Humodour

I really doubt that Obsidian would make the assumption of "All PC Gamers pirate" especially considering that many, if not most of them started out on the PC. All of the versions are essentially the same. Same engine, same story. The only difference would be graphics and controls. That's no reason not to include some bonus items. I somehow just can't bring myself to consider downloading the Bonus Content as violating copyright, but I guess I can see how it technically would be. It won't stop me though downloading it, though. Anyway, that doesn't justify it being omitted from the PC CE. In fact that would be ridiculous. I'll still buy a CE if I can, though.

Bloody Scandinavians. L

Stick with XP. Especially because of your games. Games won't stop supporting XP for a long time to come. Take a look - desktop operating system market share - as of June 2009 (actually, the June Net Apps figures are wonky apparently, so I'll round slightly from May based on trend): Windows XP - 60% Windows Vista - 25% Mac OS X - 10% Linux - 1% Windows 7 - 1% So as you can see, XP still occupies about 70% of the Windows market, and probably will continue to hold majority share for a long time. It's not something publishers can afford to ignore. Windows 7 will be probably be 'half-price' again in a year anyway, because it's starting to look less successful than the hope and hype suggested (though still outdoing Vista, which isn't hard). Just give it a wait and see.

It's silicon dioxide.

I agree with most of the other people in this thread: that box art is mediocre at best. I'm not sure I know how to improve it, but then that's what your marketing guys are paid to do. Gorth seems especially insightful on this issue.

I stumbled across this game on Kotaku and since there was a demo available I figured "why not?". After all, the comments were all pretty positive. http://trine.gamesplanet.com/trine-game-nobilis.html It's a really fun 3D sidescroller (i.e. you only play across one 2D cross-section, but the graphics are in 3D) with realistic physics, fun characters (you use 3 like Lost Vikings), nice humour, a seemingly intricate storyline, and fun platforming puzzles. Here's a pretty comprehensive review of the game: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/trine-hands-on If you like sidescrollers or platformers I highly recommend it. Even if you don't, it's really worth trying (after all, a test is as free as your bandwidth is). I wish more companies made demos these days as that's how I discover half my games. Or it's how I used to discover them. This is the first game with a demo I've seen in a long time.

I heard October but i'm happy eitheway as long as i get to play it this year Same. There's been a paucity of RPGs this year.

This game will be good. See the first page of this thread.

Just as I suspected. So you just read that news item and took it as gospel - your certainty isn't born from an intimate knowledge of the US Constitution, but from a possibility raised by your fave news site. Lemme guess... Slashdot? I guess it was too much to ask that you had, for once, shown some hint of independent thought. A quick note. The people who wrote that (obviously better acquainted with US Constitutional law than you) were cautious enough to leave the door open to the possibility that judges and courts may not agree with their interpretation. Never one to disappoint, you, once again show that you have as much sense as you do humility. Sigh. The EFF makes it pretty clear that those excessive damages are unconstitutional. The only doubt is whether or not the Supreme Court will overrule those damages, not whether or not they are constitutional. Thanks for the ad hominem. Style over substance, Krezzy? How predictable. The thing is, I have reworded that argument at least twice and explained the reasons behind the retard allusion (if, after reading the FAQ, people still don't know they are getting the files from other private computers, one can only question their intelligence). But you'd much rather ignore that and attack my lack of PC... because, unless they do the work for you at Slashdot, you have nothing to work with. You've had it explained to you by at least 3 different people in this thread why it's not 'stupidity' or 'retardedness' to not understand how computers work yet you persist on that point. You're a pretty arrogant person. You've also brought up Slashdot twice, yet I've not mentioned it or linked to it once. How about you quit attacking me personally and not post in this thread if you have no actual input of substance.

Did you read my posts? I covered that point in more than one of them.

