Zoraptor

Counterfeiting is certainly a better comparison than theft, though from what I remember counterfeiting in most places would require a physical good- thus things like hacking a bank to get more money on your account while to most practical extents equivalent to counterfeiting notes is actually a different crime. I don't really see a need to go beyond copyright infringement or piracy as terms, people in general know what they mean even if opinions differ as to how significant they are as infractions.

Mainly military history for me too, though I don't have a favourite period. I've always liked military spectaculars like Cannae or Russia 1812 and interesting or underrated characters. I have a particular fondness for Thucydides for being a better historian 2000+ years ago than most historians are today with all the benefits of modern technology.

Yes yes, and everytime someone equates copyright infringement with theft they're murdering logic, raping and pillaging reason, and cannabalising reality. They aren't the same, it's entirely an Appeal to Emotion. Copyright infringement does not involve depriving the owner of the use of and possession of something, ie the legal and actual definition of theft. If you steal a car or wallet the owner no longer has them in their possession and cannot use them. If they were duplicated the owner would still have use of them. It's also not a criminal matter (except in unusual circumstances), but a civil one, unlike theft. Ultimately you are of course free to consider piracy as theft, barratry, arson, libel, murder, DUI, terrorism, fraud or whatever but it'll only ever be copyright infringement. I also find it rather difficult to muster any outrage whatsoever that multiple years ago someone may have duplicated an infinitely reproducible virtual good that was not available for purchase at the time- I see little point to whiteknighting corporates at the best of times (frankly, corporates don't give a asterisks beyond what benefits them, so hey! reciprocal right back at 'em) and a situation where a product is arbitrarily unavailable due to geography is hardly the best of times- it's simply not anyone else's business but the copyright holder's and the infringers.

Difficult I do before breakfast, the impossible... I do when I have a bit of spare time, often in the evenings. KBM commands aren't perfect in TW2 but it's emminently playable without sullying glorious PC purity with dirty peasant console peripherals. (Now you can use not_sure_if_srs.jpg)

If a massage parlor gives legitimate massages, but doesn't stop its therapists from giving a little extra on the side, it can still run the risk of getting shut down. That's not a good analogy. The testing under the law for torrents was the same as for the earlier RIAA/ MAFIAA bete noirs, VCRs and tapes in the 70s/80s- they only require legitimate uses in order to be legal, not for all uses to be legal. It is somewhat different for sites that actually host files like megaupload if they ignore warnings, see below. Copyright also requires an active defence rather than a passive one (excluding large scale counterfeiting and other actually criminal rather than civil infractions), the copyright holder has to object to its incorrect use which is absolutely sensible, as in most cases there's no reasonable and intrinsic way to determine copyright ownership and the extent of fair use exceptions and the like. What TPB is doing is more like having a noticeboard saying "Wanna good time? Go to this address". Could mean drugs, could mean prostitution. Could mean bingo night or a course of cordon bleu cooking. Doesn't seem to work that way on the Internet. Read up on Kim dot Com's case, they were able to bust him because there's alleged proof that they not only knew that illegal **** was going on in their servers, but also actively encouraged it to make money. Megaupload is a different case from TPB as they actually hosted the files directly, rather than just directions to them. As such they were always more vulnerable since they were potentially making a direct breach of copyright. Having said that, there seems to be a fair bit of doubt that the charges will stick even there, and the procedurals have been an abject mess from both the US and NZ sides of the equation. Enough so that people are already speculating on whether we'll have to give all Mr .Com's seized assets back- amazingly, even if exonerated we wouldn't have to thanks to that grubby little fascist Simon 'ultimate' Powaaaaaah. I'm just thankful his convict by accusation law was too much even for our government and that he's buggered off to be a banker.

Since we're calling spades spades... TPB does not have any copyrighted content to remove as they don't host anything bar the torrent information. As such people cannot go there to get illegal asterisks, they can only go there to obtain directions to get (potentially) illegal asterisks. That's why they're still in business.

Yeah, EA will face financial difficulties if it keeps losing money forever, but it still has significant amounts of money in reserve. And everything I've seen about Nexon suggests they simply don't have the money for a takeover, they'd be better off going for a smaller and far more desperate fry like THQ. I'd suspect the only companies with significant interest in EA would be 'Activision' (via Vivendi Universal) or someone with a potential extra reason for owning them- MS, Apple etc. They're small, which helps with survival. It also helps with PR (underdog) and their games have personality and appeal to a certain sector with has deep loyalty. They also had at least two cancelled games- allegedly System Shock 3, definitely for EA; and The Crossing- and would have got part paid for at least the former title.

