Oh your pity! Ok, mea culpa, I didn't RTFA. If you assumed they were going to be burning the hydrogen, you should have said so. (Fuel cells are more efficient than burning) If the article said that steam reformation would be cheapest, oops, didn't read that. But the fact that natural gas is currently the cheapest way to make hydrogen (and remember cost never takes into account environmental costs) will hopefully change in the future. And where did I say that I have a hydrogen utopia hidden somewhere?
As for hating you, I was being flippant, but now that you called me stupid I am starting to dislkie you. Oh well, article's getting old anyhoo.
This is wrong in a couple of ways. First, while cracking hydrocarbons is a way of getting hydrogen, whether it is the cheapest way is debatable. Certainly you can't crack hydrogen from hydrocarbons with home electricity like you can with water.
Your assertion about NOx formation is wrong too. Atmospheric Nitrogen is very stable. In your car, NOx is formed by burning Nitrogen at very high temperatures in the cylinder. NOx would only form in a hydrogen-car engine that is BURNING hydrogen with oxygen. A fuel cell using an ion membrane does not burn anything, and thus does not create NOx.
Lastly, I believe a post above yours mentioned an ingenious cold-storage tank using Nickel to increase carrying capacity a thousandfold. In conclusion, you are wrong and I hate you.
I've repeatedly said that Bethseda is a company with a good track record, who are practically doing you die-hard fans a favor by picking up Fallout. I then noted you were bashing Morrowind, which is stupid because Bethseda is done with Morrowind, and will surely make Fallout differently.
So you come back by bashing Morrowind. Touche.
(and somehow get modded interesting)
I was going to make a tit-for-tat response to your last post, but your comparison of Neverwinter Nights and Morrowind was so irrelevant I couldn't really get a handle on it.
So here's my point. Bethesda has picked up Fallout. Bethesda is a company that has a strong record in role playing games. Before Bethesda picked Fallout up, it was going down with Interplay. Now Fallout 3 will finally be made, by a solid, respected, and well-financed company. You should take a good look at yourselves and wonder why you are complaining about this.
And I just can't help but be annoyed by your evaluation of Morrowind. Just repetitive combat? Are you retarded? If I wanted complicated combat I would have bought Tekken 4. Could it be, you know, the role playing part that got so many people hooked?
So... Fallout's random encounters in the desert were bad too?
Also, I find it amusing that the article mentioned Morrowind's plot being too narrow, and here you say it's too scattered. Though I'm inclined to agree with you on that point.
I'm just posting around here trying to get people to remember that Morrowind isn't the ONLY game Bethesda is capable of making. I think that the interview showed that Bethesda actually wants to make a game with a focused plot and defined characters, which is why they purchased the franchise.
Okay, sorry about the typo. But seriously, you're just proving my point by bashing Morrowind. Morrowind is not Fallout. Saying it over and over doesn't make it Morrowind's failure. And making Morrowind, which is not a Fallout game, does not somehow render Bethesda unable to make a Fallout game.
"Bethseda specializes in 'Roll' Playing, which is not much more then[sic] combat."
If you thought Morrowind was about combat I can see your disappointment, since the combat system is pretty basic.
It's so sad to see a fan base become this bitter. In the article and in the posts here, all you see is complaining about Bethseda and even bashing Morrowind (wtf? awesome game)
Come on guys, remember where Fallout 3 was BEFORE this press release? Nowhere. You have a beloved franchise owned by a failing company who are NEVER going to be able to do anything with. Then, lo and behold, it's swooped up by a respectable, wealthy company that - gasp - specializes in roll playing games! What is your response? Jubilation? Praise? or... whining. Yeah.
Bethseda software, winners of a bajillion awards for Morrowind, swimming in cash, with another hit game due to come out soon, picks it up - and all you can do is bitch about camera angles?
So, what I'm hearing is, you think those games are great and all, but you want them on the original release date. So I suppose it might not have mattered to you had Half Life 2 been released in fall 2003 with less than one playable level.
