scourge, we've very much alike in some ways so I think it makes what little difference there is almost harder to bare. We're both fairly logical and capable of opperating in reasonable theoretical frameworks. We both also seem to have a fairly robust grasp of the history involved. The primary distinction between your point of view and mine is that while I take all the objective information into consideration. My final decision on the matter is subjective. That is to s
Karmashock
I'm not apologizing because people can't be bothered to read anything. and we're not apologizing because you talk to much. Nope... just whining because the bad man expects you to have a grade school level grasp of the english language... but many programs still screw up on it I've never had such happen, my experience with vista (alth
Vista isnt bad by god! the worst thing about it is that it wastes resources willynilly, beyond that on any halfway stable system it functions perfectly. but many programs still screw up on it. I don't load my computer up to play with the OS. I load it up to run programs. And when my programs are less reliable or the OS is doing things I don't fully understand that means it's less useful to me. As to my previo
The security features are in and of themselves stupid. A better approach would be some kind of emulated admin access. That is you "tell" a program it has full access but really it's working with copies of the originals and looking at an emulated file system. It thinks it's working with files and folders, can change the registry etc... but really it's just creating a slight modification of your system which only applies to itself. Obviously some programs you'd want to have "actual" admin access.
the software bugs alone make me stay away from it. I'm waiting until vista has been completely hacked. the only reason I was even tempted to get it was that there were going to be games that only worked on Vista. As it stands though none of those games are still vista only and few games in the future that I know of will be exclusive to Vista. Eventually that won't be the case, but hopefully by then Vista will be properly tamed.
I really don't care why they hate us... it doesn't really matter. In the same way I don't really care why a bear attacks someone. It has done so... and now will be dealt with. And that's the reason why they will keep attacking. And thus our response will remain. The only difference is that we have the power to change them and they don't have the power to change us. The difference in
I am not a huge fan myself of artificial aids like no rush time limits, or double resources or quick start ups, as I feel it detracts a great deal from the strategy. On a personal note, "rushing" was what singlehandedly killed all incentive to ever play RTS games online for me, and why I stick to LAN play entirely. I have never been able to see what possible enjoyment coul
I like the idea of this kind of game. There should be some prime world that you can't let fall. Call it the seat of your government... your capital world... THE Homeworld. At the very least the idea of a MAJOR moral loss when hte planet is destroyed should be standard. That said, which planet is the homeworld should be something you can "move". Much as in MOO you could move your capital world. If that world were destroyed the consequences would either be fatal or very
No Theleif, we stand in their way. That is why they hate us. They hate us for the same reason the communists hated us. It's not really our freedoms... it's out ability and willingness to disrupt their conquest. These groups to a man all want to destroy Israel. They all want religious dictatorships... whether we have one or not isn't nearly as important as us not stopping them from taking over the holy land and turning the whole thing into a giant islamic circle jerk. That we're wil
First of the Cold War wasnt an actual war, so in the end no one triumphed and I dont think either country is better off. Yes it was a war... the only thing that prevented us from invading each other was nuclear weapons. We fought the war through proxies and by undermining each other internationally. The US won the cold war because our coalition was bigger, richer, and more powerful then th
uhhh, karma... that was REALLY mean and it bugs me quite a bit mean to who?... and it was only intended to get him to explain what it meant, ignore people that wouldn't respect him while he explained it, and be somewhat amusing. the only people that would be upset by that as far as I can see are people that were kicked in the head by large hoofed animals (probably their mothers) in youth... and thus spam
explain what it means as best you can... those interested will be respectful and will ask polite questions... those who were kicked in the head by large hoofed animals in their youth... typically their mothers... will try to ruin your thread in any way they can... ignore them and focus on those interested. I'm curious... explain Prime Magnetism.
LOL you americans realy like guns. Guns are nice if you have the right mind to use it. Thank god in my country,guns are forbiden, if not probably ill be death and 90% of the population too. your country doesn't let peasants have guns. Wait... don't
That was the British ideology, keep 'em fighting, and look at what we have going on now. Clearly you don't think about what you type before you do so... Me saying the Middle East needs to change = Keep them fighting amongst themselves how? It doesn't... Actually we are a litte more biased I would say. But the differance here is that we have so many different large news stations and news papers t
Oh yes I think we are doing a great job. Democrac, tons of opportunity at the cost of thousands of you people. Get it today!! we're not done yet... obviously. Yes, but see the problem with that is that the Turks dong have a religious schism dati
WOW last time i checked this post was at 72 and dead on September 4. I should get back into posting.... Look, gravity actually being applied in Sins.... no. Its disgusting. Having to constantly reposition your ships and keep them from crashing into the planet? No thanks. Once im in the mid-late part of the game I usually just send a big ol' fleet to a system and leave them fighting. I have too many things to worry about than to watch a bat
the average joe doesn't need to understand it... If he's playing the game, yes he does. If his ships are doing things he doesn't understand, he's not going to like it and he's not going to play. And he won't be nice word-of-mouth for others to play the game. And the reviewers won't give a good review, so even less people buy it. no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
And ending what terrorism? there were no terrorists in iraq prior to 2003. Osama bin laden came out of saudia and its iran who sponsores hizbollah and god knows what else. Again... we're trying to change the middle east. nearly all the countries that boarder Iraq are terrorist sponsor states. Iraq was not though it wasn't making the situation any better either. Currently Iraq is serving as lightning rod for most of the terrorists. They
the romances are rarely worth anything... but I do like stories... stories are what make me remember and love games long after their graphics and gameplay have become obsolete. A good example is planescape torment. Still worth playing after all these years because teh story and and dialog is just that good.
the average joe doesn't need to understand it... clicking on the enemy ships sends your ships after them... the calculation for your own pathing AI isn't abnormally complicated either... the gravity effect is there for two reasons. 1. it gives the game serious innovation points... which it needs. 2. It gives people that are not morons something to play with...
good I hated her in that show... but then... I've hated all the startreks after the original... Too touchy feely... too many moments put aside to talk about feelings and desires and dreams... I don't mind people getting a philosophical... but enough with the damn holding hands. I thought the latest startrek was going to better when the captain started throwing bad guys out of airlocks... not because he had to... but because he "wanted to"... but no... there's no real
in my experience, people that don't know much about computers are LESS likely to delete important files... unless they want to break the computer. Keep the core OS in Windows directory... delete anything out side of that minus a few hidden files in the root directory and the computer should still boot and operate correctly. There is no need to go about hiding application files. Especially when most of them should be in the application installation directory to begin with...
My biggest issue with the new standard is that this stuff (in XP at least) is pointed to a hidden directory. That's just not cool, as most users won't be able to find the directory if they need to. If we can do some kind of redirect (with the user's consent/action) then we will. there are too many hidden files in windows as is... the only files I'm ok with hiding are a few in the root C: drive that are required for bo
But according to that statement, virtually every game ever made is a bad one because of physics. No... I'm talking specifically about new games. I made comparisons between 3d graphics and old games. I said that old like Zelda have great game play yet if anyone made a game like that today only better no one would play it. Because it doesn't have high quality 3d graphics. Likewise, physics are very quickly becoming REQUIRED. It'
Sadly it is becoming Warcraft with no visible terrain. Looks at Warcrafts numbers sold...13+ million to date. Yeah, I think I'm okay with that. Warcraft has a brand and thus they don't hav