Nick_i_am

The stadalone addon for Dawn of War, Dark Crusade, allows you to install it across a LAN with one copy, which was very nice. Players with this install can only play Tau or Necrons though. Civ4 can be played across a LAN with the same CD, but NWN1 throws a hissy fit if you try to LAN games between two computers with installs that use the same CD key (i'd guess NWN2 does too, but I havn't tried it). Personally, I feel that digital distribution is the way forward, but this again brings up even more issues with the LAN idea. I want to buy SINS, but I am tempted to get the CD version just because there might be issues with installing the DD one across two computers (if need be). Thing is, it's not just the userbase that needs to change their thinking somewhat in order to pull the PC markets head out of the mud, but the publishers, like the record industry, don't really want to hear it.

I am in no way defending piracy, but I won't say I havn't done it either. Like newc, my shelves are full of games, old and new, and some of my proudest are those that were a complete commercial failure. Hell, I even bought BG2 depite never having played it for more than 3 or 4 hours (not due to not liking it, just better things to do). People who can afford to buy games and don't (at all), for no good reason other than that they're cheap can burn, and I salute interesting copy protection, such as that used in Operation Flashpoint, whereby the game would slowly make the controls more and more unmanagable as the game went on, lure the pirate into enjoying the game THEN screw it up for him. The problem is that I enjoy playing games on a LAN, i've got a two computer one set up here and use it when I can. More often than not though, the games played across these two computers are done so with just one copy of the game. I bought the game, sure, but i'm denying the publisher just as much profit again from not buying a second copy as I would have been by pirating the first. Am I as bad as someone who pirates all their games? I can't decide, point is that i'm still doing it. Likewise, when I lend a game to a friend, and borrow one of his, piracy is the 'big topic', but I could have never pirated a game in my life and still cost the industry just as much. And yet, it's only when I download a game that I wouldn't have bought anyway that i'm branded a badguy. Bottom line is that I, and guys like me, do help support the industry, to no small degree, my actual game to pirate game ratio is at least 10 to 1, discounting console games.

Again, the analogy doesn't work, the programmers (the builders) are still being payed if you pirate the game or not, trying to guilt trip people like this seems pointless and you're ignoring the fact that the pirate in question probably wouldn't have spent more money on games either way.

rofl @ Ace of Aces. They should have called it 'Asian mode'.

Only, when you pirate a game, you're stealing somthing that can't be used by anyone else, which isn't really stealing at all EXCEPT for the fact that it's the right of the pulisher to ask for money for it. You steal a car that belongs to someone else, whole different story. This isn't the point though.

Who else said 'sucks'?

Simple minds, easily amused. haha, wait, did that sound pretentious?

Yeah, it's too bad, the PC market is dire enough as it is at the moment.

That's okay then, I didn't realise it had gone gold already.

Erm, weren't they in the middle of making Soulstorm?

Ranger, Cleric, Druid, Bard, Wizard, Theif was good fun, screw fighters.

And he'd probably kill himself.

The lack of online play for VC titles irks me, but i'll be getting one once Brawl is out.

Flash.

It's a reference to the fact that she's married to Bill, and that he's pulling strings from the sidelines.

oh, yeah, my scedule means that I probably won't be able to play with you guys outside of weekends, we'll see.

So you're defining faith as belief in somthing that doesn't have any logical or scientific evidence to it? For example, while waiting for a bus, it's belief that it will arrive in 10 minutes, not faith, because the scedule says so. When reading about cloning, it's belief that cloning exists, not faith, because it's published in a scientific journal with evidence. When considering your own existance, it's belief that you exist, because you can see and touch and smell, not faith. But then, wouldn't it be faith that the bus still exists? You have no evidence of it having crashed. Or faith that cloning exists? You've no evidence that it's a hoax. Or faith that you're not just a brain in a jar? you've got no evidence that such a thing could even happen. Understand, i'm not talking about your stance on religion, i'm questioning your idea that, where somthing 'exists' there's no faith involved, even when it's completely out of your personal senses or control, at which point, faith and belief overlap.

No, you have faith that it's not.

I'm going to murder you.

Ha, that's awsome. But yeah, point still applies since you're not a master scientist in every feild known to man. Not to mention that you had to have faith that the machine was showing you what was actually there. It might not be conscious faith, but it's still faith.

Your post interests me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

I assume you've seen DNA then. You're not beliving in somthing that exists, you're putting your faith in scientists who say it exists. Sure you can say a tree exists, but you're taking other peoples word for the idea of HOW it exists. This isn't me being a consipacy nut, claiming that the worlds scientists are pulling the wool over our eyes, it's just pointing out that scientific 'fact' is just as dependent on our belief in a scientist as religious belief is in that of a preist.

I'm probably in the 360 camp for it.

Sand was 'in the Navy' ehhhh? If you know what I mean. EDIT: freaking link isn't working, but it better not be Navy Feild.

Contact was a good film if only because it tried to explain the nature of belief in faith to people with purely scientific minds.