Games are released later on the PC because the market's so much smaller. I don't see the problem with controller interfaces, guns aren't supposed to be fast to aim with. I think PC gamers have just got used to running around at 100mph shooting accurately at single-pixel targets twelve times a second. Get real.
I think PC gamers like you are just sore that you're flagship genre, the FPS, is now bigger on consoles, so all you're left with really is poopsocking MMOs, and maybe an RTS every ten years or so.
I know how strong the Euro is compared to the pound, and that's pretty much one good reason not to join. Unless you want to destroy all our exports of course. And tell me an advantage of having our interest rates and money supply controlled by Frankfurt rather than the Bank of England. I can't think of any.
But yeah, let's change currency and the whole way our economy operates, just so you don't have to carry too many coins.
I know console gamers bitch about this too to some extent, but maybe if they stopped buying those fucking games in the first place, they wouldn't be made so often.
Why wouldn't they buy them if they enjoy them? COD4 of Halo 3 on the console are more fun than anything the PC can offer like Crysis or shit like that.
It's only comic book guy PC gamers who whine about keyboards and mice. What exactly do PC FPSes challenge you on other than moving the mouse around really fast? I mean, other than installing hacks and cheats.
For most of the post-war era, the EU was just a trade zone, as I suggested. And I'm pretty sure that the lack of wars since then was more to do with the presence of the Soviet Union than anything else. Since the fall of communism we've had wars in Czechoslovakia, Bosnia, Kosovo etc.
The challenge in all FPSes is the control scheme. A PC FPS would be pretty easy if you have a device which could instantly aim anywhere on the screen with absolute accuracy. They're basically just clicking contests.
Assuming that the other person is immediately available. Text messages are often a lot faster than vocal conversations, especially ones that don't require a reply. Maybe you just suck at texting.
The matter is way too complex to really understand - I don't think it should have had a referendum in the first place. Instead it should have been set up by one EU parliament, and ratified by the next after the elections. Then competent people (the politicians) that can understand the meaning of the document can vote on it, and indirectly the general public votes as well.
Great, so EU politicians living a thousand miles away who don't even speak your language can make decisions like this data sharing, and you have no say in it whatsoever. The way the EU is acting recently, it's becoming less like a democratic organisation, and more like a giant, unaccountable fascist beaurocracy.
The reaction to the Irish vote just sums it up: the people have rejected it, but they're going through with it anyway, because they're in charge and 'they know best'. Most of the arrogant politicans in favour of the constitution haven't even fucking read it. In fact the document is purposefully long and complicated so no-one can understand what it's actually about.
Personally I don't see why the EU can't just be a trade zone, and fuck off all this federal superstate crap. Thank god we're not in the Euro, the last thing we need is these jokers running our economy.
You can't write them as worth $2,000,000 unless you either paid that much for them, or they're bringing in revenue enough to make them worth that much money to a prospective buyer.
So what you're saying is, it's OK to be recklessly wasteful with energy if you're rich enough to own a carbon offset company, whilst also telling everyone else to reduce their energy consumption?
I don't see why we should take environmental advice from someone with a giant house and a heating swimming pool, who flies around in private jets.
P.S the moment the term 'carbon footprint' comes out of someone's mouth, my bullshit-meter explodes. I can't afford to keep replacing them so please stop.
No, but I like sites that are free due to advertising. Maybe you adblock users have a solution to when all your favourite sites close down due to lack of revenue. Or probably not.
It does. I have been to China. Poverty and starvation and the sheer overwhelming numbers of desperate, needy people everywhere you look is like nothing that many of us sitting in front of computers can even imagine. You'll need to look beyond Fox News, CNN, and Slashdot to see it though.
Are the Chinese more or less starving and poor than they were in the 18th century?
Famine isn't caused by overpopulation, the Earth has enough farming capacity to feed everyone several times over. There's less plague and war now than in any time in history.
I think you've missed the point. If they lack food, water, and all the essentials of life, then any children they do have will either be stunted or will die. It's cruelty to bring a child into such conditions.
Often being laid off is a necessary kick up the backside to make you go for something better. Paying people to fill cups is no better than paying people to spin cotton when there is technology to do it. It may hurt in the short term, but who today wants to go back to working in cotton mills?
That's the problem with having no minimum wage laws: there's no incentive to automate and modernise as cheap labour is easier in the short term.
So, these people live where is no food, no water, no medical treatment, and they are incapable of moving somewhere else. In which case, why do they breed, and subject their children to the same misery?
You can work 10x harder, 10x faster, and 10x smarter than the guy next to you, but if you didn't finish high-school/college/university, you won't get the better job.
If you're that smart and hard working, why didn't you finish high school and university?
Then maybe a higher minimum wage will eliminate a lot of pointless jobs, so people can do something more useful. If it wasn't for an increase in minimum wage, maybe that guy would still be there filling cups up.
That works both ways, and other countries could block US exports. For example Microsoft could be banned from selling Windows in the EU, as their workers work more than 35 hours a week and don't get 10 weeks vacation. And no US food exports either as it's produced with illegal Mexican labour.
Hollywood would face problems showing their films in place where the activities of their mafia-like unions would be illegal. Your theory only works based on the assumption that the US has the world's best employment conditions.
