melkathi

But I need my QTE and I win button!!! Else Ze immershun iz brokn!!! I think we should start a petition to force inXile to stop developing the game in-house and to pass it on to Telltale

Bruce, Valve still hasn't figured out what countries use the Euro as currency. Customer support has explained to me now that my problems with steam not accepting my credit cards ,is that the system has to update to local currency for the store to be accessible. When I pointed out to them that Germany, Greece, Italy and Cyprus (the countries I have used Steam in) all have the same currency they became snarky.

Now disregarding preferences in combat. For those of us who will try to play the game with as little combat as possible, a vote for "turn based" is probably the way to go: a) the devs can benefit from work already done for the Wasteland 2 combat system -> less time needed to spend on the Torment combat system -> more time for other cool stuff b) the player will play all party members themselves -> no party AI needed -> the devs can spend more time on other cool stuff c) the game is based on a pen & paper ruleset, which is turn based -> abilities/spells/etc can more easily be adapted for the PC/whatever version -> more time for other cool stuff

Arcanum would like to have a word. Arcanum had terrible combat period. A great example with which to prove that both kinds of combat can be terrible. Also though a great example for proving that regardless what combat is chosen and how bad it may get, the game's other qualities can outshine the problem and still provide a great, memorable experience. So all that a word with Arcanum would result in is me feeling supported in my vote of "don't care"

I think I lasted about 15 minutes in that game before moving on to greener pastures.

Both suck if the devs don't get them right... That said, at least in TB you aren't weighed down with terrible party AI.

I'll still be battling with NaNoWriMo till the end of the month. Come December I'll be up for some matches though.

If I didn't care more than words can say If I didn't care would I feel this way? If this isn't love then why do I thrill? And what makes my head go 'round and 'round While my heart stands still?

such stuff is a jackarse test. vote "i don't care" and then explain how it is stoopid for people to care 'bout such n' such feature... jackarsery. 'cause REAL role-players don't care 'bout combat mechanics? some clowns ain't satisfied with being indifferent. nope, they wanna make sure you recognize how childish it is for you to care. *shrug* am getting if issue in question were something optional-- let developers know that wasting time and resources on piffle or puffery is unnecessary. however, is not possible to genuine argue that combat mechanics of a crpg that will include significant combat is an incidental or negligible feature. nope, is no good reason for going through effort to login and then try and convince others that you don't care regardless of your login... and 3 paragraph rant 'bout how much you don't care. is a litmus test for jackarses. HA! Good Fun! And so he rants about people ranting...

Press LCtrl to avoid assassination ? More like mash it repeatedly

Me. What with passwords being remembered by browsers, logging in is automatic when you click the link to the pole.

What about those of us who took the alphabet out back and shot it with a shotgun?

I voted for the NZ police as well. Even if only because of their 2011 recruitment drive: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10698256 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10705711

that looks like a Mr. Spock smiley: Y : the hand going "Live long and prosper*" first O : the right eye L : the nose second O : the left eye *as part of the Vulcan saying, not the forumite (therefor the lack of capitalisation of the word).

Someone let Ros into the thread while at the same time there is a lack of an (active) attractive women thread to vent the need to talk about wimin, by talking about too much exercice vs breast implants. That said, yesterday at the gym I resisted the urge to grab this one girl and fix her posture all ballroom dance instructor style. Damn girl, you are too young to hunch over like that. And what's the point of all that excercise if you end up being Quasimodo (exagerating here). Though it might be that she is training back and shoulders too much.

That totally misses the problem many non-subers have with subs though. If I will not pay a sub because I am not certain I will be logging in more than a few times a month, telling me that I can buy a sub equivalent for ingame currency by logging in even more is not going to get me to play. I hate to say it, but a F2P model with some kind of item shop etc has become far more appealing to me.

It get's truly bad when that is also how one's love life turns out...

I have never tried the co-op for Van Helsing, but it is on sale on Steam right now and a suprisingly fun game.

I'm just an idiot who adheres to male codes of honour like don't sleep with another dude's woman. I'm quite certain that was it the other way round, a lot of those men wouldn't have had second thoughts

Wildstar looks fun and I like the idea of paths, but I am not up for paying a sub.

Yeah, the us system is a bit of an anomaly globally, though. In most of europe a straight 3 year degree, ll.b., is enough to practice, after a little on-the-job training, perhaps. In finland and iirc sweden, you also need an ll.m., ie 3+2 years of law to practice on any level. Additionally, you can do a research doctorate 3+2+5 years on average, so it's the same system as in nearly all other fields apart from medicine. Greece I think it's a 4 year degree and then you need to spend some time being a slave at a firm. And obviously you can try get a master to pass that 5 year mark to do a doctorate (3+ years).

Prejudice is irrelevant. What matters historically in the public service is that a way was needed to establish a service free of the influences of the monarchy. To do this all decisions had to be layed out based on clear criteria. Academic qualification was the only viable option - they provided educated civic servants and criteria that were largely outside the influence of the powerful. Since then things have changed. The public service and bureaurocracy have grown, evolved and become the establishment. When seen completly as a bad thing it has become what it was designed to combat and most people seem to forget why at its core it is a good thing. Most western countries have gotten rid of that monarchy thing, at least to some extent, and the threat the bureaucracy was designed to protect from has shifted, without it able to shift and adapt accordingly. At the same time universities have also changed. Education is far more specialized than it used to be. (My original field, architecture, is a prime example. We weren't always split into archtiects, civil engineers, land surveyors etc etc etc.) As a result, having reached the level of a doctorate does no longer necessarily prove that the qualities needed for the job are truly met. It proves expertiese in a specific field, it proves research skills and above all else perseverance. But the first two will have to be acessed for relevance to the job posting. That is what doesnt happen though. As doctorates have become a simply formal requirement, in the recruitment process they are only a prestige badge really (hell, I've seen a dean advertise for a position for her personal assistant and requiring a phD). Yes, that can lead to the prejudice that people who do a doctorate are the ones who can't cope in the real world and do some proper work instead Funnily enough, once you get in, both public service and private organisations, to advance to the top you then need that title. But looking at it purely from a recruitment standpoint for a specific position, then yes the question should not if you have a doctorate but whether your doctor is in a specific field. If the doctorate only proves that 3-5 years have been spend in an irrelevant field, then it is not a qualification. And that is not even taking into account the quality of the research (where you could end up with a study like the thesis submitted by Lawrence of Arabia *shudder*) And I am starting to forget all the other smart thigns I had planned to say. So I'll close with this: Nep, you may be the most qualified person for the jobs you apply to. I have no way to judge and no reason to doubt it. I'll happily take your word for it. And I'll equally hapily agree that the idiots not hiring you are idiots for making that decission - but I'll do that not because you are Dr. Nep, but because you are Dr. Nep who spend a lot of time and effort to become awesome at what he does Now I have got to get back to write for NaNoWriMo.

To be honest though, the insistance on Phds in the civil service had become something silly. Simply holding a doctorate does not make someone more qualified as an administrator. As there usually was no evaluation of the doctorate thesis during the hiring process, the "expertiese" and "qualification" that was seen in the Dr. before the name was largely irrelevant to the positions filled. Instead it simply created an aristocracy of its own within the civil service. That is not to say that a doctorate is not a clear qualification, but it has to be a meaningful qualification within the context of the position.

Everybody is looking for something. I am looking for a girl with a washing machine.

It just all annoys me more, now that I have done that management master and supposedly HR-jobs are partly what I am applying for edit: and regarding the bank: when the person evaluating my qualifications uses the terms "Bachelor" and "Diploma" interchangeably, I do not see how they are qualified to hire me.