Would you like a playable game?
No no no, I'm being obtuse, you say. You want the game playable AND on time. Right. Well, in THAT case I suppose those game developers should have gone back in time and changed the original release date. Or maybe slipped in and extra month or two in spring, maybe, I dunno, Thermidor or April 2 to get that done for you on time.
Oh, they can't do that? Why not? REALITY INTERVENES. Which is why they had to push back the date.
Oh, and BTW, what do you do about this injustice? Bitch about it on Slashdot. Stick it to the man!
Yes, well, that's nice. Ta ta then. I trust I won't see you posting here anymore. Or anywhere else on the internet for that matter.
Sarcasm aside, grow a thicker skin or get off my internet. If you break your monical in horror every time you see bias in a site like this, you should probably invest in a fallout shelter to relocate to, permanently.
The TV versions of Dune and Children of Dune were terrible translations of the books. Where did you get the idea that they were good? Their only distinction is that they didn't suck as bad as the De Laurentis film.
I haven't seen either in more than a year, so it's hard for me to write a critique right now. Anyone else have a reason why the Dune miniseries sucked?
EQ will only consume your bank account if you can't afford an extra ~$20 charge a month. If you can't afford to spend $20 every month on your favorite thing, whether it be Chinese takeout or EQ, then you really should be looking at the problems in your life instead of blaming Everquest.
I actually never played through all of the original, I just watched the movies! I played part of the original game as a nostalgia trip and realized how dated it was.
NOD's story is cool if you want to see yourself rise through the ranks, and see Kane's devious global media malipulation first hand.
GDI's story, in my opinion, is more fun, because you get these awesome "oh crap" moments, as GDI loses funding and support, and Kane penetrates your command structure to a frightening degree. I won't give you specific spoilers, but be prepared for surprises.
C&C had better full motion video than most of the games that came after it. Still, I can't get over "Comrade Stalin, you like the tea? I made it myself." *shiver*
Don't be too hard on yourself. The brain has a terrible penchant for recognizing patterns, even if you deem such patterns to be below your understanding. Give yourself a pat on the occipital lobe.
The original C&C was innovative for its day, but the gameplay is, by modern standards, slow and without variety. Play it for its storyline, the movies are quite good. Kane is a badass, it cannot be denied.
C&C: Red Alert has dated graphics, but the gameplay is still surprisingly solid. Play as the Soviets, you'll be rewarded with excellent cutscenes courtesy of Comrade Stalin.
C&C: Tiberian Sun does not significantly advance the series' graphics, despite being 4 years newer than RA. Surprise! You may or may not like the gameplay; I remember it as disappointing. The cutscenes have high production values, and try really hard to be good, but they don't stack up to Red Alert. James Earl Jones.
Red Alert 2 is what you'll probably end up playing. It is divorced from the rest of the C&C games in art direction and storyline: it is cartoony and takes Red Alert's premise, then makes a completely different story out of it. The gameplay is spot on though, lots of options in armor and infantry, elite units, upgrades and promotions, fun superweapons, etc. The cutscenes are more tongue-in-cheek than the other games, their characters are humorous caricatures of previous C&C characters. You'll defintely laugh at at least one point.
RA2 also has an excellent expansion pack with an entirely new playable army and three campaigns; the other games have expansions, but they are really mission packs.
Most people consider this type of "ninja micro" more of an annoyance than a feature. Ultimately, without some new UI ideas for the past few years, game developers run into a wall while putting complexity in the game.
There comes a point when players have so many options, which the AI also has to use to seem realistic, that they just can't keep up in clicks per second. Hotkeys help, but in a game like Rome: Total War, you really have to allow the player to pause the game in order to use the options you've given them to greatest effect.
Of course, in real battles, there's no way in hell you can order a tank out of the way of an oncoming shell. It just can't be done. It takes suspension of disblief to even think that you can order individual soldiers around at all. In a real war this obviously wouldn't work. Squad based combat is the way to go. Unfortunately GC II took that out. Sad.
