Orogun01

Why it took me so long to find Mount&Blade is beyond me (probly the clunky animations and graphics) but now i'm hooked.

Reason # 1 Philly don't work: radioactive rain

By not provoking them? So we should turn all of our churches into mosques and kill our jews and that will solve the problem? I'll get right on it

Cheap most likely, since it's hard to attract programmers to a game project without financial bonuses (SOBs make more than everyone else) so is easier to look for those passionate about gaming.

We could say that it varies depending on who is the smoker is, I'm sure that some smokers are very decent, talented people. Despite what others may think This is incredibly wrong. You can read up on it here. That's from the American Cancers Society, but you can find a dozen other organizations saying the same thing. And nowhere in that article there was an answer to my question on the levels.

Don't really know if I should be mad or flattered; "disingenuous post" that really throws me off balance I know from your previous post that you don't seem to believe in prohibition, and are in favor of legalization. Personally I don't believe that the majority of the public's has enough self control to even deal with the legal drugs we have today. So i'm not even that positive about even the least damaging drug being completely legalized. On smoking, the amount of second hand smoke that you would have to inhale in order to actually be harmed by it can only be achieved by living with a chain smoker. You would had a stronger case if you put forth the right to privacy of the people subjected to secondhand smoke. I can agree with banning smoking from private and government facilities, but public places are common ground and aren't really owned. Under private ownership people are subject to the preferences of the owner and whether or not he should allow smoking, It doesn't make sense to me that in a public avenue they should be subjects to the preferences of others.

I have made it clear before that the crux of this matter is that some people take issue against smoking, if we were to pass legislation based on the disgust of the many I still contend that we get rid of the morbidly obese. Disgusting habit-check Should be banned in public because I find them offensive to my eyes-check Obesity poses real danger-check So do you really think that I should be able to get away with this just because my personal bias coincides with a sound argument. Despite the fact that an opposing view on the subject its equally valid. At some point you need to remember that things in life aren't all pleasurable, you banning a prick who cut you in traffic from driving and denying a group of people their pleasure just because you find it offensive its equally irrational.

Yet these poor celebrities aren't forced to smoke, many of them lead forcefully healthy lifestyles as an clear reaction to their ambient. You hit the nail on the head when you said that its due to popularity; as with most drugs legislation is related to popular opinion. At this time drugs have become a cop-out to avoid personal responsibility and serves that they are viewed as a negative illness. Putting emphasis on the fact that the user is a victim and not at fault since is beyond their control. Smoking on the other hand began to hit low when public's interest in cancer was renewed, and as it was a cause it was deemed evil. Yet despite the fact that I rarely see smokers anymore there still seems to be biased people who believe that it's a disgusting habit and should be banned. Worst is that they convince themselves that they are right because smoking poses real dangers.

Yes, I agree but smoking hardly turns you into a vegetable and before we get off hand here we should probably check the actual percentage of smokers that develop cancer. Not saying that lung cancer its not mostly caused by smoking but there's probably a certain amount you have to smoke before it happens. Nonetheless all your points are easily applicable to obesity, I would even dare say that's a greater danger than smoking but since majority rules... @Hurlshot: Aside from your right to your personal opinions(which I respect), I'd just like to say that its sad that smokers have hide and sneak just do something that's still legal.

Because they have a broad definition of bugs, maybe. Aside from the texture loading times, and clunky controls I didn't encounter that many bugs.

Forgive me but, how is a woman with three rows of teeth a bad thing? If it makes you sick then you're not that needy, give time though. A few more months and you'll be ready to do a San Fransisco Bird Feeder

Okay I'm jumping ship on this smoking thing. First of all, I believe in the right to privacy. What people do with their own bodies is no one else's concern but theirs, and public places are common ground you can't ban someone from public places for enjoying something legal. On the dangers of smoking, anything in excess is unhealthy if the government should dictate consumption based on health issues then why isn't there a stronger campaign to ban fast food? It is equally dangerous and the fact its that obesity and heart trouble are a bigger problem than smoking which is now very restricted. So aside from the fundamental hypocrisy of banning one's man joy because its offensive to you while continuing to support the other because you enjoy the eventual burger, what's the real issue with smoking? Because it sure as hell isn't some health concern, not in America where we raise hell when the government tells us that we should lower the salt content on our seafood because its above lethal dosages. @Wals: I'm still going through your link I will do a more detailed post once I've had a chance to completely read it.

I love that song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VwdpUXqq94

Forgive me but, how is a woman with three rows of teeth a bad thing?

Look on the bright side, now you have an excuse to get drunk. BTW seeing as Carlos Tevez is probably the missing link I'd say that any homo sapien is more of a man than him.

It is a nice tip of the hat to the Metal Gear series.

They seemed to do increased damage. Or instant kills. Agreed parry could take out a quarter or more of HP, it was actually one of my favorite skills.

Three words "Shadow of the Colossus" Only boss fights and still one of the best games ever. Not to mention every JRPG has an epic final boss fight right after you are done beating all his henchmen throughout the game. And WRPGs, surely they would be above that Japanese stuff and be free of bosses :cough: Sarevok :cough: So yeah, boss fights are totally arcade and not RPG at all.

Yes I would mind, because that's the part I'm terrible at. A doctor telling you to stop smoking because it has a negative effect on your health is not the same as a priest telling you to stop being gay because the bible says it's wrong. Being fine with one is not at odds with having a problem with the other. I'll help you. You were talking about people whose personal views are not absolutist; moderates. People who may believe in the right to life but still support the death penalty, it is not mutually exclusive because not everyone takes a belief as an axiom that its applicable in every situation and still optimal. In short, everything its relative so views change depending on the situation. Otherwise we would have every drug legalized in the US (as it once was) because of the right to privacy.

mmh, the whole thing's been blown so out of proportion it reeks to me of another simple case of bandwagon jumping. Could be, although I didn't have that much problem with it I was hoping for a killswitch. Or at least a bit of info prior to the fight that would had made the experience easier, otherwise it does feel a bit forced. Although I don't really mind it since I was looking forward to the boss fights when I was running through the levels.

I smell a conspiracy...Illuminati!

I'll wait, do you feel like sharing the cause of your sleeplessness?

Outsourcing because they didn't have enough time. Didn't seem to be an issue with the Q&A who thought that "it was entertaining". I personally think they should do anonymous Q&A over the net, since that's how most complaints will be delivered. You would get a more brutally honest opinion.

Maybe we have different views on what the model of drug trade is. I see it as a drug lord who controls the production through superior firepower, which he has to keep because that's his bottom line. So I'm thinking that there is a high production cost on related goods and opportunity cost. Personally I think that they would either have to increase transportation (which is a complicated process when it comes to drugs) or cater to a wider base. Also exporters have to face competition from manufacturers that are located in the US, who can deliver without the hassle of international export. Even if wholesale is low is a matter of demand being low.