Hurlshort

One solution might be that publishers work a deal with Gamestop basically saying it will not sell used games during the first week of release. That would eliminate the pretty shady practice of selling one game multiple times in quick succession.

Bring another girl home, that's super clever.

I listed a couple societal reasons why polygamy is outdated, and you brought up the Constitution. Color me confused.

I bought GTA:TfLC which has two games, The Lost and the Damned and Ballad of Gay Tony. I really wanted the original GTA4, but Best Buy didn't have any copies. I bought it for the PC. It runs decently, but I am getting some odd graphical glitches. I applied the most recent patch, but I can see why the console version is considered better. I played the original GTA4 on my 360 back in the day.

I never understood why you would buy a used game for $50 when a new one is $60. It seems like a terrible deal to me. I'd rather get a nice clean new game for a tad more. Now if I could get it for $35 instead of $60, that might be a bit more tempting.

What are you talking about?

I would call it a completely outdated practice. All the potential positive aspects are no longer relevant. Examples of outdated positives: - One man can impregnate multiple woman, which is good because the population is low and there is a high infant mortality rate. - Wealthy men are the only ones who can handle feeding a family, and if they can afford to feed more mouths, then they should for the betterment of the community.

Historians make a serious and systematic study of the past and attempt to use the knowledge they gain to help explain human nature and contemporary affairs. Philosophers offer views and theories on profound questions. There is a large difference between the two. For one thing, as a philosopher it is acceptable that you have already formed your theory before weighing evidence. It is also acceptable that you are answering a question as vague as "What is the root of equality?"

I'm surprised to hear Best Buy is trying to get into the used games business. I remember they had a program for it years ago and then they cut it.

Just to clarify, this is a philosophical discussion rather than an historical one.

Assassins Creed had a ton of exploration quests that had nothing to do with the story. Climbing 8 towers in a district, or defending so many villagers in a town area. They also had those little collectible things, although I guess Mafia 2 has the dirty magazines to fill that desire. Still, it just isn't quite enough.

I thought about it. I did plead that I was a teacher and I was just trying to pick up a few school supplies during my very short break. Think of the children, officer!

I don't need mini-games. Just some collectibles and maybe some point to exploring the far reaches of the town would be enough. I jumped over a freeway in the demo and it was super anticlimactic. I need stats and a pat on the back!

So I decided during my short prep time in between classes to rush over to Best Buy. I was making good time, until I got pulled over. I was going 49 in a 35. The cop was pretty nice about it, but I'm way bummed out. I hadn't gotten a ticket in ten years, and now this is my second in 6 months. There goes about $250 and now I'll have my first point on my DMV record. I don't think it will change my insurance premium by much, but it is still very upsetting. I told my wife she is going to have to chauffeur me for the next 18 months. edit: Never made it to Best Buy, either.

After playing the demo a few times, I did decide not to buy Mafia 2 because of the lack of a real open-world stuff. I was amazed at first, but I can see where the knocks are coming in. It kinda portrays itself as a possible sandbox game, I mean it's a beautiful world with a ton of car variety, but apparently it is really just about the story. That is good and all, but I'll spend the whole story looking out the window sighing that my exploration urges aren't being satisfied. Give me giant numbers flashing across the screen when I blow stuff up and fly through the air at least! I'll go back to Just Cause 2, I suppose.

Do you have any evidence to support that claim? The problem I see with that is the Church did very little to address the inequalities in the secular world for centuries. As a historian, it is also going to be very difficult to track down the first concept of equality. It is an idea that has many different layers, social, legal, racial, and gender equality all have quite a bit of history, going back much further than the advent of Christianity.

I'm not quite sure how it would even be possible to nerf the offline content. I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, it would be pretty difficult for a publisher to get at it without going into my house and smashing the DVD with a hammer. By making it so you have to connect online to use it, I'd guess, so that once a disc has been activated for use once it can't be used again and always being online to use it. Again, its the alarmist in me talking. So I may be wrong/crazy. I am a lot more concerned with Activision's policy of making you always be online to play games that really have no need of an internet connection. You definitely aren't wrong that the idea is out there. I just think that these specific comments by the THQ guy have been blown out of proportion.

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't? No, because online content is an extra. If you folks want to stick with the car comparison, think of it as a manufacturer's warranty. There are a lot of reasons for this. If we are talking about multiplayer games with servers, that is an extra cost for the developer/publisher to run. They work that into the price of a new game. They have no obligation to provide that service to people who do not buy the game from them. Why would Madden 2010 or SvR have multiplayer servers? Seems to me if you're going to use servers and charge to use them, you'd be better off using a MMO model (which I don't have a problem with). But again my BIG protestation over this (just like with EA) is that I don't think its going to just stay on "extra" online content. Madden does use servers to host multiplayer games and offer extra content like alternate jerseys and junk. It offers them free to people who pay for the game. I have bought Madden used. I honestly have no problem with the idea that I would not be allowed to take part in the online component. That is just one aspect of the game, and if you really want to play it that way, then you should buy a new copy.

I'm not quite sure how it would even be possible to nerf the offline content. I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, it would be pretty difficult for a publisher to get at it without going into my house and smashing the DVD with a hammer.

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't? No, because online content is an extra. If you folks want to stick with the car comparison, think of it as a manufacturer's warranty. There are a lot of reasons for this. If we are talking about multiplayer games with servers, that is an extra cost for the developer/publisher to run. They work that into the price of a new game. They have no obligation to provide that service to people who do not buy the game from them.

Geez, folks are really jumping on THQ for this. Let's look at the actual quote: "I don't think we really care whether used game buyers are upset because new game buyers get everything", THQ's creative director for wrestling titles told Gamasutra. "So if used game buyers are upset they don't get the online feature set I don't really have much sympathy for them". He is clearly answering a question here, although that was conveniently left out of the article. People are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

That is flat out wrong. The ideas of equality don't take fruition until the humanist movement, which was secular in nature. The Catholic Church was all about feudalism until the Reformation and the Renaissance, when Martin Luther successfully broke away from the church. His idea of equality before God wasn't new, but he was the first one to avoid getting killed and actually get some royalty to back him. Feudalism served the needs of Christianity very well early on, it allowed them to gain a considerable amount of power.

Thomas Jefferson's letters were laced heavily with Deist ideals from the Enlightenment. James Madison and John Adams were more publicly deist, but the fact is the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and and the Constitution are all suitably vague about religion for a reason; they were not endorsing a specific denomination, nor do they address Christianity in general at any point. That being said, the Bible clearly plays an important role in Western Society. I am finding it interesting that WoD can be extremely critical of Islam but seems to lack that same discerning eye when it comes to Christianity.

It's a very common misconception that America was founded by Christians and based on Christian values. The founding fathers were Deists. And it really doesn't matter much if it was, because our nation has changed considerably over the centuries for the sake of tolerance and equality. Just like Christianity itself has changed, and just like Islam has changed.

That isn't what he said at all. He said don't complain that you aren't getting the fancy online stuff if you aren't buying new.