Holds true as well. It isn't that you are getting bored of the game it is that the game is getting worse. The game has gotten easier every patch since release (seriously!).
These days you can solo the majority of the instances on the level you are supposed to be in a group of 5. You can TWO man a handful of the current level 80 10/25 man bosses (re naxx and other low tier dungeons). The only reason you will ever die in a raid these days is if someone intentionally screws you over (re. healer leaving), there is lag/DCs or if someone is borderline retarded (doesn't know what clockwise means).
If you look at the old 40 man dungeons today, at release they were hard enough that some were near impossible (v1.9 c'thun). Now you can do them at the same level with maybe 15-20 people?
There are still "difficult" achievements in WoW raiding, they're called hard/heroic modes. Designers decided they wanted a way for most people to be able to see the content while still providing difficult end-game raiding challenges.
The downside is that it's not easy to get excited about hard-mode content that you've already cleared on normal mode.
There are plenty of hardcore raiders who raid because the raid game is fun, and not because they have an inferiority complex. Those ones stick around, but could hardly be considered "casual".
Yet they were still less than 4% of the total player base (at the end of vanilla). I remember Blizzard representatives lamented that 96% of their player base never got to see Naxxramas, a dungeon that they had put a huge amount of time designing, tuning, and testing. It's one of the reasons it was brought back as the starter dungeon for Wrath.
I'd think it'd actually to easier to take the building apart, piece by piece from the top down, the way it was assembled but in reverse. Expensive, very expensive, though.
I visited the towers as a teen in the early nineties and was told that they were designed to pancake instead of topple to protect the neighborhoods around them. I think it was a security guard or tour guide that had this information.
It's true, the WTC towers had a strong central core supporting much weaker exterior struts. The central core heated and the heat flowed into the spokes leading to the outer wall, causing that interior fail.
I was also told that there was little chance of that happening because the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo jet.
Oh, and they surved the impact very well! They did not survive the fire though.
If the military had actually blown up two of the planes (and there is no evidence that this actually happened), you can bet the Bush administration would have trumpeted that loudly instead of looking like they were caught with their pants down in every way.
I wish I could mod this up to Eleventy-Billion. This is the post I'll be pointing that shows the biggest reason why these "9/11 was an inside job" "NASA never went to the moon" and so forth bullshit theories are just that, bullshit.
What does political correctness have to do with it?
Because you're not allowed to say that someone was just an asshole any more. I don't know if it's 'political correctness' so much as it is the obsessive need for modern people to discover "syndromes" or "mental health problems" to show how it couldn't possibly be their fault if they act like a dick.
Nobody can be at fault for anything anymore, since when you have an 'illness,' you're just another victim.
A) The guy who "didn't do enough" (in your opinion) to protect the child. B) The guy with the fucking axe invading the house with the intent to do harm on person A.
Out of those two, who really deserves your scorn? Since you chose A, I can tell how fucked up your moral code is.
You're creating a false dichotomy, that is not an either/or decision.
But if you have reason to believe that the attacker has a grudge against you, and not against your five year old granddaughter - which he did - it is reasonable to leave the granddaughter, who is probably safe, and save yourself.
No, that is a horrible conclusion to reach. The zealot (apparently we're not allowed to call fanatical religious zealots 'mad' anymore?) wants to harm and punish the cartoonist any way he can, and what better punishment to kill the granddaughter? Their kind, the suicide bombers, the terrorists, and so forth have absolutely no problem killing children, or anyone in fact who wasn't directly responsible for the incident being punished. How could he possibly have determined that an armed man breaking into his house wouldn't kill his relatives to punish him?
But it was obvious that he was a sane zealot, not insane.
And this is a conclusion that can be safely determined on the fly when an armed zealot is breaking into your house?
Actually statutory rape is a US law that is fairly recent. Back in the day (circa 0BC) raping 12 year old girls was totally cool. How the times have changed.
Only if you were the rapist. If you were the family of the raped girl (and weren't the ones doing the raping), then this was totally not cool. >_>
Girls were property. They were an investment to create ties between families. The arrangement of marriages was very important, as was the virginity of the girl.
Except for the testimony of the UN weapons inspectors
You should try reading the report right before the invasion. There wasn't a smoking gun, and the inspectors wanted more time, but they also noted that Saddam had to be dragged kicking and screaming the whole way to let the inspectors do their work. Saddam didn't do himself any favors by acting like he had something to hide.
Of course, CIA operatives being smuggled into the UN weapons inspection teams didn't help either.
