heathen

Is there an easy to way import what your character looks like in Fallout 3 to New Vegas? I spent some time on him in F3 and was really pleased. All the default presets in New Vegas are really ugly

You are trying to justify something that is quite simple. You have a company that puts time and resources into a product, and then they ask for a certain amount of money for it. When you take it without paying, it doesn't matter what you call it, it is wrong. I'm not justifying it. I think it's wrong as well. It just happens to be how things are. There's two options: either make the internet a closed system or adapt to a world where all IP is free. There's no other options, really. They're fighting a war that was lost 10 years ago now.

It's funny how you all seem to think downloading an album or a movie is the same as stealing it. It's not. Technology has moved forward and it's about the same kind of a leap as back when betamax / video cassettes / c-cassettes were introduced. The music and movie industries are trying to hung onto their old, very lucrative business model that's simply not working with the current tech we have. There's no turning back the time, either.

About the response I expected.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/party-picker Some hard facts about how the two parties have performed. Now I'm not an expert on american politics, but the numbers seem legit. What do you more conservative (even republican?) members of this? A bunch of hooey? Leftist propaganda? snippet:

Maybe it's because the engine itself was pretty crappy and what made the fallouts great was their design, atmosphere and writing, not the combat or anything about the engine really (outside of the death animations).

Why are you talking about houses? That's the worst analogy in this thread yet.

Agreed. But the thing is that they won't stop here. If this "no used-online" thing goes and becomes accepted by the majority of gamers, it will become the "standard" and they will go worse and worse. Why would this happen, exactly? The publisher asking for a small fee for online content for used games is a pretty straight forward and sensible idea. How would it actually go worse? Publishers first selling you a game and then charging extra for the online part? In my opinion this would only work if they lowered the price for the offline game, making online gaming basically DLC. I have nothing against this. We already have DRM, so this wouldn't change that. This is just publishers wanting a cut from the used games market, and rightfully so since Gamestop et al are reaping profits by selling games twice while the publisher has to maintain the online content for those gamers who've bought their games used. I think you're barking at the wrong tree here. Gamestop & similar chains are the ones to blame since they're profiting from content the publisher has to pay the upkeep for. As already stated, this wouldn't affect games without online content (for the time being at least). It's a legitimate concern that it might, but at the time being there's nothing to imply it would. Other than the general dislike the posters here seem to have against all publishers that is Well common sense says they would. The product they're selling would be of much lesser value and they'd have to lower the price to reflect this.

Instead of the doom and gloom, let's look at this from another angle: Suddenly you can't get the online component if you buy used. There's been talk of publishers selling rights to online stuff for used games for a small fee. This would mean the value of a used game as such would be less, thus probably lowering it's price on Gamestop / Ebay / whatever. The seller gets less profit from a game that's already been in use, the publishers get their cut from the used market and the customer (hopefully) won't have to pay any more than they used to. A lot of people in this thread seem to forget that online games have upkeep costs that can be quite high. As we live in a capitalist world, there is no free lunch. I don't see anything wrong with the publisher wanting a cut from the profits Gamestop and similar chains are making on used games since the games still use services provided by the publishers. This was different in the Nintendo era when the publisher involvement ended when the game shipped to the stores. If in the end we, the customers don't have to pay more for the used games I'm all for this.

Got it. On as blackzorlag.

Yes. On topic: I'm mildly amused by the fact that the first new Valve release after the much-vaunted Mac version of Steam is not available on Mac. I realise that this is due to the nature of the project, and Portal 2 is indeed supposed to be the first winmac game, but still. I intentionally keep my windows partitions tiny + the pain of rebooting to it, so I'll skip this for now, no matter how much fun it looks. You're surprised they didn't port the free, mod based niche game that they'll get no profit from to a platform that has a tiny playerbase? Right... Mac users sense of entitlement is only rivaled by their smugness There was nothing smug about his post. Yours on the other hand man... was just a tad off. **** that, was just being a ****. Sorry dude. Bad day.

Or not. Still have the same problem: I played D2 on a custom realm and now I can't change to any official realm, not even with an external gateway editor.

Yes. On topic: I'm mildly amused by the fact that the first new Valve release after the much-vaunted Mac version of Steam is not available on Mac. I realise that this is due to the nature of the project, and Portal 2 is indeed supposed to be the first winmac game, but still. I intentionally keep my windows partitions tiny + the pain of rebooting to it, so I'll skip this for now, no matter how much fun it looks. You're surprised they didn't port the free, mod based niche game that they'll get no profit from to a platform that has a tiny playerbase? Right... Mac users sense of entitlement is only rivaled by their smugness

Played a bit last night, kind of fun but I'll withold judgement until I unlock more guns and equipment. Add me if you want, steam acc name is katusea.

If you register your game at battle.net, it converts your old CD key to the new, longer format. I now have both. I just hope my friend won't mind me registering his key to myself I'll try again tonight.

The patching didn't work, I'm downloading the game from the Blizz site now. I used a torrent before, maybe thats why it didn't work. Who knows. Hopefully I'll get to play on the weekend :/

Hah, another little hitch. My DVD-drive isn't working and even though I think you should be abled to play D2 without the CD's in the drive, I can't get it to work. Any solutions?

Found my cd-keys, now I just gotta download the CD images and I'm set. Playtime tonight?

But you're going to do mkreku? Run a test with every girl and boy on the planet to see if they're ready to have sex? No, but also labeling everyone who has sex with someone under 18 a pedophile is both incorrect by the very definition of the word and na

For the record I wasn't trying to jusify his actions or say he should suffer no punishment. I just think it's useless and a waste of time to go after a guy who's obviously not a habitual rapist, pedophile or a criminal and who's done time for his crime and settled the matter in civilian court already.

He pled quilty to statutory rape, nothing else. Here's a quote from wikipedia, not the most trustful of sources but as far as I know the truth: Now naturally the judge COULD have given him probation, we'll never know right? You gotta admit though, it wasn't very likely. Also Polanski paid the victim a ****load of cash. Now I know it don't make it right, naturally not, but still that's a lot more than most "rape" victims get.

Yes, what I mean is he was cheated into confessing since he was promised a plea in exchange but didn't get it. He surely wouldn't have confessed if he'd known he'd get the sentence he did.

The victim was 13 and given champagne and quaaludes prior to Polanski's sexual activities; I'm personally not comfortable not calling that rape. Well, the way I understand it the girl was brought there to have sex with Polanski, by her mother no less. It's all kinds of wrong, hell it's in a way worse than regular rape (altho measuring that is hard), but Polanski might have not been sentenced for rape without being cheated into confessing. Just sayin', the trial wasn't fair by any meaning of the word.