Delfosse

Are you ashamed of your cute little chauvinistic remarks all of a sudden? How disappointing. 5 languages. And you? Well less obviously (3 flawlessly, 1 okayish) since I don't have a habit of lying to random strangers. Do you realize that novels can be written in Polish, can be translated and be good or do you consider Poles just "underhumans"? Just curious.

Are you ashamed of your cute little chauvinistic remarks all of a sudden? How disappointing. Sure, but that's what interpreters are for. And when they did they job, that's what writers are for, to correct stylistics etc, to transform the text into pure English. You know how popular books are translated into 20 languages, etc, right?

Yeah, what do they know, being plumbers and all. How many languages do you know by the way?

Yeah. And incidentally one of their game pictures was this: Reminded me of this: Do you get it? These games are the cancer of the game industry.

Even wikipedia, which is biased because written based on books by cold war propaganda, states the obvious. http://en.wikipedia....tion_of_Germany Most published and most numerous are the rapes committed by Soviet servicemen, for which estimates range from tens of thousands to two million. Nice estimate. I estimate that it'll take me from 1 minute to a million years to reach the nearest shop. Good estimation, yes? Very scientific, based on no numbers. There is dispute in Russia concerning these claims.[19] They have encountered vast criticism from historians in Russia and the Russian government.[20] Critics argue that the numbers are based on faulty methodology and questionable sources. It is argued that although there were cases of excesses and heavy-handed command, the Red Army as a whole treated the population of the former Reich with respect. In his review of Berlin: The Downfall 1945, O.A. Rzheshevsky, a professor and President of the Russian Association of World War II Historians, has charged that Beevor is merely resurrecting the discredited and racist views of Neo-Nazi historians, who depicted Soviet troops as subhuman "Asiatic hordes."[21] In an interview with BBC News Online, Rzheshevsky admitted that he had only read excerpts and had not seen the book's source notes. He claimed that Beevor's use of phrases such as "Berliners remember" and "the experiences of the raped German women" were better suited "for pulp fiction, than scientific research." Rzheshevsky also defended Soviet reprisals against Germans, stating that the Germans could have expected an "avalanche of revenge".[19] Rzheshevsky states that acts such as robbery and sexual assault are inevitable parts of war, and some men of Soviet and other Allied armies committed them. But in general, the Soviet soldiers treated peaceful Germans with humanity.[22] Colonel Ivan Busik, Director of Russia's Institute of Military History, wrote what Hero of the Soviet Union, Army General Ivan Tretiak said to him that there was not a single case of violence committed by men in his regiment. Tretiak said that although he wanted revenge, Stalin's orders on treating the population humanely were implemented, and discipline in the army strengthened. Tretiak said that in such a huge military group as that in Germany, there was bound to be cases of sexual misconduct, as men had not seen women in years. However, he explains that sexual relations were not always violent, but often involved mutual consent. The work of Beevor and others alleging mass rape is characterized by Tretiak as "filthy cynicism, because the vast majority of those who have been slandered cannot reply to these liars."[23] With respect to the number of abortions reported in Berlin, and the estimates of number of rapes based on the abortions statistics, there are some alternative explanations, that don't necessarily involve rapes by Soviet soldiers. Atina Grossman in her article in "October"[24] describes how until early 1945 the abortions in Germany were illegal (except for medical and eugenic reasons), and so when doctors opened up and started performing abortions to rape victims (for which only an affidavit was requested from a woman), many women would claim they were raped but their accounts were surprisingly uniform (describing rapists as having "mongoloid or asiatic type"). It was also typical that women specified their reasons for abortions being mostly socio-economic (inability to raise another child) rather than moral or ethical. German women were denied abortion up until '45, where they had to say they were raped to get one. So they did. Because women just need abortions, especially during the worst of the war time, which happened in 45 in Germany. Father most likely dead. Country in ruins. That's when women do get abortions, historically. When you're done reading this, I will remind you that rapes happen in all wars, but there is absolutely no proof that Soviets did it more than others. Americans and British raped native population of France, Belgium, Germany. I'm sure you can google it up yourself, I'm not your nanny. Here's a juicy part from the American occupation of Japan: Soon after the U.S. Marines landed, all the women of a village on Motobu Peninsula fell into the hands of American soldiers. At the time, there were only women, children and old people in the village, as all the young men had been mobilized for the war. Soon after landing, the Marines "mopped up" the entire village, but found no signs of Japanese forces. Taking advantage of the situation, they started "hunting for women" in broad daylight and those who were hiding in the village or nearby air raid shelters were dragged out one after another.[72] http://en.wikipedia....rld_War_II#Rape You have no shame.

Death camps (merciless?) in Soviet Union? What the merciless **** am I reading?

Call it perversion or the natural development, makes no difference. Free capitalism inevitably leads to the final historical stage of capitalism, which is monopoly capitalism. Lenin. Sure, feel free to talk about how unpractical perfect communism is, especially since not a single country ever implemented it, so I'd really like to see you try, it promises to be funny. Make a thread, PM me a link.

