What I don't get...

[Animeniax]

Why is it that items that are only available online still get charged tax if there is a store location in state? If you can only get it online, then why do you have to pay taxes for it? Seems unfair.

[rockmanj]

Why is it that items that are only available online still get charged tax if there is a store location in state? If you can only get it online, then why do you have to pay taxes for it? Seems unfair.

The state has to get that tax no matter what; unless it is one of the states without sales taxes.

[Animeniax]

The state has to get that tax no matter what; unless it is one of the states without sales taxes.

They need to rethink that rule. If the only way I can get a product is online, then I shouldn't have to pay local sales taxes on that product. That would only be fair.

What I don't get is, why do people seem to think poorly of Tim Tebow's football skills? I haven't seen him play much, but watching him in today's game, he's pretty good.

[rockmanj]

They need to rethink that rule. If the only way I can get a product is online, then I shouldn't have to pay local sales taxes on that product. That would only be fair.

What I don't get is, why do people seem to think poorly of Tim Tebow's football skills? I haven't seen him play much, but watching him in today's game, he's pretty good.

He is not great in the pocket, and his throwing arm is pretty bad; but he is indeed doing well this game.

[Animeniax]

He is not great in the pocket, and his throwing arm is pretty bad; but he is indeed doing well this game.

He's young, learning how to play in the pocket will take time, but he's always a threat to run when the pocket collapses. I think people are hating because of the displays of his religiousness.

[rockmanj]

He's young, learning how to play in the pocket will take time, but he's always a threat to run when the pocket collapses. I think people are hating because of the displays of his religiousness.

Well, he is good at winning games, but the main criticism has been his throwing. It can be quite wobbly for a professional-level QB. I guess as long as the Broncos play good defense and he keeps pulling wins out is ass, things will go well. I don't care too much about all the god stuff. My main beef has always been with his arm.

[Animeniax]

He threw 3 touchdowns today :p But he's still young, and still thinking of running too much. He needs better field vision and to work on his passing. His completion percentage is atrocious.

[UChessmaster]

I don`t get the hate for the group Nickelback, i mean i`m not the biggest fan or anything, i heard about 3 songs from them and i enjoy them, but i don`t get why they deserve so much internet bashing, it`s as if i woke up someday and hating them was the "IN" thing, wtf is up with that?

[Animeniax]

I'm with you. I like some of their songs, they seem like a decent rock band. I think the internet masses just pick someone/something to hate on to direct their energies and give them something to do.

[Ryllharu]

The reason for hate is well deserved and well documented (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4258547). Not only do all their songs sound the same in general, some of them actually are mostly the same components with different lyrics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2pXfAK8r1k).

[Animeniax]

Aerosmith's songs sound so much alike they did a parody of it on SNL, but no one hates them as much as they hate Nickelback. Haters gonna hate I guess.

[Ryllharu]

When was that SNL skit?

Yes, lots of bands have songs that all sound the same. Same for pop princesses and R&B music. It's been happening for decades. The reason Nickleback got all the hate is because they hit the Top 40 at the wrong time. The accessibility of Internet and later the popularity of Youtube made it easy for the comparisons to be made and spread quickly.

[Uchiha Barles]

Nickelback sucking is really a shame. I kind of liked them when they released Silver Side Up and the single "How You Remind Me", but then future singles kind of turned me off. A couple of years later, my brother (who's a fan) had me listen to a bunch of their songs and I was actually blown away by their versatility. They managed to do good pop songs, good ballads, and even good songs with raw savagery. I decided to give them a chance. Then I started hearing a number of songs that were essentially the same as other songs, and that annoyed me to no end. Nickelback is one of those bands that I'll just have to listen to on a song by song case, because I really like some of their songs, but I cannot purchase their albums.

[XanBcoo]

I loved How You Remind Me when I heard it on the radio back in 2001, so when I got their CD I was so disappointed with the entire thing that I couldn't ever take them seriously again. Especially this part from the very first song on the album:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCgjFsHvoPc#t=2m36s

"Kickin yer ass would be a pleasure"

No other song showcases the childish false bravado of their frontman/lyricist. "She's just a woman"?? Really?

[dragonrage]

What I don't get is Actors wanting to be Rappers and there being documentaries about it. What the hell are they that bored?

[Animeniax]

What I don't get is Actors wanting to be Rappers and there being documentaries about it. What the hell are they that bored?

Can you name some for reference? It still can't be as bad as rappers who want to be actors. The only one who has really made a mildly successful move to acting is Ludacris, which is funny because he's a terrible rapper.

[Ryllharu]

The only one who has really made a mildly successful move to acting is Ludacris, which is funny because he's a terrible rapper.

Queen Latifah, Mark Wahlberg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eSN8Cwit_s), Mos Def, Ice Cube, Ice T don't ring any bells?

[Animeniax]

Queen Latifah, you got me there, but the others? Marky Mark was not a legit rapper. Mos Def and Cube aren't legit actors. Plus you could take Mark Wahlberg out of almost all of his movies and those movies would have been better for it.

[Uchiha Barles]

Donald Glover from Community fame. He's "Childish Gambino"

[Killa-Eyez]

Also, Omar Epps and the late Heavy D (Dwight Myers). I have yet to name any actors gone rapper.

Edit: Common, LL Cool J, Will Smith, RZA...

[dragonrage]

joaquin phoenix wants to be a rapper, there is a documentary movie about it. Worst thing ever, had to stop watching it, wanted to kill myself if it continued.

there are a few but not many documented, good publicist

[rockmanj]

I don't know if this makes me a horrible person, but I read this: http://youoffendmeyouoffendmyfamily.com/im-an-alien-and-thats-ok-adventures-in-korea/ and it bored the shit out of me. I feel like I should empathize with this woman, but I don't. Those are not adventures; they are "boring episodes in her life".

[Buffalobiian]

They weren't exactly mentally taxing episodes of life, so I'm with you here rockman. I'm currently being taught that empathy is a skill, not an emotional synchronisation. I don't have to feel what she's thinking. I just have to know, accept and acknowledge it.

[Sapphire]

The first thing my new roommate asked me upon moving in was "would you be willing to move out?"

>.>

[Uchiha Barles]

The first thing my new roommate asked me upon moving in was "would you be willing to move out?"

>.>

LOL!! Sounds like the beginning of an awesome sitcom. She probably just had some friends in mind she hoped to live with.

[Sapphire]

She did.

I said "maybe" because I was too surprised and needed to process the request later. Obviously, it's a no. -_-

To be fair, I don't think she knew I'd been living in this room for a better part of a year. Though it certainly looks lived in.

[Buffalobiian]

She did.

I said "maybe" because I was too surprised and needed to process the request later. Obviously, it's a no. -_-

To be fair, I don't think she knew I'd been living in this room for a better part of a year. Though it certainly looks lived in.

Clear up the response as soon as possible. If you mean no, say no. That "maybe" will allow you to be troubled by her for some time to come, as well as waste her effort in organising her friend over in anticipation for this "possible" scenario. (if you want to be somewhat considerate and think about the other person. Personally I just don't care about the second half)

[rockmanj]

They weren't exactly mentally taxing episodes of life, so I'm with you here rockman. I'm currently being taught that empathy is a skill, not an emotional synchronisation. I don't have to feel what she's thinking. I just have to know, accept and acknowledge it.

Also, maybe I am biased, but I did actually have adventures there, and am currently writing about them. Her writing skill just isn't up to snuff, IMO.

[Kraco]

I said "maybe" because I was too surprised and needed to process the request later. Obviously, it's a no. -_-


That's rather interesting. My first reaction would have certainly been a no in such a situation, unless I had seriously considered moving to a better or otherwise more suitable place. What psychological condition would prompt you to say maybe? Was she two meters tall, full of muscles, carrying a bloody mace, and with barbarian face paintings, or something?

[Sapphire]

In the rare event that someone ambushes me with an important-yet-completely-unexpected question, I'll answer neutrally and process the question later.

If I think about it, I am neutral on ALL issues unless I get a chance to actively think about it. Biggest example is politics, I was the neutralest person you could imagine until after Obama got elected. I just absorbed what everyone was saying and let it stew until I finally figured out it was all a sham. I think I described myself as "moderate slightly liberal but I get where the right is coming from" until then.

Another example is friends. I'm neutral towards everyone and see them as a potential friend unless something happens to fuck it up.

After I think whatever issue through, I usually stand by it because I've thought it through in my head. It may be why I naturally dislike people who talk out of their ass (and argue for the sake of arguing even if they're wrong).

I'll try to remember to pause and think things out more and give a concrete answer to an absurd request if something like that happens again.

[rockmanj]

Wow, the NFL has some pretty draconian rules over broadcasting its content. Since I don't have a TV and wanted to get some work done, I tried to find an internet radio feed of the NFL playoffs. There does not seem to be one. That seems kind of crazy to me that something like that is not easy to find.

edit: I found one, but it was not that easy.

[dragonrage]

Sapphi is a chicken, or the girl looked like Orochimaru hence the maybe.

[Animeniax]

Nickelback sucking is really a shame. I kind of liked them when they released Silver Side Up and the single "How You Remind Me", but then future singles kind of turned me off. A couple of years later, my brother (who's a fan) had me listen to a bunch of their songs and I was actually blown away by their versatility. They managed to do good pop songs, good ballads, and even good songs with raw savagery. I decided to give them a chance. Then I started hearing a number of songs that were essentially the same as other songs, and that annoyed me to no end. Nickelback is one of those bands that I'll just have to listen to on a song by song case, because I really like some of their songs, but I cannot purchase their albums.

Some more Nickelback hate from tosh.0's blog with the caption: [cheap anti-theft device]

1167

[Sapphire]

My glorious new roommate went to the RA because my desk is messy. Even my RA knows it's an agenda to get her other friend into the room.

Should I a) pretend nothing is wrong and continue to be friendly or b) ignore the bitch?

Either way I'm writing a pre-emptive letter about her harassment to the head of housing.

[Animeniax]

Hopefully you're cool with the RA and that you're keeping notes of what's been going on. I don't think referring to your forum posts will be a good way to make your case if it goes to arbitration.

Maybe it's a sign you should move to an apartment or find some other living situation? The universe works in mysterious ways.

[fahoumh]

My glorious new roommate went to the RA because my desk is messy. Even my RA knows it's an agenda to get her other friend into the room.

Should I a) pretend nothing is wrong and continue to be friendly or b) ignore the bitch?

Either way I'm writing a pre-emptive letter about her harassment to the head of housing.
Wow, that bitch really is on a serious mission. I vote (a) since ignoring her could be interpreted as a form of hostility and could be used against you....but don't be too nice. Say "hello" but don't ask her how she is.

[Animeniax]

What's really sad is that if she and her friend do end up living together in such close quarters, they'll most likely end up hating each other.

[Buffalobiian]

My glorious new roommate went to the RA because my desk is messy. Even my RA knows it's an agenda to get her other friend into the room.

