pmp10

Sun is losing mass but you can't see it in out orbital cycle because the mass exchange is not significant. The sun is not losing mass pmp10. Since it dose fusion it has to. Unless you mean that its mass is being resupplied which AFAIK cannot be proven.

Sun is losing mass but you can't see it in out orbital cycle because the mass exchange is not significant. We made enough hydrogen bombs that worked. Fusion is well proven. And here you are not even trying.

The same way like tides: You can't explain that. - Bill O'Reilly Satellite Television -Transmitters. Satellite Internet - Cell towers. Satellite Imagery - Cell towers/transmitters. The Global Positioning System (GPS) - Cell towers/transmitters. We had fusion without oxygen since it's discovery. What are you talking about? The first fusion reaction achieved in laboratory conditions were hydrogen on hydrogen. Fusion as a reaction in general can takes place for all elements. No idea where you got specific need for oxygen from.

We had fusion without oxygen since it's discovery.

I wouldn't really call the game good on the strength of it's tech as it didn't do anything better than Half-Life or even Quake. And the combat system wasn't well designed (balance included) since Devil May Cry completely blew it out of the water. It is however an very interesting attempt to create a PC hack&slash (before Diablo 2 would claim that title). You just won't see regular enemies killing each other in other games of this genre.

The obvious problem is that modern technology and production values require larger audience for games to be profitable. And it's not just the boob size that's getting cut. Just look at the dumbing-down in the gameplay department.

I used to love the game back in the day but calling it a simulator is too much. It has not aged gracefully and is imbalanced as hell. I still can't believe that a normal person could finish the game with dwarf or knight.

Spec ops the line. Pretty shocked that a major publisher dedicated money to have this game made. I may love it for it's commentary on military shooters but it was never going to make money.

This brings up the question of why build gaming PC at all. If only you can get your favorite old games to run then you can spend the next decade gaming in nostalgia-land.

I wouldn't really say that obsessing over game proves it had a good design. In fact more often than not they are just proof of heavy nostalgia. Games I personally spent most time into tended to be strategy games with separate strategic and tactical layers. In no particular order: X-com trilogy Master of Orion 1&2 Master of Magic

Not really. Admittedly some of the elites understood that slavery is a poor issue over which to secede. But the common people of confederacy simply thought they had no choice since it was the basis of their economic and social order. Remember that when Lincoln got elected he didn't promise abolition of slavery - just stopping it's extension was enough to start a war.

I'm afraid that it is you who are wrong here. Despite all the atrocities that happen during crusades and afterwards complete city razing was not one of them.

That's not true at all. You may at best find fewer written laws but in antiquity tolerance was always in short supply. Really? Homosexuality and pedophilia were fully allowed... sounds very liberal to me. And tolerance? Tolerance was always in short suply. Today too. We just mask it better. That's the problem - they weren't fully allowed. Pedophilia had a specific place in the context of mentoring boys and homosexuality could have a prominent role in military structure but you were still tradition bound to marry and have a family. Traditions and expectations of ancient societies are way off from those of today.

That's not true at all. You may at best find fewer written laws but in antiquity tolerance was always in short supply.

Fair enough but not everything is pro-slavery. That's one of those institutions most people are uncomfortable with.

Keep in mind that most people don't really know how the flag of confederacy looked like. In popular mind stars and bars have long been replaced by the battle flag. It's quite ironic that people celebrate successes of the armies but don't care for the state as such.

The point is to have features that are now expected as standard. And that's exactly the problem with a lot of the freemium games. It's not only about CGI cinematics or good voice actors but things that should be standard by now (like having in-game tutorial instead of youtube one).

That actually reinforces the point. 3 freemium multiplayer only games and one sequel (that couldn't replace a title decade old) don't measure up to the AAA single-player titles consoles enjoy.

But that's impossible if only because those graphics don't come free. Production values expectations have put industry at a point were no middle ground exists between indie/arcade and AAA. And it's exactly the same story on the consoles. Nothing is dying because of that - industry has simply changed.

I understand the argument that modern PC gaming became nothing but Sims WoW and minecraft but I think you miss the general gaming context in which it happened. The pursuit of AAA has led to decline in variety and numbers of games on every platform. For every genre that has disappeared or got marginalized on PCs consoles have two that became arcade-only. It's true that PCs lost the advantage they enjoyed in the realms of 3D graphics and multiplayer resulting in focus shift to MMOs. It was always obvious that PC gaming can't compete in the realm of AAA games but that doesn't mean they can't find a niche that will keep it going. As long as MMOs maintain a strong focus on PC I don't see hardcore gaming abandoning the platform.

But that's just it - as long as MMOs and freemium model stays PC centric it's not dead yet. Granted - a lot of things will change with new console generation but it's way too early to say that death of PC gaming is inevitable.

Now that's just silly. Even the top games that made PC gaming decade ago could barely scratch 1 million mark. Only the revolutionary ones like Half Life and Diablo 2 produced a following that could consistently break that barrier. I agree that hardcore PC gaming has been declining and may go out all-together in the next console generation but there is no denying that it never appealed to same numbers as consoles have.

For myself, PC games and console games are typically the same price today ($60). Having said that, games inevitably come down in price. Is waiting not an option? The problem is that most console games comes down in price due to sales of used games providing competition. I'm not sure if the incentive to drop prices will still be there.

Not every old RPG was a grind fest like Wizardry or Might&Magic. Going back to something like Dark Sun can show you the roots that would later lead to Baldurs Gate.

The chief aim of always-online is fighting piracy. Otherwise MS would be perfectly happy with one time activation.