We're talking about gravity on a galactic scale dumbass, not here on earth.
Once you get out past a certian distance gravity would be too weak to have an effect on distant objects.
And example I've seen is this. put a dot on a piece of paper, that is our sun, now put another dot on another piece of paper 3 miles away, that is the distance to the next closest star to ours. Now think of that on the scale of our sun and you can see why gravity would have no effect at that distance.
and how are you so sure that this is so wrong?
what conclusive proof is there of that fact. in fact the current Electrical Universe theory makes far more sense than the gravity-based model. Seeing as how astronomers have had to invent black holes, dark matter, dark energy and many other exotic particles just to make their theory fit, while the electric universe thoery can explain events without making up some bizarre matter, I'm personally more inclined to go with them.
Well even if everyone and their dog had m16's, the government force is still going to be backed by tanks/planes/boats wtf-ever else they would normally have logistically. So if it came down to guns you're modern-day revolution is going to get stomped anyways.
What I was disagreeing with is that guns need to be freely available to the every day person. There are so many examples of where controlling access to guns reduces violent crimes drastically.
In a modern democratic country it would be damn near impossible for a tyrant to even get close to taking power away from the government. We have all these nifty modern things like tv and the internet where dissemination of information is near-instantaneous and nearly impossible to control. We have laws upon laws to prevent that from happening.
That said, this will not hold for countries that are already run by tyrants or dictators or countries going through political turmoil, but for established and stable democracies there is no need for everyone to be armed.
I hear they have these things called passwords, word on the street is, if you put one of those on a game you create only the people you give it to can get in.
And what exactly is wrong with sequels, as long as they move the story forward?
Why are people so hung up on sequels to story based games. For games like madden XXXX and FIFA XXXX where they are basically just tacking on the latest stats yeah that sucks, but a game like HL2 it can still be innovative even though it is a sequel.
See...for me 2D games are easy. It takes me about 2 seconds to see the patterns in their movement so there really isn't any challenge to those games for me and they get very repetative and boring for me very fast. That being said it's very hard for me to get into any kind of story for those games cause frankly it's either extremely lame or non-existant to begin with.
So now I've moved on to the realm of 3D games. Yes there are lots of purely crap games and yes they can be easier than some 2D games, but there are many new possibilies that open up with 3D. Most obvious of all is physics. Right now most games are just using physics as a gimmick or eye-candy of a sort, but there will come a time I believe they will soon become an integral part of game mechanincs.
Why do I prefer 3D games to 2D ones? Because they can have a decent story mainly. Now I realise they are not going to have oscar-quality writing but then again half the movies that win oscars are pure shit anyways. For me if the story is enough to entertain me I'm happy, as long as it's presented well enough and the game doesn't have any horrific glaring bugs.
I have a vision of where I think games should go in the next 5-10 years but who really knows what will happen. I do think that we will hit a plateau as far as graphics go within the next 5 years, where the improvements past that point will be incremental and games will have to focus on other areas to differentiate themselves from the rest.
Thankfully Dr. Boll-o-shit has absolutely nothing to do with the Silent Hill movie. I can't remember who is directing it but from what I saw of the filming it looks like it may be a pretty decent conversion.
I think we should actually be seeing a trailer relatively soon.
It's called electricity. And the reason that we can't detect it is that most of the current scientific community is far too attatched to the theory that gravity is the major force in the galaxy, and they refuse to acknowledge any other possibility.
Really, M$ said that the original XBOX was going to be DirectX9 compatible, have a unified shader system and be based on an ATI card that wouldn't be out for 3 years...have a link?
I rent more than I buy. There are many games out there that are great to play through once or twice, but are fairly short and/or don't have multiplayer. So I just rent them for like $10-15 for like a week instead of the $70-80 to buy them that they normally are up here.
That said I only own 1 game currently for my xbox but I have rented and enjoyed far more games on my xbox than I ever did on my ps2.
Slashdot Mirror
We're talking about gravity on a galactic scale dumbass, not here on earth. Once you get out past a certian distance gravity would be too weak to have an effect on distant objects. And example I've seen is this. put a dot on a piece of paper, that is our sun, now put another dot on another piece of paper 3 miles away, that is the distance to the next closest star to ours. Now think of that on the scale of our sun and you can see why gravity would have no effect at that distance.
Uh...there already are. And many have proven to be accurate where current theories have not.
and how are you so sure that this is so wrong? what conclusive proof is there of that fact. in fact the current Electrical Universe theory makes far more sense than the gravity-based model. Seeing as how astronomers have had to invent black holes, dark matter, dark energy and many other exotic particles just to make their theory fit, while the electric universe thoery can explain events without making up some bizarre matter, I'm personally more inclined to go with them.
