Amentep

For US definition, yes if Mr. Cobblepot hates you, but not all people like you, then the crime isn't seen as an attack on all people like you, just on you. Therefore it is a crime between Cobblepot and you and not Cobblepot and the larger society.

FBI interpretation of US Congressional definition is So the government would have to prove that the accused was motivated in part by their perception of your race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation, as opposed to your pecreption of same (ie if some nut attacks a Sikh thinking he's attacking a Muslim, it doesn't make it not a hate crime because the Sikh wasn't a Muslim).

I think he's saying "why [the] majority of F1/F2 game [fans] hate Bethesda". Not sure if that's accurate, or just representing the most vocal group.

Supposedly a reporter was investigating something regarding Dolezal. Supposedly when tracked down and asked, the parents said "yeah she's our daughter, she's white, here's childhood photos". Supposedly the parents had no plans to be public about their estrangement from her until asked. That seems shaky logically to me because they could have just refused to talk to the reporter had they wanted to keep it "in the family".

Interesting perspective on the parents of Rachel Doleval: https://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/the-media-is-doing-exactly-what-rachel-dolezals-abusive-homeschooling-parents-want/ Seems like the writer of that article is swapping unproven accusations and assertions of motivation about Dolezal to unproven accusations and assertions of motivation about her parents. The whole thing may be a sad commentary on a particular families breakdown, but I'm with Gromnir in that I can't see what material advantage or harm was caused by Dolezal's masquerade given that her position in the NCAAP wasn't contingent on her being a particular race. But I admit I'm not following the story terribly closely so maybe I missed something "important".

Firstly, a timer is not a railroad. A railroad is what it implies, a forced progression of A->B->C where you have no choice in the matter whatever. Gameplay wise it tends towards linear corridors or the actual rail shooter, narrative wise it's a non branching story. While the waterchip is effectively a choke point decision you have a wide range of different approaches prior to that. If you take that as a railroad then any narrated game is a railroad except ones with an emergent narrative- BG2 has a 'railroad' where you need to raise money and have to go to Spellhold even if you hate Imoen, Planetscape: Tournament you have to go after Ravel who has to die, Awesome Brotocols you have to return to the AP base at the end, Ultima But Thou Must, VTMB LaCroix forces you to obey him etc etc. None of them are actual railroad narratives though, they are just points at which the narrative meanders rejoin into the main stream; something with an actual railroad narrative would be, say, FEAR because every time you play it it has an identical, linear progression where the only choice is to progress in a predetermined manner, or stand still permanently, or quit. If the narrative forces you into a specific choice or narrative path, it railroads you. I would agree that all of your listed choices are railroads. The difference (and the reason I think Fallout 1's railroad is "bad") is the game fails if you don't follow the railroad in the time the developers set out for you to complete it. As I mentioned it is my memory that FO2 fails if you allow the village to die too soon (before their capture is triggered by you arriving in a particular point in the main quest) - if that's not the case, then I remove my objection to that particular game's narrative. But you can't get around the fact that Fallout 1 gets "game over" if you don't complete the waterchip quest in the time allowed - the game forces you to do a specific action in a specific way - you have to save the vault and you have to save it by a specific time. The argument is the timer adds verisimilitude. This maybe so (but the game is broken of verisimilitude on so many other points, it seems weird to care about this one). But it also fails to address that a player has to do specific actions by a specific time. Let me put it this way, one of the big complaints I recall reading about FO3 when it came out is that you have to care about finding your father. You can't play a character who hates their father for abandoning you and hates him for being forced to leave the vault and doesn't give a **** if he dies in the wasteland. Very similarly, in Fallout 1, you cannot play a character who doesn't give a **** about the vault that sent you out into the forbidden wasteland because the powers that be couldn't be arsed to get off their backside and solve the problem themselves. But unlike Fallout 3 where you can ignore "dear ol' dad" until you literally have nothing else to do in the Wasteland from a narrative perspective, you HAVE to solve the water problem or the game ends. Note, it is my opinion that all computer RPGs - by necessity - will railroad you. P&P RPGs are the only way to have (potentially) a RPG without narrative railroading. With games, there's a limited amount of time/space to implement, so at some point you have to engage the game in a way that the game requires you to engage it. Railroads in and of themselves aren't bad. Railroads in RPGs that will end your game if you don't do exactly what the dev wants when they want you to do it - that's bad (IMO). Railroads that don't offer an illusion of choice that seems to validate the character you've created inherently (IMO again) violate the spirit of the kind of RPG that Fallout wants to be. Not sure I agree with the distinction you're making; other than F1 and F2 having larger quest hub areas (thus having more quests and more ways to complete a quest), I don't see FO3's story as being more/less cliché than the others others (find the waterchip to save the vault, find the GECK to save the village, find dad - who incidently is working on a real-world waterchip to save the Capital Wasteland more or less mirroring FO1). I accept that an isometric world with city hubs and an overland map will probably have a higher quest density than a 3D world that features a continuous environment.