I think you meant waning when you said waxing. I suggest you look outside "modern" RTS games right now. Rome: Total War looks like an excellent game, and there are always a number of smaller publishers looking to fill the current vacuum in RTS now that Warcraft 3 is getting old.
I was also dissapointed in Dawn of War. The campaign left me indifferent, and my college intranet's high fluctuation in usage, and thus ping rate, leaves me unable to play online most of the time. Also, the game was unbalanced out the door, not to bash relic because balancing 4 completely different races is hard, but many players have sworn it off until the 1.1 patch comes out.
You are a general for X group. An unidentified voice tells you your enemies are in X, doing X, and you must kill them all to accomplish X. This continues throughout ALL THREE campaigns until the game is over.
There are NO characters, other than your special commando guys who never talk to you except to acknowledge your commands. Even the weak string of objectives that make up the "story" are boring and pretty much recycled from earlier C&C games. Blow up X with my commando guy? Wow, didn't I do this 8 years ago in "One Magic Bullet"?
At least the travesty that was Tiberian Dawn had actual characters and cool computer systems with decent voice acting. Although the gameplay and graphics were inexcusable for its era, I at least cared about doing CABAL's evil bidding. They had James Earl Jones, so they were at least trying.
The last time around there was no story, no characters, and no new gameplay. Why would EA, of all people, pick now as the time to create a decent game?
Just to be an annoying nagger, I'm going to point out that 1st person view doesn't upset the balance of fluid within your inner ears, but rather causes nausea as the brain gets "confused" attempting to reconcile conflicting information from the eyes and inner ears.
Slashdot Mirror
You are the god of trolls. I salute you.
Wrong! Next please.
(90% of everything is pirated in big Chinese cities)
Oh your pity! Ok, mea culpa, I didn't RTFA. If you assumed they were going to be burning the hydrogen, you should have said so. (Fuel cells are more efficient than burning) If the article said that steam reformation would be cheapest, oops, didn't read that. But the fact that natural gas is currently the cheapest way to make hydrogen (and remember cost never takes into account environmental costs) will hopefully change in the future. And where did I say that I have a hydrogen utopia hidden somewhere?
As for hating you, I was being flippant, but now that you called me stupid I am starting to dislkie you. Oh well, article's getting old anyhoo.
This is wrong in a couple of ways. First, while cracking hydrocarbons is a way of getting hydrogen, whether it is the cheapest way is debatable. Certainly you can't crack hydrogen from hydrocarbons with home electricity like you can with water.
Your assertion about NOx formation is wrong too. Atmospheric Nitrogen is very stable. In your car, NOx is formed by burning Nitrogen at very high temperatures in the cylinder. NOx would only form in a hydrogen-car engine that is BURNING hydrogen with oxygen. A fuel cell using an ion membrane does not burn anything, and thus does not create NOx.
Lastly, I believe a post above yours mentioned an ingenious cold-storage tank using Nickel to increase carrying capacity a thousandfold. In conclusion, you are wrong and I hate you.
Okay, where to begin with this...
I've repeatedly said that Bethseda is a company with a good track record, who are practically doing you die-hard fans a favor by picking up Fallout. I then noted you were bashing Morrowind, which is stupid because Bethseda is done with Morrowind, and will surely make Fallout differently.
So you come back by bashing Morrowind. Touche.
(and somehow get modded interesting)
I was going to make a tit-for-tat response to your last post, but your comparison of Neverwinter Nights and Morrowind was so irrelevant I couldn't really get a handle on it.
So here's my point. Bethesda has picked up Fallout. Bethesda is a company that has a strong record in role playing games. Before Bethesda picked Fallout up, it was going down with Interplay. Now Fallout 3 will finally be made, by a solid, respected, and well-financed company. You should take a good look at yourselves and wonder why you are complaining about this.
And I just can't help but be annoyed by your evaluation of Morrowind. Just repetitive combat? Are you retarded? If I wanted complicated combat I would have bought Tekken 4. Could it be, you know, the role playing part that got so many people hooked?
