Hurlshort

In regard to Gingrich, he may be a major mudslinger, but when he was Speaker of the House he got things done with Clinton. They balanced budgets and reformed welfare. He has the experience to get things done. I'm not saying I'm in love with him, but the pickings are slim and he's the only proven entity. To address the Ron Paul statement, the big problem I see is that a president doesn't really have the power to make sweeping changes. I keep hearing the Right Wing media make a big hullabaloo over what Obama has done and how he is turning us into socialists, but I just don't see it. He hasn't done much of anything that I can see. The Health Care reform is the closest thing to a big change I've seen, and that looks destined to get hung up in congress and the courts for years. So it's good to have Ron Paul visible and promoting his unique values, but he's basically the Ralph Nader of the Republican party. Oh, I voted for Nader over Gore and Bush I love the guys who mix it up.

In regards to the ethics stuff, I've already said he probably has no chance of winning against Obama because of it. But it doesn't personally bother me. As a politician, he reminds me of Nixon. That might sound like a terrible thing, but Nixon was a rather brilliant politician. He was effective, and that's what I want out of a president. They both seem to be willing to ignore morality to get the job done, which realistically is what you need in a leader. As for Romney and the Bain Capital Investment stuff, I can't say I know enough to speak on it. My problem with Romney is he seems to be willing to toe the party line under any circumstance. Gingrich has his own policy ideas and he doesn't care if they are popular, only if they are effective.

I have no idea, it depends on how effective they are when they reach office. I really look at what I think is the main problem in our country and try to decide who will be best at fixing it. For example, it was bad to have GW Bush as president when we really needed a strong foreign policy leader. We were in two wars and the global economy was starting to meltdown. Then Obama started his term needing strong economic policies to fix a sinking ship, and he was not able to handle it. As a counterpoint, Reagan came into office with perfect timing. He fixed a badly damaged image of the President and rebuilt American confidence. Clinton was also well-timed, he was very good at foreign policy when our economy was flourishing, leading to global implications. Both of those presidents were also capable of working with the other party. I see that as our number one problem today, the two parties spend so much time and energy fighting each other that we aren't getting anything done. I think Gingrich may be the best candidate to restore that working relationship. But yeah, I'm not sure he can avoid getting roasted by the media, and he lacks in the charm department.

This primary is definitely taking some odd turns, I really thought there would be a clear frontrunner, or at least be down to two at this point. Romney really seems to be unable to seal the deal here, and I don't think his tax returns are going to help his cause. Most of the nutjobs have dropped out, Rick Santorum is the only one left. Santorum might be the worst of the bunch though, he's hardcore religious and that makes me nervous. He's been losing that initial steam fast, so I don't think it will be an issue. I've really had trouble figuring out Ron Paul, he keeps getting that Libertarian title and he's got that loyal constituency, but I still feel like I know little about the guy. So that leaves Gingrich and Romney, it seems. I gotta say, I prefer Gingrich. He's smarter and seems more equipped to play the political game. We need a politician that can bridge the party divide, and I haven't seen anything out of Romney that says he can do that. Unfortunately Gingrich brings a fair amount of personal baggage with him, so I'm not sure if he could win an election against Obama. It will be interesting to see how this pans out. It's been a total circus so far.

Yep, I'm a big fan of that. I don't really need a bunch of DVD's and CD's sitting around if I have easy access to almost anything I want to hear or watch.

Fascists... What a moron. I don't really have sympathy for him. He made a stupid post on the official forums, there are repercussions to your actions, whoopie

The build up to SOME of the lightsaber retrievals is good.... but not em all. Yeah, the stories are definitely uneven.

Huh...I feel like most of my 'kill this many of this' lists are bonus quests attached to a 'investigate this place' quest. But yeah, there's a lot of killing.

The whole point of an MMO is that it is a long term game, so hitting the level cap in a month is actually a problem. TOR is actually really fast compared to many other MMO's. Most MMO's speed the curve up over time, so if you have played other MMO's a year or two after they've been out, you aren't actually leveling at the same rate as people who play at release.

Exactly. In fact I'd even go as far as saying that single player games will keep their AI dumb just to accommodate losers like me. I want stuff that is easy to kill and makes me feel awesome.