Maybe for the US to remain competitive, we should repeal those laws that prevent Americans from being truly competitive in the global economy. If it takes our kids working in coal mines 16 hours a day, 7 days a week, so be it. The first goal of American government is to protect the profitability of domestic and foreign businesses, and all these laws are standing in the way of this.
Slashdot Mirror
And the rocket has less chance of crashing.
Age is no barrier to winning an election. Just look at Mugabe, still going into his 80s.
Games are released later on the PC because the market's so much smaller. I don't see the problem with controller interfaces, guns aren't supposed to be fast to aim with. I think PC gamers have just got used to running around at 100mph shooting accurately at single-pixel targets twelve times a second. Get real.
I think PC gamers like you are just sore that you're flagship genre, the FPS, is now bigger on consoles, so all you're left with really is poopsocking MMOs, and maybe an RTS every ten years or so.
I know how strong the Euro is compared to the pound, and that's pretty much one good reason not to join. Unless you want to destroy all our exports of course. And tell me an advantage of having our interest rates and money supply controlled by Frankfurt rather than the Bank of England. I can't think of any.
But yeah, let's change currency and the whole way our economy operates, just so you don't have to carry too many coins.
Why wouldn't they buy them if they enjoy them? COD4 of Halo 3 on the console are more fun than anything the PC can offer like Crysis or shit like that.
It's only comic book guy PC gamers who whine about keyboards and mice. What exactly do PC FPSes challenge you on other than moving the mouse around really fast? I mean, other than installing hacks and cheats.
For most of the post-war era, the EU was just a trade zone, as I suggested. And I'm pretty sure that the lack of wars since then was more to do with the presence of the Soviet Union than anything else. Since the fall of communism we've had wars in Czechoslovakia, Bosnia, Kosovo etc.
The challenge in all FPSes is the control scheme. A PC FPS would be pretty easy if you have a device which could instantly aim anywhere on the screen with absolute accuracy. They're basically just clicking contests.
Assuming that the other person is immediately available. Text messages are often a lot faster than vocal conversations, especially ones that don't require a reply. Maybe you just suck at texting.
Great, so EU politicians living a thousand miles away who don't even speak your language can make decisions like this data sharing, and you have no say in it whatsoever. The way the EU is acting recently, it's becoming less like a democratic organisation, and more like a giant, unaccountable fascist beaurocracy.
The reaction to the Irish vote just sums it up: the people have rejected it, but they're going through with it anyway, because they're in charge and 'they know best'. Most of the arrogant politicans in favour of the constitution haven't even fucking read it. In fact the document is purposefully long and complicated so no-one can understand what it's actually about.
Personally I don't see why the EU can't just be a trade zone, and fuck off all this federal superstate crap. Thank god we're not in the Euro, the last thing we need is these jokers running our economy.
You can't write them as worth $2,000,000 unless you either paid that much for them, or they're bringing in revenue enough to make them worth that much money to a prospective buyer.
Depends on what you count as a necessity. The UK government only considers unprepared food and children's clothes to be necessary.
So what you're saying is, it's OK to be recklessly wasteful with energy if you're rich enough to own a carbon offset company, whilst also telling everyone else to reduce their energy consumption?
I don't see why we should take environmental advice from someone with a giant house and a heating swimming pool, who flies around in private jets.
P.S the moment the term 'carbon footprint' comes out of someone's mouth, my bullshit-meter explodes. I can't afford to keep replacing them so please stop.
I don't think that word means quite what you think it means.
No, but I like sites that are free due to advertising. Maybe you adblock users have a solution to when all your favourite sites close down due to lack of revenue. Or probably not.
Are the Chinese more or less starving and poor than they were in the 18th century?
Famine isn't caused by overpopulation, the Earth has enough farming capacity to feed everyone several times over. There's less plague and war now than in any time in history.
It's not just the elderly, most people are resistant to change. The young just think they're adaptable because they grew up on the new stuff.
I think you've missed the point. If they lack food, water, and all the essentials of life, then any children they do have will either be stunted or will die. It's cruelty to bring a child into such conditions.
Often being laid off is a necessary kick up the backside to make you go for something better. Paying people to fill cups is no better than paying people to spin cotton when there is technology to do it. It may hurt in the short term, but who today wants to go back to working in cotton mills?
That's the problem with having no minimum wage laws: there's no incentive to automate and modernise as cheap labour is easier in the short term.
So, these people live where is no food, no water, no medical treatment, and they are incapable of moving somewhere else. In which case, why do they breed, and subject their children to the same misery?
Then maybe a higher minimum wage will eliminate a lot of pointless jobs, so people can do something more useful. If it wasn't for an increase in minimum wage, maybe that guy would still be there filling cups up.
Except you want to make it not a criminal offence, and much easier to get away with.
But well done on trolling an entire thread for hundreds of posts. That takes some doing.
That works both ways, and other countries could block US exports. For example Microsoft could be banned from selling Windows in the EU, as their workers work more than 35 hours a week and don't get 10 weeks vacation. And no US food exports either as it's produced with illegal Mexican labour.
Hollywood would face problems showing their films in place where the activities of their mafia-like unions would be illegal. Your theory only works based on the assumption that the US has the world's best employment conditions.