I'm not sure if you're young or trying to revise history, but Quayle fumbled and came across as a newcomer to politics... But he at least knew the basics.. A far cry from Palin who came across as completely clueless.
No no no no no, Quayle was often portrayed as being clueless, in part due to his tendency to commit Biden-like gaffes (the UNCF speech, the Holocost statements, etc). I remember one prominent political cartoonist (I think it might have been Mike Luckovich?) often portrayed him as sitting in a high-chair wearing a dunce cap.
Even if he actually knew the job, most people didn't know it.
I think a number of things hurt Palin on the ticket as compared to Quayle:
1) Her inability to rationalize any political views without just relying on talking points prepared for her. Maybe Quayle suffered this too, but I don't recall that being the case. Palin seems to think that if she just mentions the buzzwords of freedom, patriotism, and Ronald Reagan, then everything will be fine. Unfortunately that works for a number of partisans. Fortunately a good chunk of people who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters can't stand her. 2) The age of John McCain. This was a biggie. Senior advocates might be outraged, but a -lot- of people felt there was a very good chance McCain would have died or been incapacitated while in office. I wish he'd beaten Bush in the 2000 primary. But in 2008 he was just too old. 3) People were actually interested in Obama. No one was interested in Dukakis. There wasn't the same anger against Reagan that there was against George W. Bush.
I didn't make it up--I really was told this story--but having only seen the guy once I won't rule out that he was spinning a yarn for his own amusement at my expense or some other more nefarious purpose.
I think it's a lot more likely that he came up with a quick excuse for why he was caught checking the other guys out.
You might be joking, but it's one of the many, many reasons why growing to be so incredibly old is not a great thing. "I want to live to be 100!" is a claim usually uttered by young people. "I wish I would just die" is more often heard from those over 90.
Nah, the solution to health problems in the US is to reduce the consumption of carbohydrates. The "diseases of civilization", as they're called, can all be traced back to carbohydrate intake. Cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and other chronic diseases aren't caused by trace dioxins, they're caused by the cereals and grains we're admonished we should eat.
Well... that and our habit of adding High Fructose Corn Syrup to EVERYTHING that we eat.
The reason nobody starves and the average person does not need to spend most of their disposable income feeding themselves. A lot of people are overweight, but given the alternative, it ain't so bad.
If you think they're "low quality" you might want to actually look at the safety record and the general quality versus both history and less industrial areas of the world.
I think he's mistaking "US food" with "fast food" and "junk food."
Oh, Nintendo is definitely in driver's seat now, but they had a good decade of failure when Sony leaped ahead. Sony's impending fall was driven by hubris, the attitude that they didn't need to listen to what they customers wanted, that they knew best, and that people would just accept the latest and greatest thing they put out there.
So Apple, with its comparatively small market among both computers and phones, shouldn't be worried about competitors? Nintendo used to in a similar position, with fans who were just as rabid, right before the Playstation came out.
If Coca-Cola accidentally created 100 million cans of faulty Coke, you know for sure the entire 100 million cans would be dropped in the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean, without a second thought and irrespective of what that did to the year's profits. What do we do with a crappy movie? We double its advertising budget and hope for a big opening weekend.
Unless you're Bill Cosby, who actually had the integrity to go on the late-night talk show circuit saying "Guys.. just.. don't go see Leonard Part 6. It's a bad movie and it's not worth your money."
The guy actually bought the television rights for it just so it could never be shown on TV.
No, I'm a 3 year veteran of Slashdot, and a 2 year veteran of the World of Warcraft forums. In the WoW forums, where every post is linked to a character, people judge others' posts by the quality of their gear rather than just the quality of the posts. On Slashdot, this doesn't happen...
... instead you are judged by the size of your id number! A seven-digit poster? Tisk, what a noob...
Real ID is required to use the friends list in game.
No it isn't, it's still optional there. You can add a character as an in-game friend, the same as you always have. I still have about triple the number of non-Real-ID friends on my WoW main than Real ID friends.
Real ID is required to use the -cross realm/cross game- friends system.
Really dumb on Blizzards part too, how long before some nut job trackssome kid down down for ganking them in game and then does them harm
The obvious solution to this, of course, is to not act like a dickhole.
Obvious disclaimer: I still don't agree with Blizzard doing this...but being polite to your fellow gamers goes a long way to making this not matter all that much.
Really? When half the game is geared around "being a dickhole" to someone else? (IE, all pvp).
Slashdot Mirror
Holds true as well. It isn't that you are getting bored of the game it is that the game is getting worse. The game has gotten easier every patch since release (seriously!).