Should I a) pretend nothing is wrong and continue to be friendly or b) ignore the bitch?

Either way I'm writing a pre-emptive letter about her harassment to the head of housing.

Get the bitch kicked out.

If not possible, leave.

It's like getting served shitty food. Get it changed or leave. Don't punish yourself by putting up with it.

[Sapphire]

I'm reporting everything to the head of housing. She's barely in the room anyway (and I'm out of the room a lot) so I don't care. Bitch ain't gunna push me around, though. I have WAY more important shit to worry about.

I told my dad, he's like "WTF ignore her, we got other things to worry about".

[Buffalobiian]

I'm reporting everything to the head of housing. She's barely in the room anyway (and I'm out of the room a lot) so I don't care. Bitch ain't gunna push me around, though. I have WAY more important shit to worry about.

I told my dad, he's like "WTF ignore her, we got other things to worry about".

He's not the one getting harassed, or at risk of being harassed though.

"Other things to worry about" means there are other things more worthy of your attention/time.. but it doesn't mean that the current matter must be ignored. You're expressed concerns of escalation regarding the way she's bitching. It'll get onto your nerve sooner or later, affecting your emotions/time/energy on these "other matters".

The fact that she's only new and already causing trouble works towards your advantage, along with the RA's bad impression of her. Letting her settle in makes it harder to kick her out later.

[Animeniax]

Are you bigger than her, Sapphy?

[Sapphire]

Yes, I am. Why ask?

[Uchiha Barles]

I'm with buff on this. Don't ever, EVER ignore someone who seems determined to fuck with you. She might find an effective way to do so. Definitely document her behavior as regards her harassment of you. As long as she keeps fucking around, contact your RA on a semi-regular basis about it, enough to make sure she's in the loop, but not enough to make a nuisance out of yourself. Writing to the head of housing is good, but if you have the RA backing you, it's better. And don't write to the head of housing often, make it look like you tried to work with the RA first. It'll make that bitch look extra shifty that you had to go through "such lengths" to deal with her.

tl:dr CRUSH her.

[Sapphire]

My roommate came with her friends while I was trying to take a nap and started screaming (to god knows who outside the room) and moving furniture. After about 20 minutes of talking unrealistically loudly I asked them to whisper but they yelled at me "OMG WE NEED TO CLEAN THIS ROOM". O_o.

Chronicled to my RA.

Sigh.

[Sapphire]

I was in the kitchen cooking kimchi, tuna and rice when I noticed my roommate carting her luggage off to somewhere. Fingers crossed!

[rockmanj]

I was in the kitchen cooking kimchi, tuna and rice when

I never liked that food combo! ugh

[Sapphire]

Why not?

[rockmanj]

Those tastes just don't jibe with me. I know plenty of people that like it, but not me. It reminds me of cat food.

[Uchiha Barles]

I was in the kitchen cooking kimchi, tuna and rice when I noticed my roommate carting her luggage off to somewhere. Fingers crossed!

Huh? She doesn't want to play anymore? lol, wonder if the RA had words with her.

[Sapphire]

I get a unique, "highly disturbed" feeling after reading a very good book.

Does anyone else?

[Animeniax]

I can't say, since I haven't read what I would consider "a really good book" in a while. I've been reading classics and I have a hard time seeing why they are classics, though they may have appealed to people at a certain time and place in history that no longer resembles our own... kind of like the Constitution.

I did thoroughly enjoy "Catch 22", but wasn't disturbed by it.

[Buffalobiian]

Sapphi needs to describe the feeling more before we can compare. I understand emotional, but not disturbed.

[Animeniax]

I imagine it's like after reading 1984 by George Orwell. That book left me quite disturbed for our future.

Other books like Fahrenheit 451 or Brave New World are also supposed to be shocking and a forewarning, but the stories in both leave you with a ray of hope at the end (sorry if spoilers). But not 1984. That book leaves you with a definite feeling of mental disquiet.

[Buffalobiian]

I would understand that feeling, yeah. For me though, that relates more to subject matter.

Harry Potter is arguably good (or LOTR for something of a higher literary level), yet their disturbance is largely absent. I was left wondering if Sapphi got weird reactions from anything well written.

[Animeniax]

What if, in movies, every time someone ordered someone else to "get down!", that second person broke into a spirited dance?

[Animeniax]

What was it about Crysis 2 specifically that made it such a big disappointment? I just got it and have played through maybe 1/10th of it... so far it's a cool game. Kind of easy on normal difficulty since you can take a lot of damage before dying. But with the HD texture pack and DX11 update, it looks amazing. Not sure why so many people speak poorly of it.

[Buffalobiian]

You are an internet service provider and a customer has just logged a fault. They are complaining that their internet connectivity is experiencing issues. On your form you requested that they provide you with a contact phone number, and they have provided their mobile number in response.

Let me remind you again that the customer is experiencing internet connectivity issues.

Why the hell do you send them instructions via email? (and ask them to call you back after they've completed it?)

[Kraco]

If a customer can fill a form in the internets, it tells the ISP immediately the customer can also read their emails from the internets. Quite simple, really. The customer should call their problem report line in the first place and talk to the robot until they are connected to the technical assistance.

[Buffalobiian]

If a customer can fill a form in the internets, it tells the ISP immediately the customer can also read their emails from the internets. Quite simple, really. The customer should call their problem report line in the first place and talk to the robot until they are connected to the technical assistance.

Ah. Yet the ability to access the internet to lodge a fault doesn't translate to having timely or regular access for notifications.

The first thing I did was ring up the helpdesk with my home phone. The crackles made everything incomprehensible.

The next thing I did was ring up the helpdesk on my mobile. It told me that I was 12th in line. I had $6 credit left on my phone.

Then I submitted the form painstakingly on my slow mobile internet.


Note: the favourite thing they like to do to test for line integrity is to do a "line test" by asking you to disconnect all appliances that may be connected to the phone sockets. In a previous fault that I launched with them, they asked me to unplug everything so they can perform this test. I waited hours for them to contact me after the test. They had sent me an email relatively soon after the previous phone call that they had completed the test, made adjustments and that I should monitor the line.

It's certainly not an isolated incident where the operator or system tried to follow your above logic Kraco.

[Kraco]

It's certainly not an isolated incident where the operator or system tried to follow your above logic Kraco.

Well, yeah, which brings us to the second truth of the matter: If the ISP had enough employees to actually call you back instead of someone spending 10 seconds to send you an email, they should according to the modern business logic lay off some of their staff to be able to pay higher dividends to the shareholders.

Either way, you as a customer are screwed.

[Animeniax]

Finished Crysis 2 on PC. Still not sure why so many people hated on this game. It got good reviews on gamespot and pcgamer but all I ever hear is criticism and hate for the game. I think it was well worth the $10.

[Buffalobiian]

I've got facebook notifications on, so they send me an email whenever a new machine uses my account, or when an authorised machine has to renew its permission. I got the email for logging in at home, and the email shows the IP and location.

In fact, the email tracked me down to my suburb with just the IP. I thought IPs don't even remotely tell you that much..

[Animeniax]

T-mobile is changing the image of the tart that hawks their service. Now she wears motorcycle leathers and rides a crotch rocket in the commercials. Does anyone else doubt that she can handle the power of the bike she's riding, much less even ride a motorcycle?

[Death BOO Z]

google image doesn't do the trick...

what are you talking about?

[Animeniax]

google image doesn't do the trick...

what are you talking about?This is the first commercial where they compare their cell service to a hotrod motorcycle:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8KdcO7rlT0

Now they're revamping her image from a cutesy girl to a tough girl:

http://www.droiddog.com/android-blog/2012/04/t-mobile-girl-carly-foulkes-ditches-the-pink-starts-riding-motorcycles/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5OIWfmjnJPs

[Death BOO Z]

putting the two commercials side by side, you can see how much she grew as an actress, she's got confidence and style now.
I liked the part in which she's going through her wardrobe. not trying to sound like a chauvinist pig or something, but she looks like she feels right doing that.

I can't really tell what bike she's supposed to be riding, but it might be something relatively small, like a CBR-200.

*vroom. vroom!*

[Animeniax]

I don't think 200cc bikes are street legal in the US. Not enough power to keep up with traffic.

I wonder if she could ride before they tried to advertise her as a rider, of if they taught her how to ride to match the image they were trying to sell (ie typical hollywood bs).

[Kraco]

I wonder if she could ride before they tried to advertise her as a rider, of if they taught her how to ride to match the image they were trying to sell (ie typical hollywood bs).

It's a commercial. It's supposed to be full of bs. So, I don't think it really matters. It was probably a real driver doing the driving anyway (as a stuntwoman), not this model - assuming she hadn't already got decent driving skills to begin with, of course.

[Ryllharu]

Clearly a stuntwoman.

@Ani
49cc scooters are allowed on roads (and the sub-50cc engine means you don't need a motorcycle license), they just have to move to the side like any bicycle so they can be easily and safely overtaken. It's not the engine size, it's the lack of lights, turn signals, mirrors, speedometer, and mufflers. Those are the differences between a 200cc dirt-bike and dual-sport.

You see dual-sports on US highways/interstates all the time.

[Animeniax]

It's a commercial. It's supposed to be full of bs. So, I don't think it really matters. It was probably a real driver doing the driving anyway (as a stuntwoman), not this model - assuming she hadn't already got decent driving skills to begin with, of course.

It's actually a series of commercials featuring this girl, as T-mobile attempts to create an identity for itself through creating an identity for this spokesgirl. The tagline for the newest commercial with her supposedly riding the motorcycle is, "setting the record straight," which makes me think people questioned her authenticity.


Clearly a stuntwoman.

@Ani
49cc scooters are allowed on roads (and the sub-50cc engine means you don't need a motorcycle license), they just have to move to the side like any bicycle so they can be easily and safely overtaken. It's not the engine size, it's the lack of lights, turn signals, mirrors, speedometer, and mufflers. Those are the differences between a 200cc dirt-bike and dual-sport.

You see dual-sports on US highways/interstates all the time.I was just being a smartass about lower-powered bikes. I live in a college town so there are plenty of mopeds and scooters on the roads, and some dual-sports too.

[Kraco]

It's actually a series of commercials featuring this girl, as T-mobile attempts to create an identity for itself through creating an identity for this spokesgirl. The tagline for the newest commercial with her supposedly riding the motorcycle is, "setting the record straight," which makes me think people questioned her authenticity.

Yet it still doesn't mean anything as long as they don't use her at exhibitions and such as a booth babe presenting live driving. And since it's a telecommunications company, not any physical traffic/vehicle related one, I don't really see why they would go all out like that with irrelevant stuff. But then again, I've read there's a definite difference between what kind of commercials are most effective over here compared to some other countries, so in the end I could be clueless.