I see - it's the "despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument," bit that's the distinction for me... Sure, there are beliefs that are impossible to prove one way or the other. Whatever I might think about such a belief, I wouldn't call it a delusion. There are also beliefs that are clearly wrong but accepted by many people based on faith - such as: people who believe that the earth is 6000 years old, there was a global flood about 4500 years ago and everyone alive today is descended from the eight people who escaped on a boat, etc. I would put the latter group of beliefs firmly in the delusion category as they are contradicted by reality and rational argument. Not that I believe the young earth theory, but logically, if an all-powerful god created the universe, then that same all-powerful god created time (it being a function of the universe), which means dating anything accurate is dependent on whether god intervened (ie god could manipulate time), which would - presumably - be impossible to detect without god intervening to say "yeah, I did it". Therefore, the earth could date to 4.5 billion years, and yet also be 6000 years old at the same time, because god intervened. I've never understood people who believe in an all powerful god fear the data of science - it seems to so devalue the ability of god who they claim to be all powerful, really. One of the interesting things to me about PoE's setup is that yes the pantheon we're introduced to are gods created by man, but while the Engwithans - we're told - could find no proof a real god (or gods) existing, it doesn't remove the idea that there's actually other gods out there that the Engwithans could never see.

Yeah I haven't got to the part where Wu shows up in JP so haven't reread that speech yet.

Yeah hologram - I mean "for reals". And I knew it was in the book, but I don't remember it being explicitly mentioned in the films (mind you I read JP when it came out; I've never read TLW, so that's going to be interesting - re-reading JP first though).

I guess instead of "more right" I should have said "closer to what was in the film". And dilophasaurus' frills were also an add on, IIRC. Isn't it fan theory it was a juvenile? I'd really like to see them return, to be honest. Was surprised to see the Pachycephalosaurus make a return, to be honest. Mind you Jurassic World "fixes" the problem in a way...

^I wouldn't care about failing the waterchip quest if it wasn't for the fact that IIRC failing that quest to get the waterchip also ended the game. Why can't I let the Vault die and get on with my bidness? I thought that FO2 had a similar timer (if the village got wiped out before a certain event was reached the game ended) but If I misremember, mea culpa.

Weak. The timer in Fallout 2 was virtually nonexistent, and the one in Fallout 1 could be extended and even stopped altogether IIRC. Regardless, timers have nothing to do with railroading a story. There was no narrative choice in Fallout 3 in the main story line. And other than that, the only notable choice was blowing up a city built around a nuke for some inexplicable reason for fun. Really hard choice, huh. The game was fun, but the writing was so cringe-worthy that I couldn't bear myself to finishing it for the second time. :D I hate-hate-hated the timers in both Fallout and Fallout 2. And you could stop both timers - provided you rushed to get to the point where you could stop the timer, at which point you could lazily do the open world exploration. But a railroad is a railroad, if you didn't do what the game designers wanted you to do in the time they wanted you to do it - end of game. Been awhile since I played Fallout 3 but IIRC your choices affect Megaton, Little Lamplight and the other town connected to it and the high rise with the ghoul problem. The main story is a narrative railroad (one that they never quite justify following, IMO). New Vegas gives more main story narrative choices (even if only an idiot would ever join Ceasar).

