metadigital

Hmm ... I recycled just about everything ... not the potplants, though ...

Custom PC just did a report on the Intel Pentium D 805: "a fancy dual-core 3.6GHz-capable CPU for

Wait 'til you have to find the pretty flowers ...

One proviso, use tags to prevent spoiling the game for others, as per usual.

Yes, there is the overwelmingly enormous administration of a top-heavy graphical user interface to consider, as well.

I would just like to say that hegemony is one of the coolest sounding words.

I didn't say who designed them, I said who built them. "

That's precisely what they want ...

And the rampant cancerous growths? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think you've been reading too many Hulk comics ...

I remember watching that before I was ten years old ...

Irony!

Maybe it's a hommage ... and don't think that "canon" means that it won't be retro-actively edited (especially by Lucas) ...

That's a boater hat. Also, what they all said, above. (Apart from the spam.) Also, welcome back. Also, you were missed. (I know I tried to hit you several times.) Also, you need to get another computer so you can play Freelancer. Also, not much topical and witty was written whilst you weren't here. Also, my sig changed to: But because nearly everyone who posts here are hypocritically prurient AND prudish, I removed it. Also, tell us a story.

That rule is simply an observation of the actions of notable* rulers in history. How do we know that the person wasn't corrupt before they received power? Post hoc reasoning Meta? I expected more from you... *(these corrupted rulers are notable because they received power and used it in a bad way, but those rulers that aren't notable are the ones who received power and didn't do much with it. I am wondering what would happen if we knew of all the rulers in history and compiled them into lists of: corrupted and uncorrupted. People in the middle would be judged by what their actions were for the most part, corrupted or uncorrupted.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> While it is patently obvious that those who seek power ought to be the last to get it (I submit Exhibit A: politicians), I fail to see how "removing" those unsuitable for rulership would be an effective method. For a start, the correlation of power to corruption is so high that the people who did well for their subjects are the exception (go on, start your list ... anywhere). Just look at the Holy Roman Emperors and Vatican Popes for a start, and they were men of God. Secondly, removing all the people who would become corrupt once given power would novem-decimate (nonagintanovem-centum? nongentinonagintanovem-mille?) the population. Thirdly, owing to the the dynamics of power politics, there is no way to assure that, given a new group where the most suseptible to corrupting power are removed, the new group will not spontaneously spawn new megalomaniacs, who see their chance now they are the most able to take control ...

It's a pretty awkward meeting point between civil rights and civil safety: if the "ninja" was a potential bomber / evil-twin Chuck Norris, then the law enforcement have to neutralize the threat, first. "Take life to save life" is an understandable policy; however, it demands accurate intelligence and rigorous standards and scrupulous review, lest the public lose confidence in the police. Recently, just after the 7/7 London bombing, a man was shot dead by the London Metropolitan Police on a commuter train (in front of the public): initially the police (including the Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair) reported that he was a suspected bomber. Subsequently, it has been proved that he was only guilty of overstaying his work visa. There is now an investiation underway to ascertain why Sir Ian made a false statement.

Yellow bit is wrong. Probability of all three gentlemen getting their hats back, in your example, is 1/6 (the top line out of the six). n! = 3 x 2 x 1 = 6, so 1/n! = 1/6. But, the probability that one of the three gets his hat is 6 successful hat returns out of a total of 18 = 1/3, so the probability of none of the three gentlemen gets there hat back is 1-1/3 = 2/3. I shall update this later ...

Tombraider is also a PC game.

Fixed. Even if you had read all 30+, you still wouldn't have a good idea of how long NWN2's campaign is going to be. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This is true. However, when Feargus says the game is going to be 20 hours, then I have a tendency to believe the game is going to be 20 hours. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah, but it was a German interview, that translated Feargus's alleged comments from English, that was quoted by the Codex and re-translated back into English. Hardly a smoking gun ... as Mr Sawyer pointed out, even the QA testers won't have any idea how long the game is until the last couple of weeks before release; and their experiences will obviously be skewed towards their speeding through it.

What about a game like Tombraider, where there is a bonus level if the player gets all the hidden triggers ... I assume they need to incorporate the triggers and bonus level, too?

And so, another thread drowns under its weight in spicy ham.

Cheers for that, Niten Ryu. @Eldar:

Congratulations on the career move and commiserations on the weather you will be experiencing ...

More games = good.

US citizens make better eating, with all that extra fat on their ribs ...