BruceVC

What's up with the fan cover frame? I though Far Cry 3 had 8 or 8.5 graphics at least. That cover looks like 4, maybe 5 graphics at most. Yeah I'm sorry to say this as I know it can be annoying when you having issues with a game but I had no issues with Far Cry 3 and I used M\Kb the whole time. Also my graphics did look much better than that, in fact I would say the graphics were one of the strong points of the game. The whole world seemed lush and beautifully rendered but I was able to run everything on max settings.

Why should I avoid crafting? Does it make you too powerful...also when you say "invo" what exactly do you mean?

Thanks

Thanks for all the advice guys I have experience with Morrowind and Oblivion so I am kind of familiar with Bethesda games. My high-level strategy for Skyrim is as follows I'll start the main quest and then deviate to start exploring anything I want. I don't want to finish the main quest until much later I'll use mods. But only if they enhance the experience like better weather, insects, advanced Ai, more and different Monsters, harder and more dragons etc. I'll used Adult Mods for various reasons. If my character can kill whole villages and slay foul dragons surly he can be rewarded with decent sex scenes, full nudity and advanced aesthetics for the various NPC's in the game? I also find in Bethesda games I tend to become too powerful and there are no more challengers in combat, so I want to see if there is a Mod that can balance but I doubt it I'll also be playing the DLC's during this play through, so that should be exciting

Speak to Oby, we'll get you a nice Russian

Yeah! NATO only kill few thousands Libyan civilians by air strikes, "rebel's" after taking of power begin terror against opposition and ethnic cleansing ( add to this quantity of people killed during civil war by them also), weapons taken by rebels causing civil war in Mali, after extermination of opposition victors begin internal fight for power and Libya become more and more similar to unhappy Somalia. NATO during this intervention violate UN rules (do not participate in civil wars on one side of conflict), violate UN resolution ( ground air strikes and Spec ops instead no-fly zone). Yeah West, you do everything right! I think it's hard to find more shameful example of Western failure (or success, if they goal is just steal resources instead this childish blah-blah about democracy). Once again you have your facts wrong. Gaddafi hired mercenaries from Niger, Chad and other African countries to fight the NATO supported rebels. After the war they looted the armouries of Libya and took the weapons to other parts of Africa like Mali. Please provide links around the Ethnic cleansing that is ongoing in Libya. Yes Gaddafi's tribe suffered after the war and people that were aligned to Gaddafi but what do you expect after the atrocities committed by them against the rebels? The mission in Libya wasn't illegal it was a NATO mission. The question is did the Western countries that helped the Libyan rebels over extend there mandate, if they did that was good as it was needed to defeat Gaddafi. All the West did was provide air support and some trainers on the ground. The Libyan rebels did the rest But anyway are you suggesting that the situation in Syria is better than Libya today? That's what you need to ask yourself

Makes sense. Imagine my excitement as I'm about to only begin my journey in the world of Skyrim

Why? I am really looking forward to my first play through of Skyrim. I have loads of Mods I'll be using but I'll only be playing it in when I'm on leave in December and January

I don't know but your feverish dreams sound pretty cool to me

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bischoff/stasis-2d-isometric-scifi-horror-adventure-game?ref=live# Guys take a look at this and support this KS. The developer is a South African who actually still lives in South Africa (my home town to be exact) so I admit to being biased . But the real reason to support this KS is if you believe in the concept, and it does look good I am going to contact him on a private capacity and introduce myself. I am excited about this home grown project

They contribute mainly by stopping the US + minions from running off and starting conflicts, of course. Really? Well Syria is an excellent example of what happens when the West isn't allowed to intervene. Now compare that to Libya at the moment. Yes Libya has it issues around there new political identity but I would take the current state of Libya after Gaddafi was overthrown to Syria any day of the week Its important to accept that regime change is necessary and important in certain examples in order to achieve long term stability in a region. The question is really just how to achieve that regime change, Iraq bad example. Libya good example.

Wow that art is very impressive. What is very interesting is I see he is South African and lives in Johannesburg where I live We don't have too many South African gaming companies or people that contribute towards the industry so I'll definitely help fund this game

Constant presence of Russian Peacekeepers in Georgia (effectively stop Georgian-Ossetian-Abkhazian war in 5 days:cat: ), Moldova and Tajikistan, also Russia try send peacekeepers to Golan Heights, but other UN members vote against this. Oby I said "real" conflict that Russia has contributed troops towards But okay I'll research these areas and comment later. I don't know how accurate what you are saying is and also I don't know the context. But thanks for the information

