there's a lot more to making an actual bomb than just enrichment, which also rather helps me since it has never been proven that they've taken those steps. Frankly, if Iran decided they wanted to build 100k+ centrifuges that would only be taken as evidence they want to build hundreds of bombs a year instead of a dozen, by those convinced their only aim is weapons. That's the nature of things. Nerp, from Mossad via RSA intelligence, only published by Al Jazeera and confirmed as genuine by Israeli sources. Puling about it won't make it less true, I'm afraid, there's no comparison to your easily debunked explosion claims. Lol. There is no proof that they did any spherical geometry studies. From your own quote, previous post, emphasis left such as Parchin, a facility where high-explosive experiments linked to nuclear triggers may well have occurred. That's not a definite any more than up to 40% means 40%. And apart from that everything else is dual use, you have to show military use for a nuclear weapons program. Well of course, when Brazil refused inspections in 2004 that was because they had a clandestine program... hmm, no it wasn't. It's also yet another out of date complaint, given the agreement made. What you need to do is show how the 2015 agreement fails to fulfil those requirements. Because if it does address them, you've lost and I've won. Heh, well I can't say I didn't give you a chance. Here's some choice quotes from ISIS on the current state of things after the 2015 agreement, not from two, three, six or twelve years ago. Note, the JCPOA is the 2015 agreement. "The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) appears to require Iran to resolve the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA’s) concerns about the possible military dimensions (PMD) to Iran’s nuclear programs." "The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provides extensive provisions that collectively provide an adequate base for blocking the plutonium pathway to nuclear weapons in Iran for at least 15 years." "For ten years, this agreement creates the conditions that any serious effort by Iran to build nuclear weapons will be highly time consuming and will be vulnerable to detection, allowing time for a harsh response. The JCPOA will likely do as it claims and this is the most notable strength of the agreement" Their sole substantive complaint is about what happens in 10-15 years time. It's gone from your posted articles talking about a one month time scale to 10- 15 years. Yet somehow I'm sure I'm about to be told that it's still an epic failure because Something. Oh dear, your only mention of the actual 2015 agreement and it's directly contradicted by ISIS's own summary statements- they say plainly that it will resolve concerns about possible military dimensions and make it basically impossible for Iran to make a nuke for at least ten years, and will 'do what it claims'. Really, "what kind of deal do you want?" is a pretty decent question to ask, under these circumstances. And that's why you shouldn't rely on deprecated blogs and opinion pieces, they tend to get invalidated when you can go straight to the horse's mouth and read the agreement and its mechanisms. "37. Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA, the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting. If the resolution described above has not been adopted within 30 days of the notification, then the provisions of the old UN Security Council resolutions would be re-imposed, unless the UN Security Council decides otherwise. [..]" The only thing that can be vetoed is continued lifting of the sanctions, it's the exact reverse of the normal situation. If President Trump wants to throw the deal in the trash all he has to do is bring a complaint, then veto continued lifting of the sanctions and they go back on. Nothing China or Russia can do about it.

I kind of presumed that Rhys Darby would have something to do with the Lone Gunmen when he was announced, he'd fit in there just about perfectly.

I certainly do know how to pick them- I don't want you weaseling out by claiming bias as you tried with Mossad saying Iran had no active weapons program, after all. As it is your assertion with respect to the explosion and sealing is now utterly debunked, by a source you like, which establishes inaccuracy and scaremongering from you and your sources pretty conclusively. Frankly, a source that says Iran can build a bomb in a month, in 2013, 22 months ago rather helps me rather than hinders me, since they haven't built a bomb in that timeframe but instead agreed to limit their nuclear programme. The accusations wrt to Parchin were from 2000-3, and never substantiated hence why ISIS say may have occurred, indeed you're circularising again and using a simple accusation as being proof that the accusation is correct. Understandable, all opponents and all scaremongers in general do that, including in that report (that may mysteriously morphs into 'has' half way through, after all). The IAEA visited in 2005, most of the information about Karchin came from exile groups who had such a great record in Iraq contemporaneously, why it's not like we had mobile weapons labs made up by someone to please his CIA handlers or anything. Mainly though it's the classic argumentation technique on insisting that a negative be proved when it's the reverse that needs proving, nobody can prove that Iran never had a weapons program as it's fundamentally impossible to prove such a thing, so you'll use that lack of proof as evidence that they had one- it's the 'when did you stop beating your wife, if you ever did stop?' technique where you start from a conclusion of guilt and work back from there. So, such zingers, saying that Iran may have had a weapons program in 2000-3, how several posts ago, plus abject scaremongering about Iran being able to produce a bomb in a month in 2013. Shame one is postdated thoroughly by those pesky intelligence assessments from Mossad (2012) and the US (2007, 2012) saying they don't have a weapons program and both are- crucially, and which you steadfastly refuse to actually address- by the 2015 agreement. What you really need to do is show how the 2015 agreement fails to address concerns, not reiterate 12 year old accusations that have never been substantiated.