[Animeniax]

Yet it still doesn't mean anything as long as they don't use her at exhibitions and such as a booth babe presenting live driving. And since it's a telecommunications company, not any physical traffic/vehicle related one, I don't really see why they would go all out like that with irrelevant stuff. But then again, I've read there's a definite difference between what kind of commercials are most effective over here compared to some other countries, so in the end I could be clueless.

She is currently the only established recognizable spokesperson for a major telecom company, so her persona matters for advertising. Of course I realize that most advertising is bs, I was just wondering how much bs was being put into creating this image for her as something more than a vacuous tart.

[Ryllharu]

I like her way better than Catherine Zeta-Jones before her.

Isn't the whole point of this new campaign to imply T-Mobile's network speed? It's not so much about remaking her image as that is an excuse for the making the marketing connection that, "Dur...motorcycles are fast, our network is fast."

They were getting shit from AT&T, who constantly claims they have the fastest GSM network (edit: which is true, but they also have the least stable network in the US these days), implying T-Mobile's is much slower. "Test drive our network, it's not slow."

[Animeniax]

I actually found a 40-something Catherine ZJ more attractive and appealing than this chick.

The point of the campaign was indeed to compare their network speed to a hotrod motorcycle compared to AT&T's service (the suit on the mini bike in the first commercial). But with the second motorcycle commercial, it's apparent they're working on the girl's image as a metaphor for the company's image. So should we believe in T-mobile's advertising about the legitimacy of the girl or their service? Or can we say both suck and are fake?

[Ryllharu]

Honestly, whatever works to keep those AT&T assholes from buying T-Mobile is fine by me. They're trying to buy their way out of their overburdened network and steal more spectrum than they deserve rather than building new towers or coming up with a better way to utilize their chosen protocol.

Secondly, I don't really care what T-Mobile ultimately does because I use Verizon, and my phone is more than 5 years old.

[Ryllharu]

Knowing only Conversational English, how does suspense work in languages that are structured different (syntax)?

By that, I mean that English sentences work pretty simply: subject -- verb -- direct object.
The killer was [identified as]...the butler!

But other languages either have a different syntax, or no require syntax. Some place the verb last (pardon my clumsy example):
The killer the bulter was identified as

For others (romance languages, etc.), the syntax is defined by the suffixes so order doesn't matter:
The butler[direct object] killer[subject] was identified as[verb]


So dear gotwoot members of multiple languages, how does dramatic suspense work when word order does not matter, or the direct object isn't (or isn't required to be) the last word spoken? It makes less impact to pause before revealing the verb.


[...and apologies for the double post.]

[darkshadow]

It's exactly the same in Dutch and German, and I think in french as well.

[shinta|hikari]

Filipino usually has the reverse syntax from English.

"Ang mayordomo ang pumatay."

Mayordomo = Butler, Pumatay = Killer (well not exactly, but it means that in this sentence)

But it can be reversed, and is usually done so by younger people who are adept at English, which is the second language in the Philippines.

"Ang pumatay ay ang mayordomo."

This form is considered awkward grammar, but it can be used for suspense or comedic purposes where the twist or punchline needs to be said last.

[Kraco]

Due to the numerous suffixes you can shuffle the word order to your heart's content in Finnish. Some word orders will sound awkward but the message generally stays the same.

[Xelbair]

In polish it is done in the same way:
"Morderca to... lokaj!'

[Animeniax]

The verb comes last in Japanese too. It's subject, direct object, verb.

For descriptors, it's subject, verb, such as "I am fat" would be "[I] fat am" where the [I] is not spoken but understood.

[dragonrage]

Lately I've been seeing this a lot even on here. I really don't get why people have to shorten everything into an acronym, is it really that hard to type out a few extra letters or use a phase that would help people better understand what you're trying to say? Do they think it makes them look cool or are they just lazy? Maybe it is just me.

p.s. most of the commercials now are retarded. One that particularly annoys me is the new Geico commercial where they have a taste test for car insurance, how much more unrelated and asinine can you get.

[enkoujin]

Lately I've been seeing this a lot even on here. I really don't get why people have to shorten everything into an acronym, is it really that hard to type out a few extra letters or use a phase that would help people better understand what you're trying to say? Do they think it makes them look cool or are they just lazy? Maybe it is just me.

It depends on the community and the context of the subject. In the Yugioh Trading Card Game (YGO TCG), we definitely see a shit load of acronyms in almost every post, but it's universally understood because it's the language of the game. Most posters will often assume that the audience knows what they're talking about - sometimes forgetting that not all of the audience is from their particular country or even continent.

I agree with you that it definitely gets annoying, but people get used to it - I mean, remember "LOL"? Yeah, that shit is easy to remember now and is pretty universal on the net after being repeated to nearly infinity. Now you have shit like "IKR", "AFAIK", "OP", etc. and it definitely gets annoying because it's new, ambiguous and shouldn't even be considered as an acronym, but times change. In contrast, readers should also spend the 10 seconds to type it up on Google to see what the phrase means as well.

[dragonrage]

I'm not talking about "Lol", or other Aol; Aim counterparts. I'm talking about very obscure acronyms that can have multiple meaning or it doesn't exists when you google it (I have and it doesn't just take ten seconds). The only person who knows what it means is the person using it. My solutions; consider their opinion void, until they can communicate in a social setting.

[Buffalobiian]

I'm not talking about "Lol", or other Aol; Aim counterparts. I'm talking about very obscure acronyms that can have multiple meaning or it doesn't exists when you google it (I have and it doesn't just take ten seconds). The only person who knows what it means is the person using it. My solutions; consider their opinion void, until they can communicate in a social setting.

Have you got any examples just so we can see how obscure these acronyms are?

[dragonrage]

Have you got any examples just so we can see how obscure these acronyms are?

Sure I do. But I rather end this discussions here, because anytime I reply to your comments I have this undying urge to insult you. Which can be quite tedious and counterproductive, so for the sake of civility I choose to leave things as is because it's just an observation, further discussion doesn't change anything and because it is not worth the time and effort.

[Y]

Wow that is crazy extreme. Buff has made many good anime posts or some shit. God I can't even keep this up I don't read the anime forum.

[Animeniax]

That's a strategy for getting his attention. By claiming to not want to elaborate, he'll make Buff want it more. Then Buff will do anything to get him to talk. Anything.

[dragonrage]

1264

If you don't want to be civil we don't have to be. Just because a thread was deleted doesn't mean the opinions, stance and outlook disappeared. Did you not believe me what I said I lost all respect for you and I believe you're a Pedophile, Buff?


Kraco:

What's the point of Private messages or taking it to the Pit? Do you want things to become down right vindictive? The closest you can get to being civil is a mutual understanding of avoidance. My opinion of him is not going to change and I don't believe he is either.

Do you want me to create a thread just so I can "personal attack" him?

[Kraco]

If you don't want to be civil we don't have to be. Just because a thread was deleted doesn't mean the opinions, stance and outlook disappeared. Did you not believe me what I said I lost all respect for you and I believe you're a Pedophile, Buff?

What I don't get is that people can't understand General Discussion threads aren't meant for personal attacks.

Take it to the Pit or private messages.

Edit: Since there was apparently something left ambiguous, let me rephrase it: The topic is not open to discussion in this thread.

[dragonrage]

Kraco, Buffalobiian's champion and voice, who knew......

Enjoy,

Laters.


p.s. delete my posts as much as you like, doesn't make them any less true.

"birds of a feather....."

edit:

sigh* this is pointless.

To all those that use this thread for the intended purposes my apologies for it going off topic, which means I'm done and I'll try to keep my disdain for the "censored word" to a minimum.

Please pardon the intrusion.

[darkshadow]

What I don't get is the message behind the last few posts..can some one explain?

[Buffalobiian]

Did paypal just raise/add to the fees for currency conversions and such, or did they just spell it out more clearly?

They were the best way to pay in foreign currency by far. Now I'm not so sure.

I've also noticed merchants charging extra for paypal now like how restaurants charge for Amex.

[enkoujin]

I always thought that PayPal were profiting from their own currency conversion system that differ from banks or places where you can convert different currencies.

Hmm, not sure if this can help you, but this is the fee for paying customers:

https://www.paypal.com/ca/cgi-bin/marketingweb?cmd=_display-fees-outside&nav=0.0.5

As for merchants:

https://cms.paypal.com/ca/cgi-bin/marketingweb?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=merchant/merchant_fees

I'd say that you might be seeing a higher fee in your transactions because merchants are required to pay a fee for the transaction. Merchants will always say that they'll have to pass this fee along to their customers to pay for. In fact, I'm not too sure about Amex, but retailers and businesses lose a ton of money (100 times more than debit) when their customers use a premium credit card here in Canada. It wouldn't be surprising to see merchants passing the hefty credit card costs to their customers to make up for the loss because people aren't usually subjected to price discrimination via method of payment.

[Buffalobiian]

I'd say that you might be seeing a higher fee in your transactions because merchants are required to pay a fee for the transaction.

That's definitely the case. It's not like they snuck in or anything. The merchants will specify the surcharge for the payment option when it's time to choose on the site. It's just that I hadn't noticed them charging it before and simply swallowed the cost - and therefore wondered if paypal overall is jacking up their fees.

I did a personal transfer not too long ago on there and it also charged me a slight fee that did not used to exist.


It wouldn't be surprising to see merchants passing the hefty credit card costs to their customers to make up for the loss because people aren't usually subjected to price discrimination via method of payment.

Yeah, as much as I don't like it, it's up to the business how they wish to operate. What really puts me off a bit is how some smaller places don't even take debit cards. It's almost as inconvenient as going to a toilet without toilet paper (a norm in some countries, but not in mine).

[Animeniax]

Just watch True Grit from 2010. I don't get why this movie was rated so highly and critically acclaimed and all that. Boring movie from what I saw (I was playing Diablo 3 at the same time). It's a remake of what is supposed to be a classic, but it looked like a crappy western complete with stilted acting and corny lines.

[fahoumh]

It's all subjective. I actually enjoyed the 2010 version a lot more than the original.

Do you like any western movies?

[Animeniax]

It's all subjective. I actually enjoyed the 2010 version a lot more than the original.

Do you like any western movies?

I love westerns, or at least I did when I was younger, especially Clint Eastwood's movies. I think the last western I enjoyed was 3:10 to Yuma.

The acting in True Grit was wooden, particularly the lead actress. And none of the characters were memorable or endearing. I'm surprised it garnered so much praise and dozens of awards. My only interest in it was that a classmate was an extra playing one of the townsfolk. I didn't pay enough attention to the movie to ever notice him in any scenes.

[Abdula]

With you 100% Ani. I love westerns and the original True Grit was one of my favorite movies. I was really looking forward to the remake, especially since the remake of 3:10 to Yuma was so good, but True Grit was terrible. Jeff Bridges just did not capture what John Wayne was and whoever that actress was she was terrible.

[hiddenpookie]

true grit was a terrible movie....

[Animeniax]

Wow, I didn't know 310 to Yuma was a remake. Glad to see others agree that True Grit was awful and typical 21st century Hollywood, remaking classics into garbage and still garnering accolades that are undeserved. It's like the steroid era of baseball and the penalty-heavy era of hockey.

