213374U

How can it be both wrong and necessary? Wrong how and necessary for what? How about we keep the intellectually hollow aphorisms to a minimum? They sure sound cool, but aren't good for much. @Wals: thanks for the recommendation. I'm adding that to my wishlist - even if it completely misses the point. I haven't disputed the effectiveness of interrogation methods that don't involve torture, even if it's impossible for any technique to reach 100% success rate. I also don't accept your rationale that using it would mean sacrificing one's morality, as that concedes the point that torture is the wrong choice. Sorry old boy but you're not going to win this one so easily.

This and torture are mutually exclusive... how? Interesting point of view. So you consider it could be a moral choice, a sort of selfless sacrifice. It is at any rate, as torturers have their characters changed by torture as well, whether they know it or not. Unlike videogames, torture really does cause a desensitisation to suffering in the perpetrator, from what I've read mainly about military Argentinian torturers. As for the practicality of the scenario (or lack thereof), that's the whole point. I would certainly not feel comfortable with a state agency that had legal authority to operate around the rule of law in that sense. But that is beside the point and it obscures and shifts the focus away from the morality of torture, which is what I'm trying to discern.

Perhaps. But does that mean that fun ⇔ replayability? Time for my nap.

Answering a question with a question? How lame. Don't hijack my hypothetical scenario, lof. I don't hijack your "let's all jack off to communism" threads. The point is that you're making up a ridiculous situation to prove your point. Why don't you come back when you have a justification for torture that's not pulled out of an episode of 24?It's not a justification for anything, but it's not as if I really expect you to understand this. You can patronize with your moral absolutes as much as you like, but unless you can adequately defend them, they are just useless dogma. If a silly thing like my little hypothetical scenario leaves you squealing like a schoolgirl, you got some stuff to figure out on your own. And if I got you so worked up, I must be doing something right. So, quit squirming and answer the goddamn question, or things are going to get ugly. Understand? I don't watch TV, btw.

No. I said games can be great fun the first time around, not so much in subsequent playthroughs. Maybe I wasn't sufficiently clear, but Tigranes seems to have caught my meaning well enough...

The reason would be, obviously, to earn Shep's trust and stay close to him. She is still TIM's hand-picked overseer for the Lazarus cell. Good point about the Collectors' base, though. I did voice my opinion on how I'd like Miranda's character to develop in ME3... not how I expect it to. No, in fact it's the opposite. It's the "soft and sensitive" delivery of some lines that I find the most grating. Renegade is fairly good, methinks. @Oner: haven't touched DA, nor do I intend to. Don't know about Morrigan. RE Shadow Broker: the impression I get is that the SB is not a new player in the galactic scene, unlike humanity. This is not supported by facts, though, so it could be easily either way.

You mean it couldn't possibly be that she's using Shep and pretending...? Frankly, the prospect of a Mata Hari of sorts is more interesting to me than yet another not-evil-but-misguided character that returns to the light by virtue of Shep's Saving Grace. You mean , right? Yeah, that makes sense.

Just checked. Everyone loyal, Legion tech specialist, Zaeed 2nd fireteam leader. Result: Legion gets acquainted with a Collector missile. =/ Funny, because when you pick him, Miranda says "well, at least he knows what he's doing" - Zaeed is discreetly mute... The VO work is pretty good overall, and Miranda is no exception. It's really jarring though that the only voice actor I find myself constantly facepalming at is the one that voices... maleShep. Maybe it's because he's the one that has the most lines, or maybe a perception that "it's not how I would have said it". I'll have to try femShep sometime. As for Miranda... I'm going to be really disappointed if it turns out in ME3 that she's more loyal to Shep than Cerberus. Cold-hearted calculating manipulative bitch FTW!