Don't really know how much of a loss it would be, almost all the pre release stuff on Stalker 2 sounded badly retrograde anyway. Given the persistent talk about needing a constant internet connection to play it may well have been envisioned as a MMOFPS effectively from the start. I'll lol if the rumours of the Stalker IP being sold to Bethesda are true.

I think I've said it before but the only reason I actually care about steam is its monopolism, else I really couldn't care less where people buy their games even if there are no circumstances under which I'd actually use Steam personally- much the same as I wouldn't object to someone else buying a Fiat but would strenuously object if the only thing being sold were a Fiat, even if you could buy your Fiat from a nominal 'BMW' dealer. I generally use GG because I prefer client free, they're equivalently cheap (probably not as cheap as often, but I think every game I picked up from there at christmas was cheaper than on steam especially given they had a 4/3 deal as well as 80% off) and they give me store credit for pretty much anything. I've used clients in the past (Impulse, Origin, even Steam for games I've been given) and they aren't definite deal breakers. But I simply will not support an attempt by one company to turn PC gaming into its personal fiefdom by bundling its software and store with every release under the sun. It's anticompetitive, exceedingly bad for the customer in the long run and especially bad for anyone who isn't Valve as they are losing the best thing about digital distribution- cutting out the middleman- for a system where Valve ends up taking the place of MS and Sony in the console world and charging their console licencing fee equivalent for 80% of all games sold. It's frankly embarassing seeing PC 'purists' who are also uncritically supportive of someone who is trying to remove the PC's strongest and best characteristic for an iStore/ XBL/ PSN style future because it is monumentally hypocritical, and would not be supported in any other circumstances or if it were any other product. It ain't the hardware that's the console, you can make a console out of anything computerish from ARM to Cell or Intel; it's the software, and always has been. In the steamworks future it doesn't matter if GG or GamestopImpulse or "Direct2Drive" or anyone else exists and retains their small market shares, buy from any of them and you still become a Valve customer. At the moment that may be an OK situation since Valve are warm and fluffy, and like kittens and want to give everybody a big hug, and their walled garden has pot plants and streamers and a fountain and pool table and Gabe tucking you into bed while singing lullabys at night; but it won't last, never does with a monopoly. They've already started leveraging their dominance to kill competition in the only place it counts, and that will just get worse.

DS1 is very good, though rather limited, dependant on your ability to put up with Advanced Monster Closet game design and with some annoyingly overlong boss fights. Some also hate the controls since Isaac is not a typical run and gun super soldier and rather shuffles around most of the time. I actually wouldn't have been disappointed had it actually been called System Shock 3, which is high praise from me. DS2 is DS1 with much of the interest and personality removed. I can't put an exact finger on why I didn't like it as much, except that it was more of the same but at the same time a whole lot less. Much as with ME3 I turned down the difficulty at the end since I just started finding it annoying. And the dlc handling is laughable since all the items (free on PC) are just dumped into the stores at zero cost so you can get the best stuff for free right at the start. There's zero G gameplay (around one section per chapter on average) and vacuum gameplay with an air supply timer in both games, though it's not really a big deal. The zero g stuff changes significantly between games, in 1 you have to jump from surface to surface while in 2 it's a more traditional 'jetpack' like system and there's quite a lot less of it too. If they're cheap both are probably worth it, if it were a choice of one DS1 is considerably better.

Yeah, the entire purpose of the steam client is to make sure that 'everyone' has valve's store installed on their computer ready, convenient and willing to sell stuff- that's been the basis of valve's business strategy since 2003. While it's certainly possible to make a game without the client linked habitual monitoring it is still needed for patching and dlc handling since valve changed its contract terms to exclude external patching and dlc handling (see Origin and Paradox Connect*). It's antithetical to a GOG like strategy no matter how warm and fluffy a fluff propaganda booklet makes them out to be. It's not that steam isn't important to indies, it certainly is as it has the largest market by far and there are all too many "No steam no sale" induhviduals out there to be ignored but it is important in the same way its direct equivalents are on the other non software consoles and walled garden marketplaces- captive audience, marketing, ease of selling. Most of the kickstarters I've seen list a Steam copy and a DRM free one in their benefits anyway. Best of both worlds, let's fanboys fan and h8rs h8 without there really being a big issue. *Anyone with the GG version of CK2 can see what the paradox based dlc handler would have looked like- its ingame store still refers to 'ducats' (Paradox's own virtual currency) in some places instead of 'blue coins'.

I finished Dead Space 2- another EA game with a deeply annoying ending gameplay wise. I really liked the original DS but DS2 never really grabbed me except when a good old friend turned up. Whoever wrote the story for DS clearly has some trust issues with women, you only meet four throughout the entire series and three of them betray you. Been playing StalkerCOP, which is pretty good even if it feels really weird getting a Vintorez on the first map and having nearly everybody friendly to you, and it hasn't had anywhere which has had the quality of SOC's X labs either. After you finish the game, whatever you think of the ending, you really must go to youtube and watch all the different ways Mordin's quest can play out. Hands down some of the best cut-scenes in gaming. Yeah, some of ME3 was excellent and almost all of the peripheral stuff was at least inoffensive if not decent or better. I didn't actually care much about the ending per se, by that stage I was thoroughly disenchanted with the post Cerberus Base gameplay snooze fest.