[fahoumh]

I love westerns, or at least I did when I was younger, especially Clint Eastwood's movies. I think the last western I enjoyed was 3:10 to Yuma.

The acting in True Grit was wooden, particularly the lead actress. And none of the characters were memorable or endearing. I'm surprised it garnered so much praise and dozens of awards. My only interest in it was that a classmate was an extra playing one of the townsfolk. I didn't pay enough attention to the movie to ever notice him in any scenes.
I still love westerns, Clint Eastwood westerns in particular. The Good the Bad the Ugly is easily my all-time favourite movie.

As far as the new True Grit, I'm actually surprised at how much you, Abdula, and hiddenpookie dislike it and I would say I disagree with all the criticisms. But like I said, it's all subjective. :)

[Animeniax]

I worked with these guys who know technology to an absurd degree. Of course they're all Asians, but it's not like they're a bunch of nerds with no lives. They live normal lives complete with gf's, jobs, social lives, etc, but they know these obscure and highly technical details about anything and everything related to electronics and computers.

Case in point, they were arguing about monitors with LED LCD panels made by LG that did not satisfy Apple's requirements for their products, so cheaper manufacturers use these panels in much cheaper monitors. Who has the time to know that kind of shit??

[Buffalobiian]

???????? (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php/17485-Manga-Magical-Girl-Lyrical-Nanoha-ViVid?p=437041&viewfull=1#post437041)

[Xelbair]

???????? (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php/17485-Manga-Magical-Girl-Lyrical-Nanoha-ViVid?p=437041&viewfull=1#post437041)
O_o the fuck?

[enkoujin]

I worked with these guys who know technology to an absurd degree. Of course they're all Asians, but it's not like they're a bunch of nerds with no lives. They live normal lives complete with gf's, jobs, social lives, etc, but they know these obscure and highly technical details about anything and everything related to electronics and computers.

Case in point, they were arguing about monitors with LED LCD panels made by LG that did not satisfy Apple's requirements for their products, so cheaper manufacturers use these panels in much cheaper monitors. Who has the time to know that kind of shit??

It's pretty easy to keep up with technology if you keep up on news websites and technology blogs. Hell, if you're a really fast reader, you could probably keep up with current events in less than 15 minutes a day. It's the same with technology - only that it might be faster because all you're really looking at are its specs and sometimes the science behind how one of its features work.


???????? (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php/17485-Manga-Magical-Girl-Lyrical-Nanoha-ViVid?p=437041&viewfull=1#post437041)

My rationalization is that after some period of time, TinyPic regenerates picture codes/URLs for older links and the preview for that manga got replaced with that picture there.

Why?

Probably because their generator wasn't coded to generate anything more 7 characters and they've simply reached their end (36 characters - 26 alphabetical and 10 numbers):

i.e., there must be < 36^7 pictures TinyPic went through already

[Animeniax]

It's pretty easy to keep up with technology if you keep up on news websites and technology blogs. Hell, if you're a really fast reader, you could probably keep up with current events in less than 15 minutes a day. It's the same with technology - only that it might be faster because all you're really looking at are its specs and sometimes the science behind how one of its features work.
To be fair, they are engineers, so that makes sense they'd be up on tech news. What upsets me is that they are also well-rounded individuals with social lives, great jobs, athleticism, and bright futures. Not that I hate them for it or wish they didn't have all of that, but that I don't have most of that. Maybe I associate with too many upper crust individuals.

[fahoumh]

To be fair, they are engineers, so that makes sense they'd be up on tech news. What upsets me is that they are also well-rounded individuals with social lives, great jobs, athleticism, and bright futures. Not that I hate them for it or wish they didn't have all of that, but that I don't have most of that. Maybe I associate with too many upper crust individuals.
I've heard that a good way to become more successful is to spend time with people who are more successful than you.

[shinta|hikari]

Because then you can leech off their successes.

[enkoujin]

To be fair, they are engineers, so that makes sense they'd be up on tech news. What upsets me is that they are also well-rounded individuals with social lives, great jobs, athleticism, and bright futures. Not that I hate them for it or wish they didn't have all of that, but that I don't have most of that. Maybe I associate with too many upper crust individuals.

Well, I'm an engineering student, but it's pretty surprising for others when they learn how up to date I am with politics and the economy because I try to religiously watch the news every night while my other engineering peers are more focused on their social lives and video gaming.

The point here is that anyone can become a whiz or a decent amateur at these hobbies that you've mentioned. There's obviously the initial time you need to put in to learn about the basics/foundations of the hobbies (e.g., adapting your out of shape body to strenuous activities at the local gym), but once you're done that and you keep up with the consistency your hobby demands, it doesn't take much to become very informed of the matter/subject - especially if you spend 15 minutes on it every day.

If you really wanted to be like these people, Ani, you should just go for it like the way they do it - but in your own way. You can be an amateur expert/speculator of any of your passions and when it's your time to shed your expertise on a subject, others will look at you in the same way you see these peers of your's in the same light. You have to realize that you can control almost everything in your life either directly or bringing it under the control of your influence and this is one situation you can definitely solve by yourself.

[fahoumh]

Because then you can leech off their successes.

I think the idea is that it's supposed to be a motivation for you to succeed.

[Animeniax]

Well, I'm an engineering student, but it's pretty surprising for others when they learn how up to date I am with politics and the economy because I try to religiously watch the news every night while my other engineering peers are more focused on their social lives and video gaming.

The point here is that anyone can become a whiz or a decent amateur at these hobbies that you've mentioned. There's obviously the initial time you need to put in to learn about the basics/foundations of the hobbies (e.g., adapting your out of shape body to strenuous activities at the local gym), but once you're done that and you keep up with the consistency your hobby demands, it doesn't take much to become very informed of the matter/subject - especially if you spend 15 minutes on it every day.

If you really wanted to be like these people, Ani, you should just go for it like the way they do it - but in your own way. You can be an amateur expert/speculator of any of your passions and when it's your time to shed your expertise on a subject, others will look at you in the same way you see these peers of your's in the same light. You have to realize that you can control almost everything in your life either directly or bringing it under the control of your influence and this is one situation you can definitely solve by yourself.

I basically just watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report to keep semi-up-to-date on politics and the economy. Weird that when I hear people reference something as discussed on either of these shows, I think they are a poseur who doesn't really know the issues.

I think at some point I had the interest in technical knowledge but those days are long gone. I'm still just amazed at how much some of these guys can do in a day.


I think the idea is that it's supposed to be a motivation for you to succeed.
Definitely the latter. If you hang out with the right people, it's motivation as well as a sign of your own tendencies and dispositions. People self-select those they associate with based on their personalities and goals.

[Buffalobiian]

You can get monitor calibration pictures or programs from various sources. One such way that they let you calibrate your monitor is to run through various pictures/graphs. Each of those pictures will be designed to test one variable such that you can modify it to look right.

What looks right? Well the program shows you a picture of what is "ideal" before you start each test.

My question is: If your monitor is unbalanced before you begin the test (which is why you're doing the tests in the first place), how the hell is an "ideal image" supposed to look "right" on such a monitor?

[enkoujin]

I think it's the same with websites detailing how to reformat your own computer. How can I access this information on the same computer I'm trying to reformat? My guess is that you use it on another different computer and compare the two screens just like you would with reformatting (printing out the steps or reading it from another computer not being reformatted).

Of course, although there will be deviations, good image testing programs/websites will have descriptions of what you're trying to look for or differentiate like this:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/ARTS/MONCAL/CALIBRATE.HTM

[Buffalobiian]

I think it's the same with websites detailing how to reformat your own computer. How can I access this information on the same computer I'm trying to reformat? My guess is that you use it on another different computer and compare the two screens just like you would with reformatting (printing out the steps or reading it from another computer not being reformatted).

But the other computer doesn't necessarily have a calibrated screen neither. You can't really print off a picture unless you're sure your own printer's colours are calibrated neither.

Descriptions definitely help, but I just don't understand how the images are actually supposed to show you what's correct and incorrect. (I gather that they actually do, since so many people do it this way?)

Take my TV at home for example. It's got its own calibration software. It'll show me a picture with some patterns and say "adjust your contrast so the picture looks like this. You should just be able to bla bla bla bla".

How does it make the first picture show up correctly so I know what I'm trying to get to in the first place?

[darkshadow]

You can't, proper calibration software will let you adjust the tv/monitor settings based on very simple tests like the ones on the site enkoujin linked.
If the calibration software tells gives you a reference image instead it has already failed.
I'm pretty sure Disney blu-rays have pretty excellent calibration tools on them.

[Buffalobiian]

Fair enough. I get calibration tools that tell me what I'm supposed to be looking for, as well as give me a reference image to show what I'm looking for. I never understood how the latter was supposed to look right. Thanks for the explanation guys.

[Kraco]

Just get a hardware colorimeter based calibration tool, Bill. You know you enjoy expensive equipment.

[Animeniax]

I don't get why they changed Daffy Duck from being a kooky, wacky character into a whiny bitchass unfriendly character. He started out as this lovable zany type similar to Bugs Bunny but more insane. Later they changed him into a mean-spirited and sour character, sometimes opposite Bugs. I've been disappointed in this change for the longest time.

I brought this up before but I don't get how "How I met your mother" is a "hit" show. I just watched 10 minutes of it and even the laughtrack seemed like it didn't think the material was funny. I'd be happy to get into this show (I'm a fan of Jason Segal, NPH, and Allyson Hannigan, and Cobie Smulders is kinda hot), but this seems like an unfunny Friends knock-off. Not that Friends was ever that funny either.

[Death BOO Z]

it works as long as you don't expect much from it.
despite it trying to be the 'lost*' of comedy shows (with hints about the future, unreliable narrator), it doesn't hold up to its' intended target (having an overall plot that ties everything down with a wedding ribbon). if you ignore that, and think of it as just another comedy show that uses the same actors to fill in whatever roles the script demanded, then it's fine.



*I never watched lost

[Animeniax]

Wow, didn't expect you to be the one defend it or be a fan of the show. I left it on the TV for two episodes and couldn't get into it. I wonder if the scenarios are such that you have to have had a similar experience in order to relate to it or see the humour in it. Maybe I am expecting too much from it, considering the hype it gets. Weird that most of those who I know who like the show are college students, not quite the older 20-30 somethings I think the show is targetting.

[fahoumh]

I brought this up before but I don't get how "How I met your mother" is a "hit" show. I just watched 10 minutes of it and even the laughtrack seemed like it didn't think the material was funny. I'd be happy to get into this show (I'm a fan of Jason Segal, NPH, and Allyson Hannigan, and Cobie Smulders is kinda hot), but this seems like an unfunny Friends knock-off. Not that Friends was ever that funny either.

I also wonder how "How I Met Your Mother" ever became a success. I find it terribly unfunny.