I can see that (although I think the graphics are fantastic in this game.) Personally I love both. A tight story with a campaign I can finish in 20 hours is fantastic, but I also enjoy the slow development of an MMO character over a few months or years.

Apparently about 8, as that is the amount of classes with unique story lines. Yet they have vast amounts of shared content. From art assets to sidequests. Hey, so did Dragon Age 2 Seriously though, I'd say there is enough content for about 8 single player games. Sure, there is a lot of shared content, but it also takes a lot longer to reach the end game than a typical single player RPG.

Apparently about 8, as that is the amount of classes with unique story lines.

This post seems pretty silly now that congressmen are running away from this bill in droves. As I said, given the scale of the protests and resistance, the chances of it passing were slim and the odds of it surviving legal scrutiny were even slimmer. So maybe the US isn't quite like China after all. Of course I was exaggerating a lot Really, I don't even think SOPA/PIPA would be the end of Internet like many seem to - if there were corporations taking down wikipedia instead of wikipedia taking down wikipedia, the backlash would be crazy. The things I really think are worrisome are other stuff, regarding surveillance and the judicial system. You'll have to forgive me for trolling a bit for trying to provoke a response regarding civil rights in general. But that discussion would really be a bit OT and it can't be interpreted as anything else than a compliment to this forum that no one took my bait Fair enough. I actually felt bad about my wording in that post, I think I sounded harsher than I meant there. What this whole episode has really shown is there are a lot of ignorant people in congress who will back stuff without learning much about it. But that isn't exactly news

We've talked about it a little bit. It doesn't look like it really capture the charm of JA2, but I'd love to be proved wrong.

It really doesn't affect me in pve when a player has better gear. But I get the complaints, I do. I just think its best to be a bit patient. You said this was seen a long way off, but the game hasn't even been out for a full month yet. I honestly don't think bioware will ever get the balance that blizzard does. Blizzard is meticulous about the stuff. It actually bothers me how blizzard does that, because the take forever to relase new content that way. Id rather have some risks taken to bring cool stuff to the table now.

I don't even know what 65 valor ranks mean. Is there an e-peen conversion table I can look at to help me understand the magnitude?

Sorta, they made the turrets unkillable at least. But they didn't take away valor from those who took advantage of the situation. So the damage is already done. Oh please. Waa waa, some folks got some more valor than I did for a day. That sounds ridiculous. This whole competitive stuff just seems crazy to me. It's just a game, enjoy it. There is always going to be some exploit or balance issue to take advantage of, patches just shift them around a bit. I guess that's why I stay away from PvP in general, I don't get the mentality at all.

Did they fix that problem with the emergency patch that went up overnight?

I wonder what the expectations were anyways? It seems like it is pretty huge right now, even if there is a large dropoff after the first month. It's a PC-only title, were they expecting it to compete with CoD?

This post seems pretty silly now that congressmen are running away from this bill in droves. As I said, given the scale of the protests and resistance, the chances of it passing were slim and the odds of it surviving legal scrutiny were even slimmer. So maybe the US isn't quite like China after all.

It's more an issue of WoW having 7 years to polish up stuff, whereas ToR has had a month. Really I see this as a problem with every new MMO release. At some point they have to launch the game, they can't keep beta testing forever. At that point there are pretty much always going to be issues. It seems like MMO players in general were more patient about that with the previous generation of games.

At least there are a few non-combat quests in the game, I can't think of any other MMO's that have even attempted them. I'm sad to hear people are dropping out. I understand that there are going to be a lot of WoW comparisons, but WoW has the benefit of 6 years of development and growth. As I said, WoW didn't even have PvP when it was released, and I don't remember it having much of an end game either. Hopefully some of the PvPers will be patient enough to wait for fixes to roll in. I know that was really what killed Warhammer Online, but that was a game with more of a PvP focus. I've started a new Agent. So far it's been a blast, great job with the shifting accents.

Probably because people being sexy in anime are usually crying. Those wacky wacky Japanese. I'm somewhat worried that you didn't just pull that at random off Youtube.

Kick butt consoles are what is killing the PC industry. Blaming DRM is a weak argument. That being said, I think the PC market is in a great place. We still have major PC only releases, and I can't think of many titles worth playing that didn't get released on the PC as well as consoles.