The trouble with using that link to counter me is that it lists the largest contributors as Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Ethiopia and Nigeria. Either that link isn't appropriate for this discussion, or those five have a better claim to sit on the UNSC than the US. Since the latter is obviously ridiculous, I can only conclude that it's not relevant. I am not saying the UK is amongst the five most powerful countries, no. I am saying that it's a diplomatic position and is not as simple as the biggest bullies in the room. No, I wouldn't claim that Bangladesh should have a permanent seat at the UNSC. I was merely dismissing your statement. Maybe I should have written as well that even if the UK happened to contribute the most men to peacekeeping efforts, it wouldn't be an argument. I don't think the exact number of soldiers sent is relevant, and neither should you. The link provided was to inform you on the facts regarding peacekeeping efforts, I'm happy you can conclude for yourself that the argument is invalid instead of calling for a permanent place for Bangladesh on the UNSC. Sorry I'm late to this discussion Ros its not often I disagree with you but in this case I definitely do, I'm very surprised that our UK based members seemed happy to accept your view that the UK doesn't deserve a permanent place on the UNSC ( shame on you Walsie !! Where is that famous Jingoism that we like to see from you ) I assume we are ignoring the historical context and sacrifice of the UK in the previous world wars, that's fine. Lets focus on the last 15 years. Firstly your initial link is flawed and doesn't represent the reality of peace keeping roles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_UN_peacekeepers Its based on 2013 data only. But even then look at the contribution that Russia and China have made to peace keeping forces. In fact lets keep it simple, find me the a couple of examples in the last 10 years that Russia or China have committed military resources to any real conflict? That should be a salient reason for a place on the UNSC, your personal stake in the security of the world and your influence. So if your link is appropriate to this discussion why should Russia or China be a member of the UNSC? Also in almost cases where the UNSC send troops to places like Africa the funding of those troops is done through the members of the security council. So just because you don't see UK troops in Mali or Central African Republic countries like the UK still pay for those troops and the deployment of those troops? This is one of the biggest failures of the African Union. They can't afford to fund there own peace keeping. I have provided another link at the end that highlights how much money the UK does give to the UN for military operations throughout the world Now lets look at some accurate deployments that the UK has been involved in last 10 years. http://www.army.mod.uk/operations-deployments/operations-deployments.aspx Then there NATO involvement http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_52060.htm Now you can research the individual examples above to see the UK commitment to conflicts like Bosnia, Libya and Sierra Leone. And lets not forget Syria, the UK was one of the few countries along with France and the USA that were prepared to get involved on a military level after Assad used Chemical weapons Then we have the personal financial contributions to humanitarian disasters around the world that the UK have made. You can find endless links around the various UK charities and the commitment that the UK has made to humanitarian issues around the world. And finally the contribution that the UK has made to the UN budget. Go back a few years to see how much money the UK commits to the UN. Compare this to Russia and China. http://www.globalpolicy.org/un-finance/tables-and-charts-on-un-finance/member-states-assessed-share-of-the-un-budget.html So in summary the UK absolutely deserves its place on the UNSC, it is prepared to send its own troops to conflict areas and is actively involved in UNSC endorsed military operations. Finally if you really don't feel the UK should be on the UNSC then neither should China and Russia because how have they assisted with stabilising conflict areas around the world?

Yeah that game is well worth $5

You didn't already have it? Okay, that's it. Show of hands, who does not already own this game? We aren't allowed to be friends. Hrm. Friends with Tale... not driven insane by the torture that is Dark Souls... I think I'm good on that choice. Too frustrating for me. I also have my doubts around if I can handle Dark Souls, I don't have patience with games that force repetition on you or don't allow reasonable save progress so if you get killed you don't have to go back too far. But I need to at least try the game before I'll comment properly

You didn't already have it? Okay, that's it. Show of hands, who does not already own this game? We aren't allowed to be friends. Well I bought it for the first time 4 days ago, can we be friends now

That's an insightful post, thanks for sharing

So I've just finished Walking Dead and it was very good. A gripping ending. So now I've recently played an old-school RPG, IWD, and the emotional Walking Dead. I now want to play something where I don't have to think too much and I can just kill things, so what you guys think...Dead Space 3 or Metro : Last Light?

Thanks for the tips

Machine for Pigs, the new one

Okay I bought Metro and Amnesia was only $10 so I got that as well, that's it for me. No more Steam games on this sale

I'm only reading this now and I've missed that SR4 special They usually run many of the sales more than once so it might come up again before it's all said and done. If not, there's a good chance it will be on sale during the X-Mas Sale, which will likely be in a couple of weeks. I contemplated getting Metro: Last Light, but then decided against pulling the trigger on it. While my lappy will surely be able to run it, it won't be able to come anywhere near max, or even high settings, plus my backlog is already quite long. Might as well wait until next year when I build a new desktop rig so that I can play it on maximum eye candy. I'll likely get it cheaper then anyway. I'm about to buy Metro Last Light, its $13. But Steam is very slow at the moment for me and I can't logon

After all the positive discussion on this thread I decided to watch Almost Human, I didn't think I would enjoy it that much as Sci-Fi isn't a genre that I'm crazy about but holy smoke its brilliant. I am really enjoying it

I'm only reading this now and I've missed that SR4 special