I'm just curious, so I wanna ask. What exactly will happen according to you? I just thought at some point there will be: a) a universal engine for games because graphics are gonna hit a plateau and the engine will be so good, everyone will stop wasting millions on developing their own engine when they can just use this one, since it's already extremely good b) one or multiple system of digital distribution of similar quality At this point developers can stop worrying about these things and just start making games. Unless Steam starts getting greedy and asks for a better cut, I don't see the problem. But according to you they will get greedy, correct? Well I agree, that's what companies tend to do in free capitalism. And this will lead to the creation of other "steams" then, because the system balances itself out. But those other "steams" will be comfy only for so long, before they form a cartel with Steam and the prices will go up and the quality will go down again. This kind of thing is inevitable in capitalism, money tends to attract money and greediness tends to develop, and so forth, and in the end, the customer will always pay more than he should. So what's your issue with Steam exactly? It's really not their fault. Don't blame the players, blame the game.

Played all night on European servers, everyone teamed up with everyone, killed zombies, didn't do much. Logged on a Russian server. ****ing hell. Everyone attacked me on sight, killed 3 guys, got killed by the 4th cause I tried to team up with him instead of killing him on sight (grave mistake). When it's played like that, it's about a very different kind of survival then, like a slow counter-strike. But that was pretty ****ing cool. Now that I can dig.

Got excited about the DayZ mod, played it all night long. It's a bit boring after a while and it's got bugs. You always find the loot laying on the floor in big storehouses. It's not worth your time and bullets killing zombies, since they don't carry anything. Once you get inside a house, you've been inside all houses. And the terrain is supposed to be huge, but it's homogeneous. Same houses, same everything. Zombies can hit you through walls if you're touching the wall. They also get stuck sometimes, trying to reach you through that wall and getting stuck somewhere in the middle, you can see its ass on one side and its face on the other side of the wall. And the zombi is crossing the wall, slowly. It'll get unstuck eventually. The way they run is also weird. Sometimes they accelerate to incredible speed, like a car, which doesn't make sense. And they don't even run to you, they just run somewhere in your general direction at this speed. It looks like a total bug. Also, once they aggro on you, they don't change target. I got attacked by 2 zombies, locked myself in a room and the other dudes I was with just went around the zombies to loot stuff, cause the zombies wouldn't attack them. Ridiculously stupid AI. Probably an arma engine bug, but in narrow places you can get stuck yourself. They should've used source engine. Their engine is really ****ty. I get 30 fps with a high end machine. What's that about? I hope it gets better in time. The idea is pretty cool, but they should introduce some things that you gain after a while just cause you survived long enough, like endurance or something. Something realistic since they're all about realism.

Isn't Gorth from Denmark, anyway? Or was it Sweden. Attacking Australia (although you do raise some good points about the genocide the British committed against the aborigines) seems a rather ineffectual and childish strategy. Then again, the modern Australian is also rather ineffectual and childish (how anybody could in good conscious support that Tony Abbott faecal stain is beyond me), so there is a certain perverse symmetry at work. The point wasn't to criticize Australia or any country for that matter.

If the Japanese wanted to invade Australia, it would've been invaded the next day. Only they had no interest in invading it and this was known. They declared war on the US precisely because US threw an oil embargo at them. With the oil they were getting despite the embargo and with their reserves, they had only a few years before running out of it. So the idea was that they were gonna attack Siberia, because it's close and the Soviets are busy fighting on another front. Or they were gonna attack the US. This was known, too. The Enigma they were using to encode messages had been cracked for over 2 years. US ships were stationed near Australia to capture the transmissions and decode them. Those transmissions, even of highest importance, are now published. They talked about Australia once and dismissed the idea entirely. They kept preparing for a massive war effort against USSR or USA, never against Australia. US knew this, therefore Australian government knew this. Australian troops weren't busy. 1) And I suppose Switzerland was a country of 100 millions? It had less than Australia and you started advancing some bull**** theories that they thrive on suffering and whatnot. Well in this case by your own logic, Australia must be throwing parties when they learn about somebody's suffering, correct? 2) Belgium is only 250 km across, it's not enough to defend against a blitzkrieg without perfectly functioning tanks (most engines weren't reliable at the time) and timing, which requires heavy training. Australia on the other hand wasn't anywhere near, so it could help and wasn't in danger as I have already explained, but while the Nazis advanced on Moscow for 2 years, Australia only looked at America with admiration, waiting for orders like an obedient pet. You're unable to understand, obviously. Some things aren't meant to be. Maybe register on a forum for teens, the communication shouldn't be as complicated there.

