Orogun01

Or you could just play a Knight, the equipment makes it the most overpowered starting class. Plus the fact that DS system means that there are few viable builds for every class (Vigor is best)

Congratulations Bruce, it isn't everyone that gets a thread made in their name. Your post as Obsidan resident SJW has finally payed off. BTW, I still love you no matter what your backwards views are.

I always took issue with that bit; I know that it might been exaggerated for consistency's sake, but the fact that some people will take this as a fact bothers me. Games do that but so do the other mediums, it is just that games reveal the faults within while the other are indifferent to them. I often thought of as a comparison and argument to anyone that proposes that games have a high level of requirement to experience, to simply read a very eloquent and esoteric writing of Shakespeare and simply go at the end: "Now tell me, what the **** was that going on about?!". Because reading comprehension is a skill and not everyone that holds a book knows what its written. Maybe I'm overthinking it but I long have understood that logic and rational thought are separate from facts and knowledge and that there are too many well educated idiots.

**** this year.

Metallica cover Cameo cover

Roberta Flack cover (one time...two times) Bob Dylan cover https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcWTTs8QVRc

Gloria Jones cover https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDT0yn9jk7M Don Gibson cover

Prince cover https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCiHsIfrOg Dolly Parton cover

To keep with the them of great covers; will be posting a fair bit of these (be forewarned)

I dunno, the trailer indicated the girls' outfits were brief and clearly expressed. Err...what kind of game is this?

Just out of curiosity, who decides what is acceptable within a community forums. Do the rules come down from the main company or is it left to the community manager, I guess i'm trying to fish as to whom made the decision to ban "girl" images from the forum. I wouldn't want to put you in a compromising position and I will fully understand if you dodge that question but it still makes me curious as to who decides what culture a forum will have. Well, I reported the image, so if you need someone to blame. Do we really need 'girl' images in every thread? It is pretty clear that this particular thread is not about such things. The poster actually asked if he could post images of girls, a moderator then answered and said quite clearly no, and he then proceeded to post the image anyways. That's pretty obnoxious. I'd probably go further than removing the image, hence it being a good thing I am not a mod. I'd imagine Obsidian has the ultimate say in what the forum culture will be. It is a company website. Yes but as I'm now part of a company I realize that no one in a company has any ****ing idea of what it is happening. Most of the meetings are to try and figure out what is happening and the rest is to figure out what are we going to do now that the deadline is soon and nothing is done because no one knew what was happening. Companies are a mess, so i'm just wondering whether this was an actual executive decision that came from the company or of it was a community manager or some other in betweener . I'm not expecting an answer anyways but it would be nice to know why a thread that had successfully kept itself tasteful and had several iterations was suddenly prohibited because some rainbow colored sourpuss on the other side of the internet had a hissy fit. Either way, enough time has passed and I think they forgot about the whole thing, so can we please have our ladies back?

Just out of curiosity, who decides what is acceptable within a community forums. Do the rules come down from the main company or is it left to the community manager, I guess i'm trying to fish as to whom made the decision to ban "girl" images from the forum. I wouldn't want to put you in a compromising position and I will fully understand if you dodge that question but it still makes me curious as to who decides what culture a forum will have. To be honest I can understand why the women thread had criticism? It did seem to objectify women....but why do you want to look at hot women when you can chat to me ? .....I'm sorry Bruce but I don't think of you that way.

Just out of curiosity, who decides what is acceptable within a community forums. Do the rules come down from the main company or is it left to the community manager, I guess i'm trying to fish as to whom made the decision to ban "girl" images from the forum. I wouldn't want to put you in a compromising position and I will fully understand if you dodge that question but it still makes me curious as to who decides what culture a forum will have.

There is a mod to turn Skyrim into a summer paradise. So if you're particular about realism and want bikinis in your game, that's the way to go.

Your argument is that unless that people are directly affected by an event in a material sense they have a deep emotional reaction to it. That is quite cynical, specially considering that when Batman is patrolling the city he gets to watch all the suffering his failings have brought. A character who so strongly attached to his belief that even though he can't see a better way he refuses to give up his humanity even when he gets close to the edge. I'm sure that Bill Gates cries himself at night about the Indian children that died because of bad vaccines. There is clearly a difference in the degrees of attachment a capitalist has the ones an idealist has. Batman's ideals are central to his character. I will agree to disagree "Superman also possesses super genius-level intelligence and an eidetic memory. Average people from Krypton already had genius-level intelligence" source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_and_abilities_of_Superman I wonder why Superman doesn't get as much criticism for not using his intellect to solve the world's great problems. The whole point of Superman is that he isn't a human, saying that he is the ideal humanity should strive for is akin to saying we should be as good as the angels. I feel like I'm repeating myself in this part and I would ask why is that an ideal man is a better mentor than a flawed one. From the latter I can learn from their mistakes. Also there is the mention of Lex Luthor's belief that Superman through his helping humanity is sapping them of the will to greatness. My point is that his innate powers removed the possibility of any moral dilemma from his life during his formative years. He didn't have to re-examine his beliefs, he knew that he was better than everyone and he was tempered with kindness. Which is the same outlook that he has later in life. So you can't really say that he has been shaped by belief in the same way that the rest of humanity grows up and becomes wiser.