Answering a question with a question? How lame. Don't hijack my hypothetical scenario, lof. I don't hijack your "let's all jack off to communism" threads. As for the question you pose, you'll need to revise it. You assert that performing P would result in both democratic socialism and a utopia, but that DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Do you have a point here? So if it isn't fun, how replayable can it really be? Games are only worth (re)playing as long as they are fun, but apparently this isn't as obvious as I thought. These are games we're talking about, not gym routines. Oh wait, the professor says that this isn't really replayability, but "fun factor", a measurable and distinct intrinsic quality. But of course! How could I possibly the subtle yet deep difference in meaning between those two fundamental ontological categories of the object!

So, if using torture is wrong, not using it is right. The direct consequence would appear to be that the attack proceeds as planned, and people die. Interesting, but I would like to hear how you see this as a more acceptable outcome. This is a hypothetical scenario. Nobody is actually being tortured so no need to get your pants all in a bunch. It is useful however to establish whether torture can be a moral choice or not, and why; it's not meant to be a justification of torture. Morality is an important aspect to consider in the lawmaking process, so the discussion has value, hurting sensibilities notwithstanding. Yes, the method is fiction because this is a hypothetical scenario. Mr. X doesn't exist, either. But I'd like to see this proof you claim to possess that establishes beyond all doubt that torture cannot be used to extract information, despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Remember, it takes only a counterexample to destroy a general rule. And I'm even more interested in finding out if those who so adamantly argue that torture is immoral are incidentally conviced, as seems to be your case, that it doesn't work - and how both ideas are related. As for the Northern Ireland example, I think you are trying to give torture an undue weight in this regard, and at the same minimizing that of other factors. Torture = Lose, Due Process = Win? I doubt it's that simple. Nothing ever is. I don't have a clear opinion on the matter myself. Don't know enough... which is why I'm posting all this crap. edit: Just saw this. 0_o There must be a way to make money off that talent of yours. TV contests maybe? Prodigious really...

Huh? A game can be great fun the first time around, but once you beat it, replaying it is pointless. Great "fun factor" the first time around, close to zero afterwards. Fun factor? What unit is that measured in, Pythons? Or is it a dimensional coefficient without units? Replayability-o-meter? Jeez, did they make Angry Gaming Aficionado a bachelor's while I wasn't looking? Sure. So... invest more in gameplay and less in churning out full-price sequels like there's no tomorrow. Simple, no? Oh wait... it's nowhere near as profitable. Why settle for selling just one when you can sell three???

Hypothetical scenario: Mr. X is known to have very close ties to Organization O, whose members have been convicted for committing random acts of violence against innocent civilians in the past. State Security Organization S has intercepted information that an attack on a population center identified only by codename is imminent. As a precautionary measure, all members of Organization O have gone into hiding, save for Mr. X. Procedure P is proven to be a reliable method for extracting information from uncooperative subjects, but will subject the individual to considerable physical pain and mental stress. It will, however, leave no lasting scars. Question: would it be wrong for S to detain Mr. X and subject him to P in order to acquire the information necessary to prevent the attack? Aye or Nay?

Gee, I wonder why people would feel inclined to resell a game. I mean, it couldn't possibly be because it's an overpriced piece of ****, right? I'm not saying that the producers of crap games should go under, but... wait, scratch that. That's exactly what I'm saying. Want to reduce second hand sales? Increase the game's replayability value so people will not want to resell it.

Heh, good points.

FSB has a very bad reputation for such a young organization. Worse even than KGB (not NKVD), in some cases...

Nazis didn't really bother with torture. Not very methodically, at least. They either shipped you off to a labor camp to work you to death, or lined you up with a few hundred others and shot you in the back of the head. That tends to make folks restless and encourage armed resistance. Which worked just fine for them, as "removal" of the native populations in conquered areas was part of their war plans - but that way they could write it off as "fighting partisans". As for torture itself, I think the point isn't so much that torture doesn't extract useful info (which it can do), but rather, that unless that info can be verified, it cannot be consistently relied upon. This severely limits its usefulness as a method for intel gathering. If it had been scienfically established that torture does not work as a method for extracting information, there would be no debate. Anecdotal evidence goes both ways, though.

