That meat is rotten. I wouldn't even feed it to maggots. Burnout was fun -- for the first two hours. Then it became boring and repetitive. Like a good DJ, 'characters,' 'story,' or 'originality' mix in a new track when the song runs out.
I'm a fan of story in games, but some games just plain don't need one, and in fact including one can even be counterproductive. Burnout is definitely one such game.
the game has deep flaws; not much of a story, a few racial stereotypes, and somewhat unsatisfying boss fights marr the experience.
And still gets a three out of five? What the fuck?
Even in this case, how is it a direct violation of the first amendment to impose standard fines for stores selling to minors?
1. Minors can still obtain the product through a guardian.
2. The product itself is not restricted from production.
It's a violation because the state has no compelling interest in regulating what games Junior plays. The right, responsibility, and ability to do that belong solely to the kid's parents.
First ammendment allows artistic expression but it does not ensure you profit from that expression. Nor does it generally force other people to support your idea financially
That's irrelevant, as nobody is making such a claim.
And don't give me the "Chilling effect" response...
Why not? It has been accepted as valid in court, and your preemptive attempt to exclude it from the discussion provides no reason why it shouldn't continue to be.
Kid's can't drive. They can't vote. They can't buy or consume alcohol. They can't go to R rated movies. They can't buy cigarettes. Do I need to go on?
<nitpick>In the case of the R rated movies, "can't" != "illegal". Minors are forbidden from entering said movies by voluntary theatre policy, not the law.</nitpick>
Well, it's technically true that you don't actually need the Player's Handbook per se, but the portions of the SRD that you do need are equivalent to the PHB in rules content. Therefore, I stopped just short of saying that you don't even need the one book, since you do in fact need it in one form or the other.
Before it was a simple game now theres like 75 books you have to buy if you want to understand the rules.
If by "75" you mean "between one and three", sure. The Player's Handbook is the only "required" book. The DM's Guide and Monster Manual make things easier but are not strictly necessary - you can run a perfectly good game without them. Everything else is purely optional. This, by the way, is exactly how it was in the older editions, so nothing has changed in that respect.
Also, the rules in 3rd Edition are actually a lot simpler, saner, and more streamlined than in 1st or 2nd.
Fact: The US Federal Government is out of control. Fact: They can justify anything they want at any time. Fact: If you notice it you will either be sent on a 5150 as "paranoid", shipped off to Gitmo, or you will meet a brick wall of denial.
Fact: The only economically viable solution is complete and utter dismantling of the Federal Government. Failure to do so will inevitably result in pi55ing off someone who _is_ crazy enough to start a real war or execute a series, not just one, but a whole string of 9/11 style strategic attacks.
Opinions: 2
Unsupported Assertions: 3
Facts: 0
Knock it off with the "Fact:" crap. You're not helping.
The term for that is "at will", not "right to work". "Right to work" is shorthand for laws protecting non-union employees, such as forbidding an employer from making union membership a condition of employment.
...and it does not have climate control, protection against radiation, chemical, biological or telekenetic attacks.
Holy shit, the insurgents are recruiting psychics now?
Ten million I could see, because your calculations need to account for inflation and we also seem to be assuming retirement at an early age where you can expect to live for several more decades.
Fifty million, on the other hand, seems pretty crazy.
If their parents don't have a problem with it, then the parent can easily purchase the game for their child.
And if they do have a problem with it, then guess what? They can sodding well do their own parenting. They neither need nor deserve the government's assistance in making sure little Jimmy isn't playing Zombie Teabaggers 4.
Also, the "advice" proffered by the PA strip was in fact satirizing the "it doesn't affect me personally so it's OK" attitude people tend to have regarding onerous legislation like this.
A politician with the honesty of Bill Clinton, the dashing presence of Michael Dukakis, the sexy charisma of Hubert Humphrey, the commanding stature of Joseph Lieberman, the popularity of Gray Davis, the humble background of John D. Rockefeller, the down-home charm of John Kerry, the electoral experience of Pat Robertson, the honesty of Dan Rostenkowski, and the huge following of Dennis Kucinich!
And the streamlined verbal economy of Crow T. Trollbot!
What makes a violent video game incomparable to an 'R' rated movie or sexually explicit material (which both cannot be sold to minors)?
I fail to see why video games are placed in an untouchable category regarding law when other media and substances like alcohol have strict age limits.
You are wrong. An R-rated movie can in fact be legally sold to minors. Most stores have policies against doing so (just as they do against selling M-rated games to minors), but no law forbids it.