These days you can solo the majority of the instances on the level you are supposed to be in a group of 5. You can TWO man a handful of the current level 80 10/25 man bosses (re naxx and other low tier dungeons). The only reason you will ever die in a raid these days is if someone intentionally screws you over (re. healer leaving), there is lag/DCs or if someone is borderline retarded (doesn't know what clockwise means).
If you look at the old 40 man dungeons today, at release they were hard enough that some were near impossible (v1.9 c'thun). Now you can do them at the same level with maybe 15-20 people?
There are still "difficult" achievements in WoW raiding, they're called hard/heroic modes. Designers decided they wanted a way for most people to be able to see the content while still providing difficult end-game raiding challenges.
The downside is that it's not easy to get excited about hard-mode content that you've already cleared on normal mode.
There are plenty of hardcore raiders who raid because the raid game is fun, and not because they have an inferiority complex. Those ones stick around, but could hardly be considered "casual".
Yet they were still less than 4% of the total player base (at the end of vanilla). I remember Blizzard representatives lamented that 96% of their player base never got to see Naxxramas, a dungeon that they had put a huge amount of time designing, tuning, and testing. It's one of the reasons it was brought back as the starter dungeon for Wrath.
The initial client costs a certain amount of money as well. Once you've bought that client you can redownload it for free from Blizzard's web servers.
I'd think it'd actually to easier to take the building apart, piece by piece from the top down, the way it was assembled but in reverse. Expensive, very expensive, though.
I visited the towers as a teen in the early nineties and was told that they were designed to pancake instead of topple to protect the neighborhoods around them. I think it was a security guard or tour guide that had this information.
It's true, the WTC towers had a strong central core supporting much weaker exterior struts. The central core heated and the heat flowed into the spokes leading to the outer wall, causing that interior fail.
I was also told that there was little chance of that happening because the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo jet.
Oh, and they surved the impact very well! They did not survive the fire though.
If the military had actually blown up two of the planes (and there is no evidence that this actually happened), you can bet the Bush administration would have trumpeted that loudly instead of looking like they were caught with their pants down in every way.
I wish I could mod this up to Eleventy-Billion. This is the post I'll be pointing that shows the biggest reason why these "9/11 was an inside job" "NASA never went to the moon" and so forth bullshit theories are just that, bullshit.
Please drop the "9/11 was an inside job" bullshit. Try to keep the discussion here meaningful. :P
What does political correctness have to do with it?
Because you're not allowed to say that someone was just an asshole any more. I don't know if it's 'political correctness' so much as it is the obsessive need for modern people to discover "syndromes" or "mental health problems" to show how it couldn't possibly be their fault if they act like a dick.
Nobody can be at fault for anything anymore, since when you have an 'illness,' you're just another victim.
A) The guy who "didn't do enough" (in your opinion) to protect the child.
B) The guy with the fucking axe invading the house with the intent to do harm on person A.
Out of those two, who really deserves your scorn?
Since you chose A, I can tell how fucked up your moral code is.
You're creating a false dichotomy, that is not an either/or decision.
But if you have reason to believe that the attacker has a grudge against you, and not against your five year old granddaughter - which he did - it is reasonable to leave the granddaughter, who is probably safe, and save yourself.
No, that is a horrible conclusion to reach. The zealot (apparently we're not allowed to call fanatical religious zealots 'mad' anymore?) wants to harm and punish the cartoonist any way he can, and what better punishment to kill the granddaughter? Their kind, the suicide bombers, the terrorists, and so forth have absolutely no problem killing children, or anyone in fact who wasn't directly responsible for the incident being punished. How could he possibly have determined that an armed man breaking into his house wouldn't kill his relatives to punish him?
But it was obvious that he was a sane zealot, not insane.
And this is a conclusion that can be safely determined on the fly when an armed zealot is breaking into your house?
Actually statutory rape is a US law that is fairly recent. Back in the day (circa 0BC) raping 12 year old girls was totally cool.
How the times have changed.
Only if you were the rapist. If you were the family of the raped girl (and weren't the ones doing the raping), then this was totally not cool. >_>
Girls were property. They were an investment to create ties between families. The arrangement of marriages was very important, as was the virginity of the girl.
Except for the testimony of the UN weapons inspectors
You should try reading the report right before the invasion. There wasn't a smoking gun, and the inspectors wanted more time, but they also noted that Saddam had to be dragged kicking and screaming the whole way to let the inspectors do their work. Saddam didn't do himself any favors by acting like he had something to hide.
Of course, CIA operatives being smuggled into the UN weapons inspection teams didn't help either.