Jacob? I never got the impression he could be a good leader - you certain he works for that role? I'll take Zaeed over him any day of the week and twice on sundays. But apparently being co-founder and head of one of the biggest merc groups in the galaxy doesn't make you a competent squad leader... may need to take a look at Blue Suns casualty rates. A few random thoughts: Am I the only one seeing a connection between TIM and the dark energy/failing stars business? Talking to Parasini, she mentions that Noveria's been suffering heavy hax0ring attacks against databases pertaining to dark energy research - and she's not certain it's standard corporate espionage. And what's that in the background of TIM's office, anyway? Too obvious? And did I miss it before, or is the in-game newsflash about this "Kasumi" person something new?

Huh? Not even waterboarding? FAIL

A warlike mindset doesn't necessarily hinder progress. But endemic warfare does, as it constantly destroys resources, infrastructure and production, that could be better used otherwise. The idea that a lot of progress is made in wartime is a misconception due to the non-linear, multi-disciplinary nature of research. During wartime more projects may be completed, but overall scientific progress is hampered due to, well, war. The krogan probably had a more rational approach to everything before their nuclear war, even if we don't really know what they were like in that period. But we do know what they were like in the millenia between that and the genophage, because it's in the codex. What they used to be or could have been doesn't matter however as those krogan are all gone, magically replaced by a bunch of overly aggressive, honor-obssessed simpletons.

Beer Effect: 1. Get to the local bar and chat up some asari matriarch 2. pretend you're listening to her 1000-year long life story while you hit the bottle, hard 3. ???? 4. PROFIT!!!

In one of the documentaries of the "making of", they speak about the ambiguity present in those, regarding their intelligence. Apparently, they wanted to make them obviously intelligent, but it's difficult to imagine true intelligence that doesn't immediately remind you of human intelligence. So they had to compromise between that and what are seemingly animalistic traits, to get a distinct non-human, alien feel. The thing in the picture is what they got. Not many animals on Earth can manipulate an elevator after watching somebody operate it just once, use the blood of another individual to elaborate an escape plan, shut down power to facilitate an ambush, etc.

I can live with that. But they really need to work on those armors to make it worth the extra $.

When you have something that is completely different from the group you are trying to analyze it's not "proof" of anything, it's an exception. Again, the krogan with the poetry only shows that krogan are capable of memorising random crap. Once more, you don't get to talk with him, so any conclusions you draw are made up, 100%. Go on, find more examples of the diversity in krogan character. Heh, even their scientists are like that, "there's ALWAYS room for one more weapon in Tuchanka!" "we measure success when the earth trembles in response!", etc. Other races have a more or less dominant trait but, unlike the krogan, that doesn't preclude their development of different, individual personas. Eh, the krogan aren't really alien, as grom said. They are simply barbaric, and dumb. Lol, walking unprotected on a venus-like world just to prove how tough you are? Really, Bioware? That guy is alien. The krogan are a caricaturized version of the gaulish warrior tribes of the classical period. Think of Grunt as an uglier, meaner version of Obelix. So... what? Obviously krogan aren't going to be shooting at each other with .22 peashooters. And a redundant liver isn't going to do much good if a 20mm round connects with your faceplate. They even get the reference in-game that, after the invention of gunpowder, the #1 cause of death changed to gunshot wound. So, actually that's judging by krogan standards. As far as I know, the krogan only nuked themselves back to stone age once. I may have missed any references to that being more or less a cyclical occurrence?

Yes, I suppose you could. But encroaching on the consumers' rights isn't what I was thinking when I wrote that, as in that sense, you adapt to something that threatens you... which isn't the case with second hand sales. You may as well "adapt" to the possibility that people can choose not to buy your product. This is generally known as unfair competition, though. But yeah, as long as they aren't shot down in court, I expect businesses to do anything in their power to maximize their profit, and to be lazy and inflexible in their practices.