ID takes more faith which is why it fails Occam's Razor. Evolution assumes that all attributes can change given enough time, ID assumes that there is an Intelligent Designer and that he designed life. One assumption vs. at least two. Another question ID poses is "Where does that intelligent designer come from?" whereas evolution does not introduce such questions. Furthermore, evolution attempts to set up a consistent ruleset that could be used to predict future development while ID claims the rules were different back then (because there was that intelligent designer back then) and offers no way to predict future developments. While both are attempts at explaining the data that was observed, one of them requires considerably more assumptions than the other. Since there is a theoretically infinite number of ways to explain a given set of data the most simple explaination (i.e. the one introducing the fewest new rules) is the one preferred.
I think some branches of ID even claim that the intelligent designer placed fossil evidence to distract us. That's getting way too absurd. Sure, a nice topic for philosophy class but not for science.
I don't think anyone compiles a list and the first two Serious Sam games were the only major (post-386) games I remember. The rest is mostly independent games, often in 2d. Most people would stare at such a list and wonder "what are those games".
They'll probably hand out mod licenses that allow you to develop these things and run unsigned mods, those without a mod license can only run signed code.
Too powerful mods would include stuff like automation (either botting or just "automatically heal self whenm damage below threshold", "immediately trigger $skill again when the effect runs out/the reload time is up" or "use $counteraction when $action is encountered"). Not-so-powerful ones will maybe give you an extra panel or two to fill up with stuff or allow you to have a different design for the various UI elements.
Let's see... A CRT costs a couple hundred bucks, this thing costs... 6000$? Not everyone can afford that, especially when you're a hobbyist that still needs good color reproduction.
You're playing the wrong games. There are plenty of splitscreen-enabled PC games, most of them just aren't the big name ones. And since most big PC games fall into the FPS or RTS genres, seeing your opponent's screen wouldn't work, anyway.
Dunno, I didn't talk to them much. In that cavern, there are one tile sized images of the three monsters that drop transform souls on the walls. That may be only in the european version but I'm absolutely sure I saw them.
You cannot prove a theory at all, you can only find supporting evidence. Observation is NOT proving. Data cannot prove, it can merely support. A theory seeks to explain data and the more data is found that can be explained by the theory the better. But a proof has to be beyond all doubt. Mathematicians prove, other sciences (except for those derived from math like computer science) gather data and form theories to explain it.
Considering that TFT isn't suitable for color-critical work I'd say they should hurry up with that because CRTs are getting raqrer and soon you won't be able to obtain any screens with good color reproduction anymore.
Actually the only clue were the pictures on the wall in the room with the waterfall. I needed a FAQ to figure out that you have to do it from some distance, I thought it meant different recolors of those enemies and you have to equip them all or something.
No, Julius didn't have his own game. In Aria of Sorrow it's hinted that he killed Dracula in 1999, sealed his castle in a solar eclipse and lost his memory but there was no game about that part of the Castlevania story yet (I wonder how long until they decide to make one?). From the characters you can play in Julius mode, only Alucard was in a previous game (SOTN), Julius and Yoko are descendants of characters in the previous games.
I prefer the copy protection of Earth 2160. It's one of those product activation schemes but in this case it's an advantage because they've foregone any other form of protection. And it's better than Steam because it doesn't require an internet connection, especially not for subsequent starts.
If you can do it without landing in jail it's obviously not heinous, cruel or depraved. Soldiers being brought to court for that are the exception and it usually went farther than what you can do in the average WW2 FPS.
But yes, since our own (german) constitution has provisions for youth protection in the free press rights that is obviously not possible without such exceptions. And the US constitutions doesn't grant those so this law looks unconstitutional to me.
It's also that while cinemas all seem to enforce the ratings, not all game stores do. It's basically a "you do that or we do that" law. Of course, parents not reading ESRB labels is something that can't be stopped (though I still think that a plain "17+" label instead of that big M with a tiny 17+ in a corner would be more effective) and the politicians are overreacting but the basic idea that if the stores don't all enforce it (just needs one store selling M games to minors and it doesn't matter that all the others refuse to do that) the law has to is correct.
The MPAA probably revokes your license if you don't enforce the ratings, the ESRB or the ESA can't do such a thing.
I don't like LCDs. I'd buy them if they were 4:3, went up to 1280x960 or 1600x1200, had no native resolution crap (i.e. no blending/stretching issues) and proper color settings. Sure, some of that is not possible but I won't buy a screen that doesn't do all of this. Anything less than what a CRT delivers is not acceptable IMO.
Zelda 2 seemed like a nice concept but horrible (okay, not as bad as Metroid but still not very good) execution. That's a game they should try to remake and show what they can do with modern knowledge of gameplay.
It's only illegal if they claim to do otherwise. E.g. if a court show says "these cases are not staged" then it's illegal for the to show staged cases.
Slashdot Mirror
ID takes more faith which is why it fails Occam's Razor. Evolution assumes that all attributes can change given enough time, ID assumes that there is an Intelligent Designer and that he designed life. One assumption vs. at least two. Another question ID poses is "Where does that intelligent designer come from?" whereas evolution does not introduce such questions. Furthermore, evolution attempts to set up a consistent ruleset that could be used to predict future development while ID claims the rules were different back then (because there was that intelligent designer back then) and offers no way to predict future developments. While both are attempts at explaining the data that was observed, one of them requires considerably more assumptions than the other. Since there is a theoretically infinite number of ways to explain a given set of data the most simple explaination (i.e. the one introducing the fewest new rules) is the one preferred.
