I bet his subconscious is double-thinking but doing it wrong...

Guyz, one of us is supposed to say something cool and inspiring that will change his course of action, but we're not doing it.

Oh yeah, and this is the first I heard of the game. Just wanted to throw that in there.

...And yeah he is coming off as a middle-class stuck-up white-boy.

I feel somewhat conflicted on the issue...

The kid is obviously not mentally stable, and shouldn't be playing that type of game. He shouldn't have gotten a hold of it. The game is somewhat at fault for the murder, but what's more at fault is his insanity.

Also, if you were addicted to cigarettes and shot someone cause they took them away, that wouldn't get you off the hook.

Then again, if you're really obsessive about a game, you may feel that immersed in it that you wouldn't understand your actions. This is very similar to something known as psychosis, and it's possible he was in a sort of trance about it.

But you know, when it gets down to it, he's not mentally sound, and the real issue is not that the game could've done something, it's that the justice system has ignored this and threw him in jail when he should be put into psychiatric care.

Enterprise, it sucked really hard at first but it was getting much better and geekier towards the end. My least and most favourite Trek episodes are both in there...

The first season had one or two great episodes. Shuttlepod One comes to mind.

As for shows I'd like to see back, there's only two, which are Arrested Development and Quincy, M.E.

I hate it when they replay the old Looney Tunes and take out parts.

For example, in the one where Bugs Bunny is Christopher Columbus, he's trying to explain to the king that the world is round.

He says "see, the world is round, like your head!"  The king then pulls out a hammer, gives a resounding thwack to Bugs Bunny's head, and said "no, it is flat *wham* like your head".

That part is totally taken out of any reruns of that episode.

Sacrilege!

To add a point I find relevant:

He asked people to post extensive information about themselves, their careers, and their experience, with the claim that he would answer questions from them. His follow-up post was then basically a re-hash of everything he said before, with responding to maybe one or two questions. Questions, mind you, that weren't even the most frequently asked.

So basically he lied about why he wanted the information, then he didn't even care about the information, and then he didn't even stick to his word.

See, he's basically being an ass. And as Dacke said, I also don't think that's appropriate for a representative of people. Regardless of whether they're in the games industry or not.

Sorry, I had to post this somewhere :D

*face/palm*

Ah, sorry. I thought it was more clear seeing as how Tim was last referenced by Paul. Or at least, I think so...

As for Buscaglia, I'd say a good analogy would be as follows:

You've got this politician's right-hand-man, and... well, I'll use a series of quotes.
"Yes, I am kind of an ass and unlikable. But my opinions of people are more valid than yours, since you are well-reasoned gentlemen/gentlewomen"
"If you haven't gone to law school and ran for a political position, you are not allowed to vote for or against my friend over there."
"My friend over there is in the right and those dead prostitutes in his car may have been dead beforehand."

I think that sums it up.

A guy who consistently robs convenience stores for a long period is more of a threat to society than a guy who just robbed one store and never did it again. If you were to decided that the guy who did it once for passable reason, you might let him go. If you then tried the consistent guy but ignored the fact that he robs reliably, and tried him for only one issue at a time, and then pretended he was a different guy for the next issue, he could more easily get away with his crimes. After all, incident by incident, the guy isn't trying to freeload everything off of convenience stores. He is though, if you look at the long-term profile.

Likewise, let's look at Langdell. If you isolate any one alone items of his dickery, it's not really that bad. I mean he's being a bit over-protective but he's not actively pursuing the destruction of indie developers.

Oh wait, yes he is, because his consistency proves it. Well fuck.

anyway, i think it looks funny. you probably could have fun just laughing your ass off about the funny errors + that 2 huge dogdeamons in the beginning of the trailer look awesome

that would require buying it

I have a friend who is majoring in sociology who wants to buy it just so he can prove to his cohorts that it exists.

To provide an analogy, it's like if you tried a guy who robbed 100 convenience stores for only one robbery (let's say... the forty-third) and then defended it with a mediocre but passable argument. (Like... the guy needed to eat but had no money or something.)

Smokin' Guns is pretty western. Haven't played it yet though...

Fumaza by Los Pinguos. All their music is really good, by the way.

See, that's the problem. The business model claims that it is better to aim slightly low to hit the greater populous. But hell, why not just aim high? If your gameplay is solid, the people who don't want any meaning or substance won't care anyways. (Hint: They don't right now.) Couldn't one argue that having BOTH solid gameplay and substance actually increases audience?

The business model says this is too much work, though. From what I understand.

Course, that would require developers to stop masturbating to their own drunken frat-boy egos. *cough*cliffyb*cough*

Things become complex if either party has binding contracts saying they will not engage in such transactions. but the ethical issue there is entirely seperate.

I'd have to look thoroughly, but I'm pretty sure most license agreements and copyright information for games says that they are not available for resale. Especially PC games.

Not that I give a damn though.  :D

I totally agree that cartoon was great. Michael Keaton was the shiznat as Batman though.

I never saw that cartoon because my family doesn't get cable and my parents would've probably thought it was too violent. 

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go play something with lots of gore. 

There's also http://gametz.com/. I've used it before. It's alright, but pretty basic.

If I ever do this though, I'm popping the EA executives and designers of this game in the circle that represents "violence against art"

The extremist counter-organization would then be "violence against violence against art". Heh.

[HAL 9000]

Would I be right in assuming all of us are fearful of calling our computers HAL 9000?

That was the name of my first computer.

Also, I don't see why anyone would be afraid of that.

The contradictions in Windows alone...

This topic totally reminds me of Deadly Creatures.

You know I can't watch gameplay videos of that game without shouting "FINISH HIM!!!" every few minutes. It's like Mortal Combat with Scorpions and Tarantulas. Hence I want it.

Neat idea. I don't know if I'd have time for this right now, but it would be neat in a few weeks.

I recently bought a used copy of Fire Emblem: Sacred Stones at GameStop and I must say I loathe it. It's been less than a week of the purchase, but I tore off the stickers and threw away the receipts, so I'm pretty much screwed, plus I've heard GameStop gives crap deals for trade-ins. There's a Play N Trade near by, so any of you have suggestions as to the best places to trade in games (both in my case and on a broader scale) - or even the ethics of trading games in general?

The best place to trade games is somewhere which doesn't buy any games except second-hand games. Like local hobby stores. We have one in town where you get 2.50 for a previous-gen game (PS2 and before) and 5.00 for a current-gen game, and buying a game costs twice that. (5.00 for p-gen and 10.00 for c-gen.)

All major stores suck for trading in. You'll get maybe 8 dollars for your game, which they will then sell for like 45 dollars if the game sells at 50 brand new.

And yes, it's unethical. If you trade with stores like GameStop. For they are the spawn of Satan.