[Animeniax]

I have this weird thing I do in video games when confronted with one and then another enemy. I'll shoot at the first enemy, but as soon as I see the second one, I'll switch to shooting at him. What always results is that they both fire on me and I die and they both survive. I don't understand why I always do it and how I can ever stop doing it.

[Buffalobiian]

I have this weird thing I do in video games when confronted with one and then another enemy. I'll shoot at the first enemy, but as soon as I see the second one, I'll switch to shooting at him. What always results is that they both fire on me and I die and they both survive. I don't understand why I always do it and how I can ever stop doing it.

Hmm, no idea. Your attention simply gets caught by the second guy perhaps?

I know the general rule in firefights is to kill the one closest to you first, the next etc etc. I have a bad habit of going after the sniper first if I see him though.

Disregarding the distance rule of thumb and the sniper exception, I have no trouble trying to kill the first enemy I see before I move onto the next. I'm a guy who finds focusing easy but multitasking difficult, so ignoring everything else until I've performed the task at hand works for me.

[Kraco]

It's always useful to think like a villain: Kill the weakest one(s) first, then the stronger.

[Uchiha Barles]

I have this weird thing I do in video games when confronted with one and then another enemy. I'll shoot at the first enemy, but as soon as I see the second one, I'll switch to shooting at him. What always results is that they both fire on me and I die and they both survive. I don't understand why I always do it and how I can ever stop doing it.

Maybe you're taking habits from a different type of game and applying it (erroneously) to an fps? Like, say in a game like world of warcraft, you might be fighting someone or something, when someone/something else engages you as well. You might switch targets at that point to do something to the new target that temporarily takes it out of the fight, and then switch back to your initial target to finish it.

[Death BOO Z]

I too think it's one genre logic 'spilling over' to a different type of games.
your behavior in the game would be very reasonable if the game had a knock-back mechanism (hitting an enemy temporarily prevents him from action), or enemies had very low health or appeared only once the previous enemy was killed.

[Buffalobiian]

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/4517/front33med.jpghttp://img821.imageshack.us/img821/7602/back33med.jpg


^ Power switch is on the back.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/5894/phonitorblackfront.jpghttp://img269.imageshack.us/img269/74/phonitorr1500.jpg


^ Power switch is on the back again.


Why the hell would you put the ONLY power switch for the amp on the back?? :mad:

[shinta|hikari]

So that people don't see it.

[Buffalobiian]

So that people don't see it.

But they can't reach it neither when the equipment is stacked with other stuff.

You can make it pretty and slap it on the front.

[Kraco]

Probably for many reasons. To keep the front less cluttered, to keep the AC wires restricted to the back (although devices with an external PSU can still have the power switch on the back), to encourage people to keep the thing on instead of swiching it on and off continuously (I don't know why, but maybe the manufacturers are power company stock owners), because it's a tradition, etc.

[darkshadow]

I think the switch is there just to act as a surge protector, because it completely cuts all power instead of being in a soft standby state like most electronics are when you turn them "off"; A lot of electronics actually have this 'complete-off' switch on the back.

[fahoumh]

Or it could have simply been an oversight....people do make mistakes.

[Animeniax]

I've been watching a lot of the 2012 summer Olympics and been wondering, is it worse to strive for such supposed greatness (some believe it is greatness) and fail, or to do the average run-of-the-mill with your life like getting a decent paying job and starting a family? I guess that depends on what you consider meaningful, like do you consider having a family important or getting a post-graduate degree/doctorate as necessary. Or do you feel you have to do something more meaningful than the standard in order for you to look back on your life and feel it was worthwhile?

[enkoujin]

guess that depends on what you consider meaningful, like do you consider having a family important or getting a post-graduate degree/doctorate as necessary. Or do you feel you have to do something more meaningful than the standard in order for you to look back on your life and feel it was worthwhile?

You pretty much answered your own question.

Every individual in this world have their own beliefs, values and a vision of what kind of legacy they want to leave behind when they die. Some people think getting a good job and raising a family is good enough and that's fine. However, almost anyone with a bachelors degree can do that nowadays; this includes raising a family because while it is biologically, physically and psychologically taxing, I'd like to say almost anyone can reproduce children. Others think it's worth it to have a shot at being the world champion at the sport that they love - so that they can inspire others or get acknowledgement from rivals of their own field.

[Animeniax]

You pretty much answered your own question.

Every individual in this world have their own beliefs, values and a vision of what kind of legacy they want to leave behind when they die. Some people think getting a good job and raising a family is good enough and that's fine. However, almost anyone with a bachelors degree can do that nowadays; this includes raising a family because while it is biologically, physically and psychologically taxing, I'd like to say almost anyone can reproduce children. Others think it's worth it to have a shot at being the world champion at the sport that they love - so that they can inspire others or get acknowledgement from rivals of their own field.

I wish I could elaborate without getting too personal or revealing too much, but I can't so I won't. It just feels like I've done what I needed to to count my life as "successful" and it's not going to get any better or more worthwhile. So what then? Try something new? Make a drastic change?

[Buffalobiian]

As long as that "something new" is something that you like, or think you'll like.. I'd say go for it.

[enkoujin]

As long as that "something new" is something that you like, or think you'll like.. I'd say go for it.

This, pretty much.

IMO, if you feel like your life can't be more better or successful than it already is, you've pretty much peaked.

I'm sure there's a lot of things you can do to make yourself more successful, though.

[enkoujin]

I don't get why some people always default to the responses of "you're just a kid" or "I'm older, so I know what I'm doing" in any debate or argument. It pretty much has no relevance to the actual discussion and just because you're older or if someone else is a kid doesn't mean that they can't be more informed than others. If the older party's argument is truly sound, shouldn't they be able to sway or defeat the younger party's side? Not to mention that doing that is condescending and that anyone can use that argument in their 80's (including people suffering from Alzheimer's, etc.)...

[Uchiha Barles]

I don't get why some people always default to the responses of "you're just a kid" or "I'm older, so I know what I'm doing" in any debate or argument. It pretty much has no relevance to the actual discussion and just because you're older or if someone else is a kid doesn't mean that they can't be more informed than others. If the older party's argument is truly sound, shouldn't they be able to sway or defeat the younger party's side? Not to mention that doing that is condescending and that anyone can use that argument in their 80's (including people suffering from Alzheimer's, etc.)...

You know, I used to think the same way, but now I think it does have some relevance. To be clear, I'm not saying people's arguments become any more sound as they grow older, nor am I saying that "I'm older, you're a child" should ever be used in an argument. But, as you grow older, experience leaves its mark on you and colors how you see things. I think it does make you wiser. Thing is, it doesn't make you smarter. If at this point in your life you're a superior critical/analytical thinker than the older person you're having a discussion with, you likely always will be. However, experience may have taught him something he thinks you'll learn eventually as you gain experience on your own, but he's not sure how to formulate that as a precise statement that can be analyzed and criticized.

Or maybe they just don't feel like having the discussion any longer and are being dismissive. I've seen it both ways.

[Buffalobiian]

"You're a kid" or "I'm older" is used for a few reasons:

1) They can't think of a better reason because they don't have any,
2) They can't think of a better reason because they can't explain it into words,
3) They can't be bothered to think of a better reason because they're lazy
4) They can't be bothered to think of a better reason because they think age/rank is authoritative and therefore the best reason.

I agree with everything Barles said.

I do not approve of the age card because it defaults a certain person's opinion as being right due to their age, rather than letting opinions be debated upon intellectual validity. In a technical argument (or rather, any argument in which you're trying to prove that you're right based on objective points), "Because I'm older" brings it down to subjectiveness inappropriately.

Where I do approve of its use is when the technical aspects of the argument have come to a standstill (ie grey zone), and the topic hinges on values and beliefs rather than straight logic or reason. As Barles has said, age "colours" the way you see things. In other words, your experiences and time spent alive can change your values and beliefs. What may be "worth it" when you're 20 years old may not be "worth it" any more when you're 40 years old.

That said, I "approve" of it being spoken about in order to give a perspective on the issue. It shouldn't be used to rule out younger thoughts on the matter. Because we're in the subjective region, someone else's changes after 10 years of living won't necessarily become your changes/realisations after 10 years. You lived in a different time, were possibly brought up differently and could very well experience things differently from each other during a 10 year period.

"Being older" can give a perspective or an anecdotal reference for someone who has not had as much exposure (either in the field you're talking about, or simply "being alive") to evaluate and think about, but should not be used to dictate that the younger person has to make one decision or another.


edit: How old are we talking about though En? Because biologically speaking, teenagers are still developing their pre-frontal cortex (which is used in decision making).

[Xelbair]

Whole point of argument is to make other side understand your point of view and convince them to adapt it.
Using this kind of argument(doesn't matter if you are right or wrong, or whichever of 4 reasons you've chosen) only infuriates the other party and decreases the chances of convincing them.

[Kraco]

Whole point of argument is to make other side understand your point of view and convince them to adapt it.
Using this kind of argument(doesn't matter if you are right or wrong, or whichever of 4 reasons you've chosen) only infuriates the other party and decreases the chances of convincing them.

If you are in a position of authority (real or imagined), you don't necessarily need to care about convincing the other person. It may save much time to cut it short. Of course it won't make the younger one any happier, but that's life.

[enkoujin]

I've just realized this my entire life - a lot of people have been saying this to me throughout childhood and teenage periods and it really stuck out one night. These weren't in stressful situations that required me to shut up and move, but on many different issues regarding decision making.

I also found out that credibility does serve a great purpose, but that background should be more articulated rather than condensed in such a condescending statement. I wouldn't mind if someone told me, "I've been working with laying down pipelines for the last ten years; trust me on this.", but if I get the "You're just a kid." treatment, I'll treat it as malicious.

[Xelbair]

I've just realized this my entire life - a lot of people have been saying this to me throughout childhood and teenage periods and it really stuck out one night. These weren't in stressful situations that required me to shut up and move, but on many different issues regarding decision making.

I also found out that credibility does serve a great purpose, but that background should be more articulated rather than condensed in such a condescending statement. I wouldn't mind if someone told me, "I've been working with laying down pipelines for the last ten years; trust me on this.", but if I get the "You're just a kid." treatment, I'll treat it as malicious.
Exactly - the second one just infuriates the other party and tempts them to ignore the advice/order.

[Abdula]

Far too many people seem to think age=life experience and it does not. Life experience is life experience and no one has a monopoly on it. Secondly a lot of people simply take a long time to learn from the experiences they have had. Thus they assume that if they did not understand something when they were younger, you can not because you are younger and that is just stupidity. Those are usually the reasons why the you're just a kid or I'm older than you argument is used in my experience.

[Kraco]

Those are usually the reasons why the you're just a kid or I'm older than you argument is used in my experience.

You should add to your list the basic fact: They heard it when they were young themselves, so they spread the love when they get older.