So... Fallout's random encounters in the desert were bad too?
Also, I find it amusing that the article mentioned Morrowind's plot being too narrow, and here you say it's too scattered. Though I'm inclined to agree with you on that point.
I'm just posting around here trying to get people to remember that Morrowind isn't the ONLY game Bethesda is capable of making. I think that the interview showed that Bethesda actually wants to make a game with a focused plot and defined characters, which is why they purchased the franchise.
Okay, sorry about the typo. But seriously, you're just proving my point by bashing Morrowind. Morrowind is not Fallout. Saying it over and over doesn't make it Morrowind's failure. And making Morrowind, which is not a Fallout game, does not somehow render Bethesda unable to make a Fallout game.
"Bethseda specializes in 'Roll' Playing, which is not much more then[sic] combat."
If you thought Morrowind was about combat I can see your disappointment, since the combat system is pretty basic.
It's so sad to see a fan base become this bitter. In the article and in the posts here, all you see is complaining about Bethseda and even bashing Morrowind (wtf? awesome game)
Come on guys, remember where Fallout 3 was BEFORE this press release? Nowhere. You have a beloved franchise owned by a failing company who are NEVER going to be able to do anything with. Then, lo and behold, it's swooped up by a respectable, wealthy company that - gasp - specializes in roll playing games! What is your response? Jubilation? Praise? or... whining. Yeah.
Bethseda software, winners of a bajillion awards for Morrowind, swimming in cash, with another hit game due to come out soon, picks it up - and all you can do is bitch about camera angles?
Where do you get these lovable cranks? Not even 100 comments and already I've read a dozen odd rantings:
Wireless power is stupid and gives you cancer and you have to plug it into the wall anyway! Take that Faraday!
So, what I'm hearing is, you think those games are great and all, but you want them on the original release date. So I suppose it might not have mattered to you had Half Life 2 been released in fall 2003 with less than one playable level.
Would you like a playable game?
No no no, I'm being obtuse, you say. You want the game playable AND on time. Right. Well, in THAT case I suppose those game developers should have gone back in time and changed the original release date. Or maybe slipped in and extra month or two in spring, maybe, I dunno, Thermidor or April 2 to get that done for you on time.
Oh, they can't do that? Why not? REALITY INTERVENES. Which is why they had to push back the date.
Oh, and BTW, what do you do about this injustice? Bitch about it on Slashdot. Stick it to the man!
That's 32 gigabits per cell. The article seems to indicate that a Flash drive is composed of multiple flash cells.
Internet geeks argue the existance of the soul. Results inconclusive. Full story at 11.
You know, that is exactly what I said to the FBI, but they wouldn't listen to reason!
Yes, well, that's nice. Ta ta then. I trust I won't see you posting here anymore. Or anywhere else on the internet for that matter.
Sarcasm aside, grow a thicker skin or get off my internet. If you break your monical in horror every time you see bias in a site like this, you should probably invest in a fallout shelter to relocate to, permanently.
The TV versions of Dune and Children of Dune were terrible translations of the books. Where did you get the idea that they were good? Their only distinction is that they didn't suck as bad as the De Laurentis film.
I haven't seen either in more than a year, so it's hard for me to write a critique right now. Anyone else have a reason why the Dune miniseries sucked?
EQ will only consume your bank account if you can't afford an extra ~$20 charge a month. If you can't afford to spend $20 every month on your favorite thing, whether it be Chinese takeout or EQ, then you really should be looking at the problems in your life instead of blaming Everquest.
I actually never played through all of the original, I just watched the movies! I played part of the original game as a nostalgia trip and realized how dated it was.
NOD's story is cool if you want to see yourself rise through the ranks, and see Kane's devious global media malipulation first hand.
GDI's story, in my opinion, is more fun, because you get these awesome "oh crap" moments, as GDI loses funding and support, and Kane penetrates your command structure to a frightening degree. I won't give you specific spoilers, but be prepared for surprises.