I'm not sure if you're young or trying to revise history, but Quayle fumbled and came across as a newcomer to politics... But he at least knew the basics.. A far cry from Palin who came across as completely clueless.
No no no no no, Quayle was often portrayed as being clueless, in part due to his tendency to commit Biden-like gaffes (the UNCF speech, the Holocost statements, etc). I remember one prominent political cartoonist (I think it might have been Mike Luckovich?) often portrayed him as sitting in a high-chair wearing a dunce cap.
Even if he actually knew the job, most people didn't know it.
I think a number of things hurt Palin on the ticket as compared to Quayle:
1) Her inability to rationalize any political views without just relying on talking points prepared for her. Maybe Quayle suffered this too, but I don't recall that being the case. Palin seems to think that if she just mentions the buzzwords of freedom, patriotism, and Ronald Reagan, then everything will be fine. Unfortunately that works for a number of partisans. Fortunately a good chunk of people who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters can't stand her.
2) The age of John McCain. This was a biggie. Senior advocates might be outraged, but a -lot- of people felt there was a very good chance McCain would have died or been incapacitated while in office. I wish he'd beaten Bush in the 2000 primary. But in 2008 he was just too old.
3) People were actually interested in Obama. No one was interested in Dukakis. There wasn't the same anger against Reagan that there was against George W. Bush.
I didn't make it up--I really was told this story--but having only seen the guy once I won't rule out that he was spinning a yarn for his own amusement at my expense or some other more nefarious purpose.
I think it's a lot more likely that he came up with a quick excuse for why he was caught checking the other guys out.
Also Alzheimers and it'll save Social Security!
Man the benefits are so worth it!
You might be joking, but it's one of the many, many reasons why growing to be so incredibly old is not a great thing. "I want to live to be 100!" is a claim usually uttered by young people. "I wish I would just die" is more often heard from those over 90.
Nah, the solution to health problems in the US is to reduce the consumption of carbohydrates. The "diseases of civilization", as they're called, can all be traced back to carbohydrate intake. Cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and other chronic diseases aren't caused by trace dioxins, they're caused by the cereals and grains we're admonished we should eat.
Well... that and our habit of adding High Fructose Corn Syrup to EVERYTHING that we eat.
How do you define life expectancy? How do you define infant mortality?
The reason nobody starves and the average person does not need to spend most of their disposable income feeding themselves. A lot of people are overweight, but given the alternative, it ain't so bad.
If you think they're "low quality" you might want to actually look at the safety record and the general quality versus both history and less industrial areas of the world.
I think he's mistaking "US food" with "fast food" and "junk food."
Oh, Nintendo is definitely in driver's seat now, but they had a good decade of failure when Sony leaped ahead. Sony's impending fall was driven by hubris, the attitude that they didn't need to listen to what they customers wanted, that they knew best, and that people would just accept the latest and greatest thing they put out there.
So Apple, with its comparatively small market among both computers and phones, shouldn't be worried about competitors?
Nintendo used to in a similar position, with fans who were just as rabid, right before the Playstation came out.
Which reminds me of this:
If Coca-Cola accidentally created 100 million cans of faulty Coke, you know for sure the entire 100 million cans would be dropped in the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean, without a second thought and irrespective of what that did to the year's profits. What do we do with a crappy movie? We double its advertising budget and hope for a big opening weekend.
Unless you're Bill Cosby, who actually had the integrity to go on the late-night talk show circuit saying "Guys.. just.. don't go see Leonard Part 6. It's a bad movie and it's not worth your money."
The guy actually bought the television rights for it just so it could never be shown on TV.
No, I'm a 3 year veteran of Slashdot, and a 2 year veteran of the World of Warcraft forums. In the WoW forums, where every post is linked to a character, people judge others' posts by the quality of their gear rather than just the quality of the posts. On Slashdot, this doesn't happen...
... instead you are judged by the size of your id number! A seven-digit poster? Tisk, what a noob...
Real ID is required to use the friends list in game.
No it isn't, it's still optional there. You can add a character as an in-game friend, the same as you always have. I still have about triple the number of non-Real-ID friends on my WoW main than Real ID friends.
Real ID is required to use the -cross realm/cross game- friends system.
Really dumb on Blizzards part too, how long before some nut job trackssome kid down down for ganking them in game and then does them harm
The obvious solution to this, of course, is to not act like a dickhole.
Obvious disclaimer: I still don't agree with Blizzard doing this...but being polite to your fellow gamers goes a long way to making this not matter all that much.
Really? When half the game is geared around "being a dickhole" to someone else? (IE, all pvp).