[Buffalobiian]

[Condition Ranking for Pre-owned Items]

Condition Ranking for Outer Box
A: No damage to the box is visible.
B: Some damage to the box is visible.
C: Box is clearly damaged.
N: No box/packaging is included. (item is loose)

Condition Ranking for Item
S: A like-new item. Guaranteed to be unused and unopened.
A: No damage or signs of wear can be seen. Item is either unopened or appears to be unopened.
B: Package has been opened and some slight damage is visible.
C: Package has been opened and conspicuous damage is present.
J: Item is either missing parts (the main body or accessories) OR the shape of the figure itself is visibly altered from the original prototype.

Why use "J"?

[Death BOO Z]

if you're selling something that meant to be used as spare parts, like an old motor or something,

[Buffalobiian]

if you're selling something that meant to be used as spare parts, like an old motor or something,

Could you show me an example?

I tried searching under terms such as "J motor parts", "used car grading system" etc, but I have yet to encounter a J-rated part or its explanation for the choice of that alphabet.

[Death BOO Z]

I'm sorry, I don't really shop online, so the above post was mostly an assumption.

[Animeniax]

These ratings are for used action figures/models, right? So J would be where accessories are missing or parts of the action figure are missing. Like an action figure with missiles or launchable fists, or interchangeable hands, but some of the hands are missing, would be rated J.

[Ryllharu]

Buff isn't questioning what it stands for, that's obvious, the chart is right there.

He's wondering why they go from S-rank, A, B, C, (common in any ranking in Japan, see any video game) to "J" in lieu of D or F.

It's probably the first roman letter of some Japanese word for incomplete/damaged or whatever.

[Animeniax]

If that was his question, then why not also question the use of N or S?

[Death BOO Z]

s,a,b,c is the usual. and N stands for "no package"
and J probably stands for junkyard condition.

again, I'm guessing.

[Ryllharu]

First you fail at basic reading comprehension and deductive reasoning.


If that was his question, then why not also question the use of N or S?
Then you prove it.

edit:
What I don't get is how you graduated high school. Then I remember that Texas writes textbooks that dismiss evolution, glorifies Ronald Reagan to new heights, and has officials claim other textbooks are "indoctrinating" students to Islam.

[Animeniax]

Wow, I bet you think a bunch of racist stuff too. Nice job generalizing. You left out the cowboy hats and that we all ride horses, you racist.

[Ryllharu]

Cute. You of all people calling me a racist.

Also..."Texan" ain't a race.

No generalization at all. But don't let facts (http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/movies/the-revisionaries-looks-at-textbooks-in-texas.html?_r=1&) get in the way (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/13/irving-schools-muslim-bias_n_2288601.html).
(Yes, yes, NYT and HuffPo, but doesn't make it any less true.)

[Dark Dragon]

Actually, most of these revisions didn't happened until very recently. The Texas Board of Education didn't really become extreme right wing (or at the very least, didn't propose rewriting history) until sometime after the tea party movement, before that point most of the textbooks were pretty typical. Arguably the only bias that exist before then are related to world history rather than American, but that's another issue entirely.

So unless Animeniax is still in highschool or graduated within the last 2 years, he's largely unaffected by right wing bias of the current Texas education system.

If facts are going to be brought into the argument, it should be presented base on how it actually happened and within context.

[Animeniax]

Cute. You of all people calling me a racist.

Also..."Texan" ain't a race.

No generalization at all. But don't let facts (http://movies.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/movies/the-revisionaries-looks-at-textbooks-in-texas.html?_r=1&) get in the way (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/13/irving-schools-muslim-bias_n_2288601.html).
(Yes, yes, NYT and HuffPo, but doesn't make it any less true.)
Talk about reading comp, I said you probably think a bunch of racist stuff too, since you're so given to generalize about large groups of people (ie people from Texas).


Actually, most of these revisions didn't happened until very recently. The Texas Board of Education didn't really become extreme right wing (or at the very least, didn't propose rewriting history) until sometime after the tea party movement, before that point most of the textbooks were pretty typical. Arguably the only bias that exist before then are related to world history rather than American, but that's another issue entirely.

If facts are going to be brought into the argument, it should be presented base on how it actually happened and within context.Ryllharu doesn't care about the facts as much as he just wants a springboard for going on a rant.

[Dark Dragon]

I don't think this is just about Ryllharu overgeneralizing, it probably has to do with you more than anything. You also technically call him a racist, what with the whole "You racist" part.

It doesn't bother me, but you are very good at pissing people off for some reason or other.There's a very general willingness from several member of this board to jump on anything you say.

But anyhow, I am not a part of whatever this is, nor do i want to be.

The only reason i even responded is because of my obsessive compulsiveness for fact checking.

[Animeniax]

If anyone took any of that talk about racism seriously, I don't know what to say. If you can't see the purposeful absurdity in going from generalizations about Texans to being called a racist, then you should learn not to take things so black and white. I'm just messing around. Thanks for the laughs.

[Kraco]

Alright, that's enough bickering.

[Ryllharu]

What I don't get:

That people frequently criticize the design decision in FPS games to limit players to 2 weapons at a time. It was common to have 10 weapons in the FPSs of yesteryear, but it has become less and less common with games today. People say it "limits" players. I say it adds realism and a bit of strategic tradeoffs to consider. Do you take the gun that has more ammo, or the one that hits harder but is more difficult to hit with in a pinch?

Try dashing about with more than two weapons in real life, particularly larger ones like a SAW, rocket launcher, or large caliber sniper rifle. Just imagine Gordon Freeman running around the countryside with 10 weapons attached to his back.

I get that concessions are made in order to make the game actually fun or enjoyable to play (since getting hit and killed with a single bullet is no fun for most...except in Goldeneye), but bemoaning that the game won't let you carry an entire armory on your back is silly.

[Buffalobiian]

I don't get it either. Overcoming limits is basically what makes games fun (and any pursuits, really). It's the same as reloading in that it adds both realism and tension.

I remember a story where a king went to a village and saw a bunch of kids fighting over one ball. He gave each of them a ball so they didn't have to fight. The kids went back to playing soccer.

[Xelbair]

I don't get why ppl complain about that too - limiting the amount of weapons that you can carry was one of greatest inventions in FPS history.
I dislike regenerating health, but it is easier for game devs to design the game and gives them much more freedom.

[Death BOO Z]

I don't play FPS, but I can understand the criticism, I guess people don't like having their options blocked. especially in games that are "one man Vs EVERYTHING!!!!".
I want the ability to mow down enemies with a SMG after throwing 300 grenades on them and shooting them from afar with a sniper rifle. why take that away from me?

some weapons are fun to use but not necessarily practical (like a reflecting beam, or a freeze ray that lets you break your enemies afterwards), and if I have to go with only 2 weapons, I'm not going to get the chance to use them.

it's especially relevant in single player game, if I would want to make it more "challenging", I'll do it myself.

[enkoujin]

Couldn't video game developers resolve this by having a cheat mode function in single player? Players can toggle on/off this feature, but there'll have to be some sort of trade-off (e.g., not advancing forward in the story, not being able to share scores or get achievements, etc.).

[Buffalobiian]

it's especially relevant in single player game, if I would want to make it more "challenging", I'll do it myself.

It's not that simple. The options that a player would be taken into account in level design and confrontations etc. Picking weapons is a tactical choice and designers would use that to perhaps design "hard" and "easy" parts in the levels. It's also a lot easier to code difficulty based on available health, ammo, damage, enemy numbers etc instead of adding weapon slots. In fact, adding more weapons doesn't inherently make things any harder or easier. Not as directly as the above modifiers anyway. You'd also have to code a different UI/menu, which makes it a poor choice as far as difficulty modification is concerned. It's more a variety/experience thing more than an "waaah, this game is good hard" thing.

[Animeniax]

Couldn't video game developers resolve this by having a cheat mode function in single player? Players can toggle on/off this feature, but there'll have to be some sort of trade-off (e.g., not advancing forward in the story, not being able to share scores or get achievements, etc.).

They should just add a "burden" or weight feature so you can carry as many weapons as you can, but suffer a penalty for it. They could either add a movement/speed penalty, make you tire faster, or add inventory slots that you can fill up. I like the system in Fallout 3 (I think it's from here) where you could expand your inventory as you leveled up and got stronger.

Realistically, if I was a one-man-army like DBZ said, I'd carry 2 pistols, an assault rilfe or range weapon, and a heavy damage weapon like an RPG/bazooka/grenade launcher. It'd be easy enough, one on each shoulder and your side arms on each hip or on a shoulder/chest holster.

I don't like that the game designers restrict what you can use to "make it more challenging". They should just make the enemies smarter or greater in number, not limit what the player can do to kill them.

[Buffalobiian]

They should just add a "burden" or weight feature so you can carry as many weapons as you can, but suffer a penalty for it. They could either add a movement/speed penalty, make you tire faster, or add inventory slots that you can fill up. I like the system in Fallout 3 (I think it's from here) where you could expand your inventory as you leveled up and got stronger.

"Getting stronger" is more of an RPG thing, though there are perks and such that FPS games can let you unlock.

In the end, I think it comes down to game design though. If I made a game where you could carry 10 weapons, but also coded enemies to be stronger, smarter, more numerous and just downright invincible to the point where your ability to succeed is essentially tied to your ability to score headshots (because anything less would lead to your prompt death), you'd have other more stupid things to complain about.


I don't like that the game designers restrict what you can use to "make it more challenging". They should just make the enemies smarter or greater in number, not limit what the player can do to kill them.

See my previous comment about designers taking into account user capacity when designing the experience. Making the player into a God would make the game ridiculously easy, or make the enemies ridiculously hard to kill in order to compensate.

Instead of "I've chosen a sniper so I'll have to make sure the enemy can't get close", it's "I have to make sure I put 4 headshots into him, or 25 body shots.. or else he'll kill me". It becomes monotonous and quite boring.

Again, it's more about the experience and less about the challenge.

[Kraco]

It's more of a problem of some kids getting used to an infinite armoury in brainless shooters where you run around a very limited map shooting everything that moves, which is usually other players in PvP or bots appearing in great numbers. Or SP games where you have to run through long maps full of enemies alone. Then these kids try to play a game that attempts to simulate real combat a bit better for those who like some degree of realism, but not having any idea it's a different type of a game, they complain because they can't hoard everything they see. It's like buying SimCity and then lamenting they can't build troops to conquer neighbouring towns like in an RTS.

Having created maps and missions for both a fast-paced shooter with unlimited carry capacity and a realistic combat simulator, I can say the requirements to reach decent gameplay are vastly different, and all fun would be ruined if that difference was removed with some cheat or whatnot. Well, except for some lousy cheater trolls, but nobody develops anything for such sad people.

[Animeniax]

"Getting stronger" is more of an RPG thing, though there are perks and such that FPS games can let you unlock.

In the end, I think it comes down to game design though. If I made a game where you could carry 10 weapons, but also coded enemies to be stronger, smarter, more numerous and just downright invincible to the point where your ability to succeed is essentially tied to your ability to score headshots (because anything less would lead to your prompt death), you'd have other more stupid things to complain about.