C&C had better full motion video than most of the games that came after it. Still, I can't get over "Comrade Stalin, you like the tea? I made it myself." *shiver*
I get those two names mixed up all the time. I think you know what I meant. I obviously indicated a difference between the two.
Don't be too hard on yourself. The brain has a terrible penchant for recognizing patterns, even if you deem such patterns to be below your understanding. Give yourself a pat on the occipital lobe.
The original C&C was innovative for its day, but the gameplay is, by modern standards, slow and without variety. Play it for its storyline, the movies are quite good. Kane is a badass, it cannot be denied.
C&C: Red Alert has dated graphics, but the gameplay is still surprisingly solid. Play as the Soviets, you'll be rewarded with excellent cutscenes courtesy of Comrade Stalin.
C&C: Tiberian Sun does not significantly advance the series' graphics, despite being 4 years newer than RA. Surprise! You may or may not like the gameplay; I remember it as disappointing. The cutscenes have high production values, and try really hard to be good, but they don't stack up to Red Alert. James Earl Jones.
Red Alert 2 is what you'll probably end up playing. It is divorced from the rest of the C&C games in art direction and storyline: it is cartoony and takes Red Alert's premise, then makes a completely different story out of it. The gameplay is spot on though, lots of options in armor and infantry, elite units, upgrades and promotions, fun superweapons, etc. The cutscenes are more tongue-in-cheek than the other games, their characters are humorous caricatures of previous C&C characters. You'll defintely laugh at at least one point.
RA2 also has an excellent expansion pack with an entirely new playable army and three campaigns; the other games have expansions, but they are really mission packs.
Most people consider this type of "ninja micro" more of an annoyance than a feature. Ultimately, without some new UI ideas for the past few years, game developers run into a wall while putting complexity in the game.
There comes a point when players have so many options, which the AI also has to use to seem realistic, that they just can't keep up in clicks per second. Hotkeys help, but in a game like Rome: Total War, you really have to allow the player to pause the game in order to use the options you've given them to greatest effect.
Of course, in real battles, there's no way in hell you can order a tank out of the way of an oncoming shell. It just can't be done. It takes suspension of disblief to even think that you can order individual soldiers around at all. In a real war this obviously wouldn't work. Squad based combat is the way to go. Unfortunately GC II took that out. Sad.
I think you meant waning when you said waxing. I suggest you look outside "modern" RTS games right now. Rome: Total War looks like an excellent game, and there are always a number of smaller publishers looking to fill the current vacuum in RTS now that Warcraft 3 is getting old.
I was also dissapointed in Dawn of War. The campaign left me indifferent, and my college intranet's high fluctuation in usage, and thus ping rate, leaves me unable to play online most of the time. Also, the game was unbalanced out the door, not to bash relic because balancing 4 completely different races is hard, but many players have sworn it off until the 1.1 patch comes out.
Story? What story? The story was:
You are a general for X group. An unidentified voice tells you your enemies are in X, doing X, and you must kill them all to accomplish X. This continues throughout ALL THREE campaigns until the game is over.
There are NO characters, other than your special commando guys who never talk to you except to acknowledge your commands. Even the weak string of objectives that make up the "story" are boring and pretty much recycled from earlier C&C games.
Blow up X with my commando guy? Wow, didn't I do this 8 years ago in "One Magic Bullet"?
At least the travesty that was Tiberian Dawn had actual characters and cool computer systems with decent voice acting. Although the gameplay and graphics were inexcusable for its era, I at least cared about doing CABAL's evil bidding. They had James Earl Jones, so they were at least trying.
The last time around there was no story, no characters, and no new gameplay. Why would EA, of all people, pick now as the time to create a decent game?
Just to be an annoying nagger, I'm going to point out that 1st person view doesn't upset the balance of fluid within your inner ears, but rather causes nausea as the brain gets "confused" attempting to reconcile conflicting information from the eyes and inner ears.
Great history skills, but I noticed something funny about your post. Lots of bing hoopy things. Remember that "of" is not capitalized in titles.