Velociraptors were small but the other branch of the family tree was bigger - with Utahraptor or Dromaeosaurus being more right for what the movie shows. Albeit still without feathers...

No dev in their right mind would ever work for the Codex. For one, it's just an internet forum. For two, they hate everything. Not true. They like Fallout 1, MCA and Tim Cain. I think you mean "They hate Fallout 1, MCA and Tim Cain less than they hate other stuff." Likes a pretty strong word. I keed, I keed...RPG Codex likes a lot of stuff (and individual members have wide variety of tastes); there's just not a lot of games that meet the high standards they set for "good game" status.

I think that there's just a lot of people who want to dump on Bethesda because that's what the majority seem to want to do. I played Fallout and Fallout 2 and Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas and Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel. The stinker of a story was not Fallout 3 in that group. Fallout & Fallout 2 have more narrative railroading (due to the timers) than either of the others. At the end of the day the biggest sin Fallout 3 did was force a narrative choice at the end rather than let the choice come about based on how the character had played. The rest of the game was - IMO - pretty fun.

I'm reading Jurassic Park and The Lost World...I'll confirm in a few months. Maybe..

My primary interest in Stick of Truth was Obsidian (having never watched a South Park episode). Not sure without that Obsidian name that the game holds much appeal (although I guess slightly more appeal because I played Stick than had it never existed).

Regarding T-Rex in the first film - there's a fan explanation that the T-Rex had a cold as to why Grant's "just stand still" strategy worked given the T-Rex's sense of smell.. I mean I guess it could have gotten better overnight, but... My theatrical cut never had wall bursting. So sad. At least I did get to see the weird 13th Warrior edit that's not the film out on DVD...I'll always have that bit of film trivia. I'm not surprised that the boat sequence was added - it felt added on in the second film. I guess I can kinda buy the Spinosaurus theory, since they were clearly at an outlet for a river...and I guess it didn't like the saltier seawater and went back to freshwater after grabbing a snack.

Watched all the Jurassic Films over the weekend. Was fun. JP was the only film I watched 3 times at the theater. I probably liked the 2nd film better this time around than any other time I've watched it, although I still find it falls flat in San Diego. JPIII is a tight film; not terribly ambitious but it does what it sets out to do. A few lingering questions Jurassic Park - How did the T-Rex get into the Visitor's Center? It was last in the savannah grasslands when the power was turned on. Nedry left the doors open, but why would the T-Rex run all around the park just to keep chasing Grant and the kids? Jurassic Park: The Lost World - Okay so what killed the people on the boat? The baby T-Rex wasn't there, the T-Rex was locked in the hold, so what killed the crew and where was it after the crash? Jurassic Park III - again with the boat deaths, what killed the two guys in the speedboat to set all of this off? The aviary wasn't opened until much, much later. A sea dinosaur? But Jurassic World is the first known appearance of InGen doing a mosasaur...? Anyhow, the main event was Jurassic World. It hooked me like the original film did; it may not be quite as strong, but it does a good job building the new world and setting it on its spin. By the time the end rolled around I knew where it was going (whether it made sense or not) and it was exciting to see. Lots of dangling plot elements to be picked up in an inevitable sequel.

She-Conan? Is Red Sonja that obscure these days?

Personally, I have no ****ing clue what you're speaking about, Frodo.

I like the basic idea of fantasy Victorian setting and magic vs tech, but IMO the thing would need a ground up overhaul.

Yes?

RIP, truly sad news.

Yes, but those use an Apple emulator. They work fine for some people, for others, not so much. Hopefully this means that whoever has those games already but doesn't buy TBT4 still gets the reworked versions as a free upgrade. Ah, that makes sense. I knew something was weird with them (but haven't really tried to play them yet).