See my previous comment about designers taking into account user capacity when designing the experience. Making the player into a God would make the game ridiculously easy, or make the enemies ridiculously hard to kill in order to compensate.

Instead of "I've chosen a sniper so I'll have to make sure the enemy can't get close", it's "I have to make sure I put 4 headshots into him, or 25 body shots.. or else he'll kill me". It becomes monotonous and quite boring.

Again, it's more about the experience and less about the challenge.

It is a poor game design to limit players' ability to carry what eq they want, same as invisible walls and other cheap ways to increase game difficulty. Only allowing limited inventory slots is still the best way to force a player to balance what weapons he carries. The inventory also holds other items and potions, so the player has to choose between carrying several weapons or just one or two because they also have to carry other eq.

[Splash!]

In the end, I think it comes down to game design though. If I made a game where you could carry 10 weapons, but also coded enemies to be stronger, smarter, more numerous and just downright invincible to the point where your ability to succeed is essentially tied to your ability to score headshots (because anything less would lead to your prompt death), you'd have other more stupid things to complain about.

See my previous comment about designers taking into account user capacity when designing the experience. Making the player into a God would make the game ridiculously easy, or make the enemies ridiculously hard to kill in order to compensate.


I don't really get this point and can sympathize with the views of DBZ and Animeniax(within the context of single player campaigns). Giving the players more room to carry doesn't make them a god and doesn't automatically require enemies that are impossible to kill.

Limiting the carrying capacity is one of the easiest ways to modulate difficulty and that is what makes it so desirable (also a bit of a cop out). It makes it easier to design levels by focusing on the 'recommended' weapons that the player is likely to have. In contrast, what Animeniax is suggesting is harder to do well. In any given portion of a map, you have to account for a player having a large variety of weapons and design accordingly. You would want to place more enemies, but be careful about their placement so as to not put the player in impossible situations. You may also need to offer a larger variety of enemies and consider weapon-to-enemy/weapon-to-situation rules (thinking of Starcraft and how certain units counter others). Finally, making enemies 'smarter' is easier said then done and more often developers often resort to cheap mechanisms to make things more difficult.

The point I am making is that limiting weapon choices doesn't necessarily make for better game experiences, it just makes it easier to design them. Frankly, I would enjoy it alot more if I was given a larger selection of weapons that I could play with at any given time, so long as there were sufficient challenges on the map. Of course, it is alot harder to design a game that does this well, but that doesn't necessarily mean game designers should discard the approach altogether because of that.

[Kraco]

You guys should probably stop to think for a moment why the designers limit the number of weapons. It's not because they were lazy and it somehow magically allowed them to get off with less work when building the missions. It's because out there in RL soldiers don't carry an assload of guns at the same time and then another truckload of ammunition for every one of them. They carry an assault rifle, a sniper rifle, or a light machine gun, possibly a sidearm and a few handgrenades. Some in the squad would then carry additionally an AT missile/rocket or an AA missile, some might carry mines of some sort, assuming they would need such on their mission. I don't know how many of your have marched kilometers carrying a soldier's full equipment, so I will enlighten you: Even a single assault rifle will start to get annoying before too long because it's heavy, gets always in your way, and it's generally cumbersome, yet you must protect it like it was your bride. If somebody had tried to make me carry a few weapons equal to it, I'd have jammed them down this somebody's throat. Not to mentions there's no way in hell you'd move like you should when under fire if you had a meter long metal sticks pointing in every direction from your back.

Like I said before: Different games have different goals. You can't try to build semi-realistic missions if you allow the soldier to carry ten men's worth of weapons and ammunition. Get a different game. Having made missions for both types, I can tell they require different kinds of thinking from the mission maker, but it's not like one would be for a lazy developer, one for a hard-working. They are just different. It's good both types are being made.

[Splash!]

Like I said before: Different games have different goals. You can't try to build semi-realistic missions if you allow the soldier to carry ten men's worth of weapons and ammunition. Get a different game. Having made missions for both types, I can tell they require different kinds of thinking from the mission maker, but it's not like one would be for a lazy developer, one for a hard-working. They are just different. It's good both types are being made.

That is not the point I or others are making. It's not about those FPS games that prioritize realistic combat above all else, where the natural thing would be to limit the number of weapons. It is about how most of the FPS games out there are converging to this model of carrying 2 weapons and some utility. Not every FPS needs to be that realistic, and often I find this argument to be an excuse for games that are otherwise perfectly willing to discard realism in other situations.

So yes, it is good to have both types and it should continue to be that way. One way isn't inherently better than the other and there should also be plenty of FPS games designed for players to carry lots of weapons. I just don't buy that limiting the number of weapons a player can carry makes a game more enjoyable or even that most players out there prefer this to be the case. It is just a matter of what is out there for them to consume.

[Animeniax]

Like I said before: Different games have different goals. You can't try to build semi-realistic missions if you allow the soldier to carry ten men's worth of weapons and ammunition. Get a different game. Having made missions for both types, I can tell they require different kinds of thinking from the mission maker, but it's not like one would be for a lazy developer, one for a hard-working. They are just different. It's good both types are being made.

What Splash! said, plus as mentioned there are plenty of games where it's you against the world (baby) and in that situation the realistic thing would be to carry more than two guns. A real life soldier doesn't carry more than two weapons because he's most likely not solo and not in a post-apocalyptic survival situation.

Realism is important, but like Splash! said, it's often ignored when your character, an average citizen with little experience in combat, suddenly can deadshot monsters and trained mercenaries who outnumber you 1000 to 1. I'd be happy if there were more games that allowed you to carry more than 2 weapons, but they seem fewer and fewer as more designers default to a 2 weapon inventory.

[Buffalobiian]

Hold on, is the complaint specific to two weapons, or the fact that there is a limit on weapons?

[Ryllharu]

I mentioned that I don't find it to be a legitimate complaint to begin with.

It doesn't "limit" players in any way. It just means that they suddenly have to think about what they're doing in an FPS, and this is probably the real reason they're complaining. I get the feeling that some people dislike that they can't just run a weapon down to empty then switch to the next and so on.

Their side of the argument frequently is that the developers use this tactic because, "they don't trust players to be able to handle more than two weapons at a time" and follow it up by saying that there's all sorts of ammo scattered around, but not the type for my chosen weapons. They call the developers "lazy" or accuse them of poor level design.

...that's kind of the whole point of scattering around the "wrong" type of ammo. To force you to switch, or make the decision whether it is worth it to keep your preferred weapons. They're distinctly not treating players like idiots. They have an expectation that the players are intelligent enough to make decisions under pressure.

If they were really lazy, there wouldn't be ammo strewn about to begin with. There would either be no reloading at all, or infinite reserve ammo.

There are plenty of run and gun FPS games out there. They have their own place, but not every game needs to be the same.

edit:
Clarification: None of this post (or the initial one) refers directly to anyone on this forum.

[Animeniax]

Hold on, is the complaint specific to two weapons, or the fact that there is a limit on weapons?

No, but most limits end up at 2 weapons. I get bored using the same weapon but you pretty much have to when there's a limit, as it's too risky to use some weapons in a lot of situations. Typically an assault rifle is best for both close range and distance shooting. Sniper rifles are only for long distance, shotguns and pistols are only good for short range. I find that it really reduces the use of certain weapons and that dulls the experience.

@Ryllharu: seriously though most FPSes don't require that much thought or pressure even on hard difficulty, so the restriction on weapons is just an annoyance. Some games have it set up so whatever weapon is best for a level is readily available upon entrance to that stage (sniper rifle for long range levels).

People were really upset with Dead Space 3's use of universal ammo, but the alternative was the very limited ammo for certain weapons in the first two games so people just used the same few guns that had plentiful ammo.

[Buffalobiian]

People were really upset with Dead Space 3's use of universal ammo, but the alternative was the very limited ammo for certain weapons in the first two games so people just used the same few guns that had plentiful ammo.

Then that's a balancing issue. The weapons ideally should have their available ammo balanced such that a high-output weapon has low ammo around, while a low-damage gun has plenty of ammo to go around.

[Splash!]

It doesn't "limit" players in any way. It just means that they suddenly have to think about what they're doing in an FPS, and this is probably the real reason they're complaining. I get the feeling that some people dislike that they can't just run a weapon down to empty then switch to the next and so on.

Their side of the argument frequently is that the developers use this tactic because, "they don't trust players to be able to handle more than two weapons at a time" and follow it up by saying that there's all sorts of ammo scattered around, but not the type for my chosen weapons. They call the developers "lazy" or accuse them of poor level design.

...that's kind of the whole point of scattering around the "wrong" type of ammo. To force you to switch, or make the decision whether it is worth it to keep your preferred weapons. They're distinctly not treating players like idiots. They have an expectation that the players are intelligent enough to make decisions under pressure.

If they were really lazy, there wouldn't be ammo strewn about to begin with. There would either be no reloading at all, or infinite reserve ammo.



I have never found lack of ammo to be much of an issue for modern FPS single player campaigns. If anything, there is usually more ammo lying around than in older games. Also, I am not sure how forcing players to use a particular weapon in certain areas makes them actually think about what they are doing. As you pointed out, it is made blatantly obvious to players by scattering ammo of a specific type. I don't think the designers actually want players to think about the pros and cons of sticking with their preferred weapon. More like they want to encourage players to switch as much as possible without having to automatically reset their inventories at checkpoints (which would be quite bizarre).

Again, I am hard pressed to find any valid arguments for why severely limiting the amount of guns one can carry is actually 'better'. It is just different, and in cases where combat realism is desired above all else, it would be more appropriate. But that isn't always the case.

Also, I would like to point out that shying away from design complexity (when possible) isn't the same thing as laziness, but I don't really want to get into that discussion.

[Kraco]

I'd be happy if there were more games that allowed you to carry more than 2 weapons, but they seem fewer and fewer as more designers default to a 2 weapon inventory.

If that's true, then I stand corrected. Though it might be just temporal fluctuation in the game trends. If lots of people wanted the type of shooter where maps, missions, and gameplay are designed appropriately for looser weapon handling, then there eventually should be enough games like that, according to the laws of supply and demand. Game makers naturally want to try different things and I don't think they are immune to following (copying) general trends in the business either. Though there have always been more games than game engines, and if some popular engine supports better one type of gameplay, then the designers likely stick to it.