I think some branches of ID even claim that the intelligent designer placed fossil evidence to distract us. That's getting way too absurd. Sure, a nice topic for philosophy class but not for science.
That sounds comparable to Discordianism. Except Discordianism is funnier.
Namco has made its fair share of junk as well. Plus they're currently licensing tons of ancient franchises to turn into games.
I don't think anyone compiles a list and the first two Serious Sam games were the only major (post-386) games I remember. The rest is mostly independent games, often in 2d. Most people would stare at such a list and wonder "what are those games".
Oh, it's all fine as long as they let me watch.
They'll probably hand out mod licenses that allow you to develop these things and run unsigned mods, those without a mod license can only run signed code.
Too powerful mods would include stuff like automation (either botting or just "automatically heal self whenm damage below threshold", "immediately trigger $skill again when the effect runs out/the reload time is up" or "use $counteraction when $action is encountered"). Not-so-powerful ones will maybe give you an extra panel or two to fill up with stuff or allow you to have a different design for the various UI elements.
Don't forget Capcom. They can be very innovative when they're trying and lately they're willing to take a lot of risk to find new game ideas.
Let's see... A CRT costs a couple hundred bucks, this thing costs... 6000$? Not everyone can afford that, especially when you're a hobbyist that still needs good color reproduction.
You're playing the wrong games. There are plenty of splitscreen-enabled PC games, most of them just aren't the big name ones. And since most big PC games fall into the FPS or RTS genres, seeing your opponent's screen wouldn't work, anyway.
Dunno, I didn't talk to them much. In that cavern, there are one tile sized images of the three monsters that drop transform souls on the walls. That may be only in the european version but I'm absolutely sure I saw them.
You cannot prove a theory at all, you can only find supporting evidence. Observation is NOT proving. Data cannot prove, it can merely support. A theory seeks to explain data and the more data is found that can be explained by the theory the better. But a proof has to be beyond all doubt. Mathematicians prove, other sciences (except for those derived from math like computer science) gather data and form theories to explain it.
I've got an ancient 386 notebook with an LED display, it's monochrome, though.
Considering that TFT isn't suitable for color-critical work I'd say they should hurry up with that because CRTs are getting raqrer and soon you won't be able to obtain any screens with good color reproduction anymore.
I know a lot of take-away Pizzerias.
Not all characters in JUMP are playable, I'd hate to have to scroll through a menu in the heat of the battle to spawn that little medic monkey.
Actually the only clue were the pictures on the wall in the room with the waterfall. I needed a FAQ to figure out that you have to do it from some distance, I thought it meant different recolors of those enemies and you have to equip them all or something.
No, Julius didn't have his own game. In Aria of Sorrow it's hinted that he killed Dracula in 1999, sealed his castle in a solar eclipse and lost his memory but there was no game about that part of the Castlevania story yet (I wonder how long until they decide to make one?). From the characters you can play in Julius mode, only Alucard was in a previous game (SOTN), Julius and Yoko are descendants of characters in the previous games.
I have my doubts whether bosses like Abaddon, Bat Company and Menace would have been possible on the GBA.
I've stopped consuming CDs because my doctor said my stomach doesn't like it!
I prefer the copy protection of Earth 2160. It's one of those product activation schemes but in this case it's an advantage because they've foregone any other form of protection. And it's better than Steam because it doesn't require an internet connection, especially not for subsequent starts.
If you can do it without landing in jail it's obviously not heinous, cruel or depraved. Soldiers being brought to court for that are the exception and it usually went farther than what you can do in the average WW2 FPS.
But yes, since our own (german) constitution has provisions for youth protection in the free press rights that is obviously not possible without such exceptions. And the US constitutions doesn't grant those so this law looks unconstitutional to me.
It's also that while cinemas all seem to enforce the ratings, not all game stores do. It's basically a "you do that or we do that" law. Of course, parents not reading ESRB labels is something that can't be stopped (though I still think that a plain "17+" label instead of that big M with a tiny 17+ in a corner would be more effective) and the politicians are overreacting but the basic idea that if the stores don't all enforce it (just needs one store selling M games to minors and it doesn't matter that all the others refuse to do that) the law has to is correct.
The MPAA probably revokes your license if you don't enforce the ratings, the ESRB or the ESA can't do such a thing.
I don't like LCDs. I'd buy them if they were 4:3, went up to 1280x960 or 1600x1200, had no native resolution crap (i.e. no blending/stretching issues) and proper color settings. Sure, some of that is not possible but I won't buy a screen that doesn't do all of this. Anything less than what a CRT delivers is not acceptable IMO.
Zelda 2 seemed like a nice concept but horrible (okay, not as bad as Metroid but still not very good) execution. That's a game they should try to remake and show what they can do with modern knowledge of gameplay.
It's only illegal if they claim to do otherwise. E.g. if a court show says "these cases are not staged" then it's illegal for the to show staged cases.