Actually I've found that after the first or second book this series goes downhill into cliche faster than Michael Bay's Explosions. The main character is actually the only guy in the world to have both types of magic, and he always has some fight of the month against an indescribably nasty person, and randomly pulls new powers out of his hat to save his friends and family from said nasty people. And did I mention he's also the superpowered seeker of truth that'll is given OTHER special powers and is viewed by the fates as friggin sweet? The first book is pretty interesting because most of this stuff doesn't happen (well except for the bad guy bit) and a lot is covered up (there's also a funny bit having to do with a wizard, a lynch mob, and the definition of the term witch). Yep, after the first book (which was interesting enough to warrant reading the second and third in the hopes of similar quality) it goes to **** rapidly. Blech.

Yes, but how is this unconstitutional? Illegal isn't the same as unconstitutional. Further, this isn't a criminal trial, and the requirements for proving intent are not necessarily so strict, I think Enoch pointed this out already. Why are you so vehemently convinced that the ruling violates the US Constitution? Again, my specific knowledge of the US Constitution is null, so any links you can produce that show how the verdict contravenes part(s) of the Constitution would pretty much settle the matter. Yes, you unaware of the US Constitution; excessive punitive damage awards are considered to violate the Due Process clause of the US Constitution. http://current.com/items/90233505_1-9-mill...l-questions.htm Your second point that people who are technically illiterate are 'retards' is not worth replying to.

At least two people have already invented small jetpacks (small enough to strap on, though still bulky) and between countries with them, so I think we're talking more thna a few minutes. One Swiss guy and one Japanese guy I think.

I don't know who or what Stardock is. Somebody mentioned online activation for patches, though? Well that's no better than any other form of online activation, is it? I'd certainly call that intrusive. But I also think Steam is intrusive (for exactly the same reason). I really don't like the concept of online activation. You wouldn't accept it for a music CD or a movie DVD, now would you?

Why don't you start off with a cheap second-hand car and bash around in it learning to drive? You're not even 15 yet. You've got plenty of time to waste money on a sleek expensive car so you can show off to your friends. Then perhaps a Peugeot RC, Subaru Impreza, or Bentley Mansory for a first car? Why don't you spend your money on something that's actually worth it? If you're buying your first car (especially at 14) based on a brand name or aesthetic appeal then you're probably doing it wrong. I know this sounds condescending, but I'm not that much older than you at 21, and anyway, at 14 I felt exactly the same way about cars as I do now. Well, except that now I actually wouldn't mind owning a snazzy car to show off to ladies. But the point remains it's still primarily to get you from point A to point B and depreciates in worth at an amazingly horrid pace (assuming you manage not to dent it in some tussle with a semi). Conclusion: take your parents's money, pretend you're buying an exorbitantly expensive first car, snag a well-cared for 2nd-hand energy efficient urban vehicle instead, and invest the cash difference in shares before the economy recovers.

Why do I have a feeling that vehicle would flip over incredibly easily? Because it doesn't have training wheels?

Thanks for the ideas so far guys. I'll read this thread more fully after my last exam, but I welcome more suggestions! Yes you can. I just get everyone to tell me their favourite new and old sci-fi/fantasy books and obviously I will ignore the ones I've already read. After that I should have a good picture of what some decent news reads are. For example, I haven't read any of those, so I'll now read some reviews about them to see if I want to read them. Fine, some details. My favourite books have been (some I haven't read in years): Animorphs (lololol) Harry Potter The Red Dwarf Novels Colony (by one of the Red Dwarf guys - Rob Grant) The Truth (Pratchet) Thief of Time (Pratchet) The Tripods Series 1984 Fahrenheit 451 The Night's Dawn trilogy - Peter F. Hamilton The Commonwealth Saga - Peter F. Hamilton The Void Trilogy - Peter F. Hamilton The Hobbit (I read LotR two or three times but I'm not sure I'd call it a favourite) I tried some Aasimov (Caves of Steel) but it was amazingly boring. I could appreciate it for the elements that later sci-fi built upon, but the 1930's culture (sexism, small-mindedness, disrepect for freedom, etc) and lack of futuristic insight (1000 years later and they hadn't even invented proper computers) essentially killed it for me. Or maybe it was his style of writing - that was quite boring as well. Edit: It's probably not entirely inconsequential that over 50% of that list is dystopian/post-apocalyptic. I do very much like my novels to end on a happy ending, though (1984 being an outlier, but I enjoyed it more for the literary/philosophic appeal than because it was entertaining).