Well even if everyone and their dog had m16's, the government force is still going to be backed by tanks/planes/boats wtf-ever else they would normally have logistically. So if it came down to guns you're modern-day revolution is going to get stomped anyways.
What I was disagreeing with is that guns need to be freely available to the every day person. There are so many examples of where controlling access to guns reduces violent crimes drastically.
In a modern democratic country it would be damn near impossible for a tyrant to even get close to taking power away from the government. We have all these nifty modern things like tv and the internet where dissemination of information is near-instantaneous and nearly impossible to control. We have laws upon laws to prevent that from happening.
That said, this will not hold for countries that are already run by tyrants or dictators or countries going through political turmoil, but for established and stable democracies there is no need for everyone to be armed.
If it keeps him from making any more horrendous movies I'm all for it.
I hear they have these things called passwords, word on the street is, if you put one of those on a game you create only the people you give it to can get in.
Crazy I know but there it is.
Ummmmmmm....NO.
And what exactly is wrong with sequels, as long as they move the story forward? Why are people so hung up on sequels to story based games. For games like madden XXXX and FIFA XXXX where they are basically just tacking on the latest stats yeah that sucks, but a game like HL2 it can still be innovative even though it is a sequel.
Beyond Good & Evil is probably one of the best games I have played in the past 5 years and the most tragically underrated as well.
See...for me 2D games are easy. It takes me about 2 seconds to see the patterns in their movement so there really isn't any challenge to those games for me and they get very repetative and boring for me very fast. That being said it's very hard for me to get into any kind of story for those games cause frankly it's either extremely lame or non-existant to begin with.
So now I've moved on to the realm of 3D games. Yes there are lots of purely crap games and yes they can be easier than some 2D games, but there are many new possibilies that open up with 3D. Most obvious of all is physics. Right now most games are just using physics as a gimmick or eye-candy of a sort, but there will come a time I believe they will soon become an integral part of game mechanincs.
Why do I prefer 3D games to 2D ones? Because they can have a decent story mainly. Now I realise they are not going to have oscar-quality writing but then again half the movies that win oscars are pure shit anyways. For me if the story is enough to entertain me I'm happy, as long as it's presented well enough and the game doesn't have any horrific glaring bugs.
I have a vision of where I think games should go in the next 5-10 years but who really knows what will happen. I do think that we will hit a plateau as far as graphics go within the next 5 years, where the improvements past that point will be incremental and games will have to focus on other areas to differentiate themselves from the rest.
WWW.EVE-ONLINE.COM
This game is essentially run by the players, the devs just releaase new content periodically and the players have at it.
Thankfully Dr. Boll-o-shit has absolutely nothing to do with the Silent Hill movie. I can't remember who is directing it but from what I saw of the filming it looks like it may be a pretty decent conversion.
I think we should actually be seeing a trailer relatively soon.
Nine-Hundred and Ninety Nine perhaps?
Wow 30% income tax? must be nice, we've got around 50% income tax plus 15% sales/service tax.
Upside is we don't have to pay extra for healthcare but it's still a lot to pay.
Instead they just invent things to satisfy their ever-more-convoluted theories. i.e. black holes, dark matter, dark energy.
It's called electricity. And the reason that we can't detect it is that most of the current scientific community is far too attatched to the theory that gravity is the major force in the galaxy, and they refuse to acknowledge any other possibility.
check this link for more info: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/
and this one for even more: http://www.thunderbolts.info/
Really, M$ said that the original XBOX was going to be DirectX9 compatible, have a unified shader system and be based on an ATI card that wouldn't be out for 3 years...have a link?
Since when do American's actually know what's going on in the world...you don't actually beilieve what you see on FOX do you.......BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You marked it troll but...uh...sorry to say it's true.
I'll believe that when I see it...except I probably won't cause you're talking out of your ass.
Uh...sorry but the Geforce 6600 does not even come remotely close to the graphics performance of the GPU in the Xbox360.
just thought I'd point that out.
$30 just to view the article...that's just re-fucking-diculous.
I rent more than I buy. There are many games out there that are great to play through once or twice, but are fairly short and/or don't have multiplayer. So I just rent them for like $10-15 for like a week instead of the $70-80 to buy them that they normally are up here.
That said I only own 1 game currently for my xbox but I have rented and enjoyed far more games on my xbox than I ever did on my ps2.
The preview button is my friend. Hello mister preview button...where were you on that last one jackass......
In your opinion. In my opinion all those games look like ass.