If bought direct from steam it's automatically added to your account, if bought retail (and probably other DD vendors) you need to enter a code into GfWL to access it. If it's been used you need to know the original owner's login details.

You leave Loc Muinne in the end, which is on the border of Kaedwen and Aedirn. I expect the third game will be set in Dol Blathanna and Lyria and be about dealing with Wild Hunt/Nilfgaard invasion. That way CDPR can still peruse some major Sapkowski creatred characters not previously seen in Twitcher games, e.g. Francesca Findabair and Queen Meve. Either way your decisions aren't likely to have major effects on the sequel, at least not in the way that the Triss/ Shani situation should have had. The big events at the end which are likely to shape the sequel occur no matter what your choices are with only peripheral (for the purposes of a sequel) stuff like who will be leading the countries and whether the rebels succeeded being based on choice, and there's one leader who is indestructible if you need to meet the northerners again. Most of the choices could be shown by having Redanian/ Temerian help for something in the sequel, having minor cameos or references to people who may be dead/alive or similar- much like Adda or Thaler were treated in TW2. Certainly there's no obvious gotcha like starting up TW3 to find that Shani has appeared in your bed, unless they decide on a canonical chapter 2 path/ companion.

I've been to visit Germany, saw Danzig and Stettin? (I'm noticing a distinct lack of Rabid Ukrainian Nationalism on this forum)

Yeah, you've just admitted your 'method' has failed you and yet it doesn't effect your point at all. Perhaps a smidge above "Ubisoft > kickstarter FACT!!! r00fles" on the cogent argument stakes, but only a smidge.

TW2 is far better set up for a sequel than the original in that regard- you're pretty clearly leaving the north at the end so any developments there ought to be peripheral. Resolving Shani/ Triss was always going to be a problem for a sequel, hence bad planning. For the lulz actually describes my solutions to the Henselt/ Dethmold problem pretty well.

The thing which CDPR really did well with regard to inter game choices was to get the really big choice out of the way right at the beginning. I guess the closest analogy would be those occasions in AP or an ME where you make a conversation choice and Mike/ Shep says something completely different to what you expected- not a big deal really, just a bit immersion breaking.

So, how's ME3 working out for you?

I tend to agree on balance and it didn't really effect my enjoyment personally, but I can certainly understand it having an effect. All the big choices in TW1 were pretty much disregarded in the sequel- minor mentions of Adda, whether Siegfried survived being maybe the biggest to make it through. The 'path' picked has basically zero effect beyond Siegfried, the sequel disregards the 'wrong' choice of ladyfriend and all the talk about the nature of monsters and Geralt's attitude to society and his place in it is either ignored, or rebooted. I tend to put that down to changed priorities and bad planning and leave it there but it certainly is a significant potential annoyance and may well detract from the overall impression of the series, all those factors arguably should be if not explored at least acknowledged better in a sequel. My copy of ME3 would have gone sailing out the window if Bioware had arbitrarily decided that Carth was still alive (let alone a romantic interest) after I'd taken such satisfaction in having him nuked on Virmire and that isn't that much different a situation.

Their intra game C&C is one of if not the best of any game. I might even describe it as masterful. The inter game C&C on the other hand makes Bioware's handling of it look masterful.

I don't really have a problem with the grouping issue, despite disliking that sort of thing a lot in other games. In certain circumstances it is a definite disadvantage, but it encourages good tactical usage of the terrain- fight in a narrow constrained area and you will always have all your party members available for combat while the oppo may have as few as one or two and have reduced ability to use their status/ area attacks too. Area effects (especially status effects) are a real pain to be sure. I've always tended to run away from them unless I have good level protection spell up or I can get in close and kill them very quick.

Finally got around to sticking some money in, will be interesting to see how the promise ends up meeting reality. Will be hilarious if it ends up being a multi GB behemoth and I'm still on suckful internet.

It does have backing, of a sort- it's the global reserve currency, so it's in effect backed by every other currency on earth. Which is precisely why they can get away with a lot more than other currencies with regard to 'quantitative easing' (printing money)- so much stuff is US denominated that dropping its worth too much stuffs everyone else up.

This, if they fixed the dreadful combat from the last one. Whatwhatwhat, Wiz8's combat is coolness personified! Wizfast is mandatory though, else you could read write War and Peace in between rounds thanks to the slow animations.