So you're saying that because Clinton signed that act, that the Republicans are the party of gay people?
I'm not saying that, or anything even remotely like it.
Also, that was signed just over ten years ago through a republican senate and congress (I think they were both republican at the time, but I'm not sure).
That the law was passed by a Republican Congress does nothing to detract from the fact that it was signed into law by a Democrat. Both parties were eager, as they are now, to put people's rights on the chopping block for the sake of popularity.
Probably giving you too much credit, but I'll operate under the extremely generous assumption that you're trying to be serious and not just trolling to make Libertarians look bad.
What a way to debate the points...
What points? You made a broad assertion and failed to support it.
, oh wait you were just trolling for the Republicrats and Democans.
Pointing out a logical fallacy != trolling.
This demonstrates you want an intrusive, activist government to take our rights and money at gunpoint. As such you have no room to complain, you ASKED FOR THIS!!!
Check the sig, kiddo. My post history too, while you're at it. I've never voted Democrat or Republican. In fact I usually do vote Libertarian. That doesn't mean I won't call bullshit when it happens to come from one.
Not that there's a shred of validity to this particular suit, but the idea behind Big Numbers(TM) in civil suits is primarily to punish the offender with a major financial loss, not necessarily to imply that a dead person is worth $X.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a fan of story in games, but some games just plain don't need one, and in fact including one can even be counterproductive. Burnout is definitely one such game.
"Marr" != "Ruin"
Only because there aren't any mailboxes in City of Heroes.
In the same sense that your house is a cave with windows, yes.
That's irrelevant, as nobody is making such a claim.
Why not? It has been accepted as valid in court, and your preemptive attempt to exclude it from the discussion provides no reason why it shouldn't continue to be.
<nitpick>In the case of the R rated movies, "can't" != "illegal". Minors are forbidden from entering said movies by voluntary theatre policy, not the law.</nitpick>
Well, it's technically true that you don't actually need the Player's Handbook per se, but the portions of the SRD that you do need are equivalent to the PHB in rules content. Therefore, I stopped just short of saying that you don't even need the one book, since you do in fact need it in one form or the other.
If by "75" you mean "between one and three", sure. The Player's Handbook is the only "required" book. The DM's Guide and Monster Manual make things easier but are not strictly necessary - you can run a perfectly good game without them. Everything else is purely optional. This, by the way, is exactly how it was in the older editions, so nothing has changed in that respect.
Also, the rules in 3rd Edition are actually a lot simpler, saner, and more streamlined than in 1st or 2nd.
It's both*. The two are not mutually exclusive.
It's not really free speech unless you get to say the bad shit too.
* Or rather, it's both freedom of speech AND (a hateful lie OR a spectacular act of stupidity);
Opinions: 2
Unsupported Assertions: 3
Facts: 0
Knock it off with the "Fact:" crap. You're not helping.
The term for that is "at will", not "right to work". "Right to work" is shorthand for laws protecting non-union employees, such as forbidding an employer from making union membership a condition of employment.
Fixed for accuracy.
Hyperbole, this is argoff. Argoff, hyperbole. Oh, I see you two already know each other!
...and it does not have climate control, protection against radiation, chemical, biological or telekenetic attacks.Holy shit, the insurgents are recruiting psychics now?
Fifty million, on the other hand, seems pretty crazy.
And if they do have a problem with it, then guess what? They can sodding well do their own parenting. They neither need nor deserve the government's assistance in making sure little Jimmy isn't playing Zombie Teabaggers 4.
Also, the "advice" proffered by the PA strip was in fact satirizing the "it doesn't affect me personally so it's OK" attitude people tend to have regarding onerous legislation like this.
And the streamlined verbal economy of Crow T. Trollbot!
You are wrong. An R-rated movie can in fact be legally sold to minors. Most stores have policies against doing so (just as they do against selling M-rated games to minors), but no law forbids it.
Which is why Bill Clinton signed the Defense Of Marriage Act?
Hint: The games themselves are not what it's about.
Yes it is.
The right and responsibility to decide what games little Billy can buy belongs solely to his parents.
The right and responsibility to protect the integrity of the ESRB ratings belongs solely to the ESRB.
The government has no business interfering in either.
Not that there's a shred of validity to this particular suit, but the idea behind Big Numbers(TM) in civil suits is primarily to punish the offender with a major financial loss, not necessarily to imply that a dead person is worth $X.
I stress "idea", obviously.
Ah, false dichotomy. Where would we be without you?
Oh, I'm sure they have more pressing things to worry about than a little joke.