Do you really want this can opened? Switzerland maintained neutrality to protect their own from the horrors of war. Australians on the other hand never really cared for peace, they are all descendants of convicts (murderers, rapists and thieves), descendants of the worst human rejects from UK that were sent to Australia. When they came, they started by massacring the native population by millions and deliberately infecting them with smallpox. Having done that, they never really decided to stop. They continued their barbaric practices till the early 20th century, covering up and having each other's backs when it came to killing Aborigines. A true Nazi team play. But when it came to fighting the Nazi during WW2, Aussies decided to give peace a try. They lost 40 thousand people in their "war" against Nazism. Were they not really into fighting Nazy Germany who was exterminating entire races and raping another ones, selling Polish women into forced prostitution, massacring Polish men and killing entire populations through labor? You had legal obligations as part of the Commonwealth, which Swiss didn't. Australia never cared for peace. Australia had a decent army. Switzerland couldn't fight, not only because it was never intended to fight anything as a country, but also because it was surrounded by Germany and Italy from day 1. Australia on the other hand had no excuse. What right do you have to say anything against neutral Swiss? I am not saying all this because I want to offend the Aussies. I'm saying this because you're dropping racist remarks against a country that has much more merit than your own and to show you that this kind of talk can be used against any country. But when your own country did more wrong, you've just no right to talk about these things. And unlike you, I actually don't call any country or people as "people with a national goal to profit from other's people misery", I wouldn't allow myself anything like that. This is racist pure and simple. Again, I can do this with any country. And if you're gonna do it, I'm gonna do it as well. Did you know that USA kept selling oil to the Nazi Germany up until 1943? To the Japanese up until 42, who were massacring the Chinese by millions? Did you know that the British sponsored Hitler at the beginning of his political career (your Queen sponsored Hitler, yeah). Did you know that Hitler had only one friend and that were the Anglo-Saxons? He surrounded them at Dunkirk, but instead of crushing them, he just let them evacuate, cause that's the kind of relationship he had with the Anglo-Saxons. And while the Soviets were shedding their blood to stop the Nazism in Europe, Americans held Nazi parades. Do you understand what I'm telling you? Do you want to say anything to the Swiss readers right now?

This is not what the study says, buddy. It says that since people spend the same amount of money monthly on entertainment whether they pirate things or not, it doesn't matter that they pirate, because if they didn't, they wouldn't be spending more money anyway, because money is limited. And since they sometimes pirate loud titles, they tend to buy them a bit less and buy small artists a bit more, which by the way helps them stay afloat and develops music, etc. And since they pirate loud titles, they recommend them to their friends later who will now go and buy them. This was the point, not your imaginary ISPs making tons of profit from hosting a torrent site. And you know why so many people host in Netherlands? Cause they allow freedom of speech as long as it's not child pornography, while others meddle in everyone affairs and shut sites down for somebody drawing mohammed.

Dutch almost don't make any movies/music themselves, they all speak perfectly English. Your assumption that Netherlands make profit because people steal big international movies/music and buy local instead is incorrect. So again you're wrong. And it's legally allowed, which means the idea of intellectual property isn't universal, but mostly local in many places due to lobbying. It isn't illegal everywhere, and some people were completely stuck in their thinking process, since in their brain, "immoral <=> illegal". Well it's not immoral, there you go.

Or read university articles. You can even see from the previews that some of them say that piracy may increase profits.

In Switzerland it is legally allowed to download copyrighted material for personal use. A study done by the Danish government shows that piracy doesn't decrease anyone's profits and instead has a positive effect on the economy.

Prove it before calling people thieves and halfwits. I've seen opposite claims. If anyone is robbing people of their jobs it's the publishers who order developers to make ****ty games which don't sell afterwards. If anyone is a thief, it's the elite who lobbied the intellectual property concept.

Ask him if he owns the rights to his avatar and then ask him to remove it if he's such a monorail copyright zealot. I'm done talking to him.

It is when it is contended that "in a democracy right is what the majority makes it to be" that democracy degenerates into demagoguery. Under the rule of one homogeneous and dogmatic majority, democracy can become more tyrannical than the worst of the dictatorships. Friedrich von Hayek

But there's no democracy, only kleptocracy and lobbying. And lobbying >> your vote. Made me laugh, thanks.

I so happen to work in a fashion industry. Do you know the production price of Diesel jeans? It costs 2 dollars to make. They sell them for 300-500 dollars in Europe. Make a few logical connections. And there are no-name mp3 players with a small screen akin to ipod etc, with 40 gigs of memory, etc etc, and they only cost 30 dollars in China. There's an online chinese shop that ships only to Russia, the reviews about the quality are very good. They sell other stuff too. I only wished they shipped to Europe, because that's where I am atm.

Depends on what you mean by counterfeit. Counterfeit money is one thing, a generic drug that somehow bypassed the patent is another thing. If it's the latter, then yes. If it's counterfeit money, then no. If it's an "abibas" t-shirt or an obviously fake Dolce Gabbana pants, then I think it's just another product altogether.

Eve is good. Not my cup of vodka though. Also Anarchy Online is good (even though equipment doesn't drop, the pve is okay, which is a rare thing indeed). They're making a new graphical engine cause the game just wouldn't die, people are still playing it. I hope it's good, I got high hopes for it.

I admire your self-restraint. That's all.