Is matter of utilitarianism vs humanism; those men you mention, I know two of them to be scum. Even so I will entertain the thought that their intent is the greater good. Batman is not about the greater good, his is to inspire fear in criminals and hope to the crestfallen. More so, Bruce Wayne has established charities and community programs to try to get Gotham back into shape. He isn't as ignorant of the causes of crime as everyone seems to think or so strict that he can't empathize with his enemies. One the his inner turmoils is the fact that he feels too much like them. Like I said before, I'm arguing from the position that capitalists are selfish and have no real obligation to the community. If your argument is that a capitalist is just someone who owns capital, then everyone who has private property is one. IIRC; Superman is affected by different types of radiation, with G type stars being the ones who empower him, plus Kryptonians are also smarter than humans. So if your point is that in an Universe without Suns he would be normal, then you're right. Our isn't that Universe. Moreover that is part of his nature as classical hero, who are divine and therefore more than human. What you argue is that he is the ideal human, what I said was that because he was born as such he can't be representative of humanity's modernist struggles. Author's intent aside, only Batman has been shaped by his belief. Superman has and always has been Superman, he merely adopted his views but wasn't shaped by them; Clark Kent was. The Renaissance was the birth of humanism, while they copied the techniques of the ancient the subject matter they embraced was different. Gone were the demigods and what took their place were normal men who accomplished great deeds, even if they had been guided by divine providence.

Batman often has moments of collaboration with certain elements within both the justice and the criminal world. He chooses to stand at the threshold of both in order to be more effective whilst being bound by none. In this regard he is pretty much a capitalist, yet the main difference comes from how they see the world and what their intent is. Batman seeks order out chaos, pure capitalism seeks profit and history has shown that great profit and progress come with a dose of chaos. It is not just attachment to reality but an awareness of how one's actions affect the world, my earlier point was more about degrees of separation than actual empathy (although those two things are related). The banker that fails at his job, swindles or finances a war in a Third World country is very far away from where the consequences take place. Batman has focused his efforts in Gotham, which he patrols nightly and can gauge the effect his actions have on the world. Perhaps it is more of how the term "capitalist" has come to mean something else, it is applied to bankers, brokers, and moguls yet small business owners are exempt because they have to work directly in their business. Ours could be a difference of how we see the term. I don't deny Superman takes strength from his ideals. The point is that regular humans have to compromise in their ideals to survive while Superman was born blessed so that he wouldn't need to. At any given conflict, Superman is always capable of making the right choice. Superman answering the Trolley problem would be pointless as he can save all of them. Yes, he is ideal and that is why he can't be the best of humanity or his ideal as what defines our struggle is our powerlessness.

Interesting perspective, yet there is a dogmatic nature to both characters that contradicts your view. Batman whilst misguided in a practical sense, still retains a tentative hold on his sanity by adhering to a code of not killing. There is the running theme that Batman holds back his potential which makes him a bit more altruistic than your typical capitalist which trough separation to the rest of the world has no emotional attachments to it His universe is self contained and he expects the rest of the world to be the same; Batman's perspective is broader, being unable to ignore the consequences of his actions and the strain it puts on his moral code. Superman on the other hand despite being inherently better, chooses simplicity and almost yearns for it. It is the lack of a sense of belonging or how the adage goes "It is lonely at the top". A long standing critique of Superman is his alien nature, not because of actually being an alien but because of his inherent superiority which separates him from the mere mortals. His archetype is closer to the Greek heroes who had a connection to the divine rather than of it actually being humanist. I find your view that he is made better by an ideal mistaken; he is simply better by genetics, and more fitting to Batman whose entire existence has been defined by a singular moment and the belief it generated. Both seem to be very bound by the personal consequences of their existence which in no way reflect the consequences of the belief you claim they represent.

A common misconception as well.. It's the other way around actually. We're among the richest 10% in the world, in truth I think we give far too little back (I'm sure Batman would agree, given his business practices). It's the fool that think his fortunes are entirely his own and jealously keeps his neighboor from achieving the same, for fear of diluting his own. I still don't see how just giving out money is good. Most rich people that want to give back to the community set up funds or give donations, to help people with the will to accomplish. It is equally as stupid to expect someone whom you don't even know to act as your surrogate father. Giving that inclination i'm not surprised that the left falls prey to communism, not because of the proletariat but because of spoiled middle class kids.

A dumb liberal joke that fails to recognize that Batman himself is a product of that corrupt system and place the onus on him to change society within the confines of his moral code. But then everyone freaks out when Superman does just that. This may be reading too much into it but methinks that you people are just want to be handed free money from rich people whom they believe to be related to the giving tree.

Man, those will be some fancy romances.

I guess I wouldn't show up to work and I probably drink....I seriously don't get what's so special about either living or dying so I don't mind it either way.

Follow your dreams, step outside your comfort zone, even if doesn't pan out you will learn something about yourself. As someone older who regrets time wasted, take all the opportunities you can...BTW what the hell do you need a crossbow for? To kill roaming carnivorous bears that are common in his area? Germany has a huge problem with bears A crossbow won't help then, he needs an elephant gun or a 50.cal.

Follow your dreams, step outside your comfort zone, even if doesn't pan out you will learn something about yourself. As someone older who regrets time wasted, take all the opportunities you can...BTW what the hell do you need a crossbow for?

Maybe you should learn about After Effects.