Oh, come now. We're grownups here. A little legalese isn't going to kill anyone. So please, explain how exactly the verdict violates the US Constitution. I'm by no means an expert, so don't assume I know anything. Precedents would help, too. Sure. The jury accused her of 'wilful' violation. Wilful in this sense means essentially 'with malicious intent to cause damage to the copyright holders' and is distinct from what she obviously did: caused a loss of a sale, which caps out at damages of, from memory, $30,000 per infringement (as opposed to the cap of $150,000 for wilful violation). Moreover, the album itself was the sale lost, not each individual song, so the calculation of per song is also dubious. That's a really poor defense and would hardly stand in court. "Why, Your Honor, how could I possibly had known that file-sharing software was in fact designed to share files?" Anyone trying to pass that off as an excuse should be fined for a deliberate insult to intelligence. That's incorrect. Most people see downloads on the internet as a one-way thing, which they largely are. I can tell you as somebody who sets up internet and ethernet connections for people as a part-time job that almost every single one of them is clueless that file sharing programmes go both ways. They think it's file sharing in the classic sense: everyone downloads files from a central repository kind enough to 'share' them. Some of the more savvy college kids are actually aware it goes both ways. I'm sorry that you think that's 'unintelligent' behaviour, but the fact is it's far more likely to be simple technical ingorance. Those fines are unconstitutional in America. I won't get into the legalities of it, but they're unlikely to be upheld when she appeals. We're talking fines larger than the combined sales of the album she shared, even though probably only a handful of people downloaded it off her - clearly that's not valid 'compensation'. And it assumes she intended to share, which is unknown. Many people don't realise they're sharing when they use torrents and other p2p technology. They're not fines. This was a private suit for damages, not a prosecution. The range of permissible damages is defined in the Copyright Act, and the determination within that range is left to the jury. They are deliberately set higher than their likely cost to the plaintiff, to provide extra discouragement and make sure that nobody ever can profit by violating the Act while counting the consequent suit as a cost of doing business. (This is much the same way that Antitrust awards are always tripled.) Yes, tripled - multiplied by 3, not multiplied by 80,000. The 'discouragement' defence is perfectly reasonable for a typical copyright case, it's just a pity (for you, and the RIAA) that it's not a viable defence here. And you're wrong, AFAIK - she appealed the initial ruling, not the amount of the initial ruling, no?

Hydrogen is only viable somewhere like Iceland where you have so spare much geothermal and hydro electricity that the word 'inefficient' is pointless (which is also why the smelt so much aluminium there, produce so much fertiliser, and heat their footpaths in the dead of winter). In places where you don't have abundant access to renewables, I don't think it's such a good idea, as Magister points out (hydrogen costs a ****-load of electricity to make, and is very hard to store). Here's a good read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy

Those fines are unconstitutional in America. I won't get into the legalities of it, but they're unlikely to be upheld when she appeals. We're talking fines larger than the combined sales of the album she shared, even though probably only a handful of people downloaded it off her - clearly that's not valid 'compensation'. And it assumes she intended to share, which is unknown. Many people don't realise they're sharing when they use torrents and other p2p technology.

I've already read all his books. One of my favourite authors. I'ma ctually after stuff similar to his works (space opera, strong/unique/compelling characters and storylines)...

What? I thought your were an oldie?

Do a search on all your posts, take the number of results returned, and subtract your post count from it to get your WoT post count.