[Xelbair]

1) Limiting the amount of actions that player can undertake simplifies design of the level(no 3-weapon combos or n-weapon combos)
2) simplified controls - mind you that most games need to be available on consoles - and players need to have fast access to each weapon.. and cycling through inventory midfight destroys immersion, which is a BAD thing.
3) direct ability to control which weapons will be available on stage without forcefully removing them from player(no one likes it when someone takes away their toys) - they can easily limit you to lets say 3 weapons from pool of 12 by providing ammo for quite some time for just those select weapons and/or making enemies drop just those weapons -> this leads to #1 - simpler and more precise design.
4) 'realism' effect - as someone said in here you wouldn't be able to run with whole inventory of heavy weaponry on you.

also by limiting player to few weapons lets them pick weapons that suit their playstyle, while giving them as many slots as there are weapons forces them to utilize everything(and some players might hate that), plus there will be always a weapon that would feel useless in such case - and by removing ability to compare all weapons at the same time(doable only by hardcore maniacs tbh) you trick players into not noticing it.


you are giving a player set of actions that he/she can do, and you are designing a challenges that are overcome by utilizing set of actions. Increase in available actions might lead to some unforeseen ways to bypass the challenge - a design bug.

[Splash!]

1) Limiting the amount of actions that player can undertake simplifies design of the level(no 3-weapon combos or n-weapon combos)
2) simplified controls - mind you that most games need to be available on consoles - and players need to have fast access to each weapon.. and cycling through inventory midfight destroys immersion, which is a BAD thing.
3) direct ability to control which weapons will be available on stage without forcefully removing them from player(no one likes it when someone takes away their toys) - they can easily limit you to lets say 3 weapons from pool of 12 by providing ammo for quite some time for just those select weapons and/or making enemies drop just those weapons -> this leads to #1 - simpler and more precise design.
4) 'realism' effect - as someone said in here you wouldn't be able to run with whole inventory of heavy weaponry on you.

also by limiting player to few weapons lets them pick weapons that suit their play style, while giving them as many slots as there are weapons forces them to utilize everything(and some players might hate that), plus there will be always a weapon that would feel useless in such case - and by removing ability to compare all weapons at the same time(doable only by hardcore maniacs tbh) you trick players into not noticing it.


The points here are about how it makes it easier to design such games (except for #4 which is the only valid reason for certain types of game). Also, the control thing isn't that big of a deal. Even earlier FPS games had quick switching to alternate between two specific weapons. It shouldn't be that hard to come up with a seamless interface to speed up the access of weapons without having to restrict the player to just two. Again, it is fine for designers to do things that make their job easier but they shouldn't be dressing it as something that is fundamentally better, because it doesn't actually improve the player experience and in many ways limits it.

[Xelbair]

The points here are about how it makes it easier to design such games (except for #4 which is the only valid reason for certain types of game). Also, the control thing isn't that big of a deal. Even earlier FPS games had quick switching to alternate between two specific weapons. It shouldn't be that hard to come up with a seamless interface to speed up the access of weapons without having to restrict the player to just two. Again, it is fine for designers to do things that make their job easier but they shouldn't be dressing it as something that is fundamentally better, because it doesn't actually improve the player experience and in many ways limits it.

Well, overcoming the limits/challanges is what makes the games fun. Restricting number of weapons makes designing easier and allows for more precise control of difficulty level. Same as with regenerating hp - designers had to design a level in such way that it wouldn't be too easy for someone with full hp, and that it would be passable for someone with 10hp left.

remember that most fps games are made for multiplayer too - you can't have bigass windows with 10 weapons to chose from in form of big circle menu.

try designing control scheme that fits gamepad and allows for most fps actions and lets player chose more than 4 weapons, seamlessly without any additional interface. And remember that most games aren't just run'n'gun - player has some special abilities at his disposal. Good luck.

[Splash!]

Well, overcoming the limits/challanges is what makes the games fun. Restricting number of weapons makes designing easier and allows for more precise control of difficulty level. Same as with regenerating hp - designers had to design a level in such way that it wouldn't be too easy for someone with full hp, and that it would be passable for someone with 10hp left.

I don't get why this is being reiterated over and over again when it is the very basis of my point (stated several posts back). Sure it makes it easier to design levels but there is no hard and fast rule that makes it impossible to design good levels with more weapons. It is just 'harder', and I don't find this a good enough reason to preclude the approach. With more guns on hand, I can imagine a player being put into a lot more high octane situations where the have to face a multitude of different enemies in a single stint before they need to get more ammo. Secondly, I vehemently disagree with the notion that the difficulty level is the only thing that makes games fun (games can overly simplistic but extremely difficult and I wouldn't derive much enjoyment out of them). The experience, the degree of the control the player has over game outcomes, and the choices one can make all play an important part. That being said, there is NO REASON why having more weapons makes it impossible to design levels with decent levels of difficulty.



remember that most fps games are made for multiplayer too - you can't have bigass windows with 10 weapons to chose from in form of big circle menu. try designing control scheme that fits gamepad and allows for most fps actions and lets player chose more than 4 weapons, seamlessly without any additional interface. And remember that most games aren't just run'n'gun - player has some special abilities at his disposal. Good luck.

My whole argument is focused squarely on single player campaigns. There is no reason there can't be subtle differences in rules for multi-player maps (again I use Starcraft 2 as an example where certain units introduced in the campaign need not necessarily be part of the multi-player experience). In a multi-player situation, there is the matter of fairness and players that stay alive longer are able to hoard more become exceedingly difficulty to kill.

As for the controls, again 10-11 weapons can be managed reasonably using a combination of different strategies. And remember, it should always be possible for players to short list a handful of weapons to toggle through quicker. With some thought, I am sure I could come up with a decent design (and no doubt those in the industry that are willing could do even better).


This will be my last post on the topic, since I find that I am repeating myself a lot which is usually a good indication that we are at an impasse.

[Xelbair]

Is interface vastly different in stacraft(1 or 2, dosen't matter) in sp and mp? comparing units to UI is like comparing Cars to fruits(for example both can be the same colour).

[Splash!]

Is interface vastly different in stacraft(1 or 2, dosen't matter) in sp and mp? comparing units to UI is like comparing Cars to fruits(for example both can be the same colour).

Huh, ok? My comment was about only how there can be differences in the multiplayer and single player versions. It wouldn't be a big deal to allow fewer weapons to be carried in a multiplayer version but allow more in the story mode.

[Kraco]

I don't get why this is being reiterated over and over again when it is the very basis of my point (stated several posts back). Sure it makes it easier to design levels but there is no hard and fast rule that makes it impossible to design good levels with more weapons. It is just 'harder', and I don't find this a good enough reason to preclude the approach.

Since reiteration is the word of the day, I'll join the chorus. It's not harder. It's not easier. It's just different. Of course for a shitty game that has 20 copy-paste levels it might be easier, but I doubt anybody here in this discussion was thinking of such games. As long as you have the models and the engine support, even a beginner mission developer can build missions that can allow or even encourage various types of weapons. Who knows, it might actually be easier since different weapons assume different enemies or conditions, and those could be easier to add than to make a more monotonous environment, bestiary, and objectives interesting.

[Splash!]

Since reiteration is the word of the day, I'll join the chorus. It's not harder. It's not easier. It's just different.

That may very well be the case. At a cursory glance, it seems to me that incorporating more weapon choices and enemies may be harder but who knows (at the very least it is not impossible to do well). By that same line of reasoning, limiting the number of weapons to be carried to 2 is not better, or worse, but just different :)

[Animeniax]

In defense of some game designers, BL allowed 4 weapons so you could carry 1 each of 4 of the 5 primary weapon types. I found myself mostly resorting to the assault rifle because it worked well for close and long range kills, and coupled with acid damage it killed pretty much everything. Occasionally the rocket launcher came in handy against tougher enemies, but the pistol and even the shotgun and sniper rifle saw limited use. This is most likely a limitation of the game itself that you could pretty much play with just one weapon even though the arsenal in the game was highly varied.

Other games that limit you to 2 weapons force you to drop your trusty assault rifle and switch to carrying a sniper rifle or rocket launcher for certain stages.

[Buffalobiian]

I found myself mostly resorting to the assault rifle because it worked well for close and long range kills, and coupled with acid damage it killed pretty much everything.

/shakes head.

Explosive assault rifle's where it's at. ;)

BL2 was the immediate game I thought of when you guys mentioned multiple weapons. I'm assuming you guys are talking about your backpack inventory instead of your quick-cycle? 4 weapons in quick-cycle and up to 24(?) in inventory is pretty large. That game worked for a few reasons:

1) You keep picking up stronger and newer weapons that are not necessarily of your preferred type. That is, even if you liked assault rifles you may use a pistol today because your assault rifle was acquired 10 levels ago and is now useless.

2) Ammo - you run out, and so you kinda HAVE to have a few different guns just in case.

To me, BL2 worked since it was kinda a lolwut-overthetop-wholethingsajoke kind of game. Any game in a military setting, I'd opt for a limited weapon approach - whether it's touted to be a military-simulator or just a Sci-fi shooter - it fits the atmosphere IMO.

So Splash, on that note, what are some games that had 2-weapon limitations that you would have liked to include unlimited carrying?

[Splash!]

I am not much of an FPS gamer (but I do have strong opinions about the design of things), so I can't claim to a good sense of the different types of games out there. Mostly, I was responding to Ryllharu's comment about games with 10 or so weapons becoming less and less common.

That being said, I was comparing Half Life 2 and the Halo games in my head. HL2 seemed to have worked quite well for me with the large number of weapons you could carry. As much as I liked many of the Halo games, I didn't quite see the need for the two weapon limit in single player. Also, I was thinking of COD and other modern warfare games as examples where the 2 weapon model actually made sense.

[Animeniax]

/shakes head.

Explosive assault rifle's where it's at.I liked how acid continued to do damage which also helped you see where the enemy was as the damage was tallied.

[fahoumh]

With the original Borderlands, I started with the Shotgun as my choice weapon, then the Sniper Rifle, then a 4x Fire SMG that wasn't powerful but had very fast fire and reload rates, then I moved to a non-elemental pistol...then I went back to the Shotgun.

[Buffalobiian]

I don't get why some counterfeit items have such poor labelling on their packaging. Incorrect spelling or down right contradictory information on the box just screams "I'm fake!!" I'm sure there are people out there who buy counterfeit items knowingly, but their motivation is that the items are cheap - not because the items are knockoffs in themselves.

So is the horrible labelling:

1) A sign that the makers are poor at English, or can't get the labels right even if they wanted to (mental deficiency or otherwise)
2) Simply don't give a fuck (cheap products sell anyway without effort, careless consumers etc)
3) A deliberate act to avoid legal trouble ("It says Abble, not Apple.. clearly this shows we're not trying to "copy" someone, Mr Judge" defence)

[Death BOO Z]

I think it's mostly the 3rd one. as long as it's not infringing on the copyrights of a product, it's not a knock-off. it's a different brand.

[Ryllharu]

[HorribleSubs] Fate Kaleid Liner PRISMA ILYA - 06 [720p] : 322.46MB
(Much larger than a few years ago, but not unexpected)

Fate Kaleid Liner Prisma Ilya - 06 [h264-720p] : [U]749.62MB!!!

What the fuck?! Did groups completely forget how to encode?
That's the size of 1080p episodes...but still just 720p. No wonder I keep running out of hard drive space.

Someone please justify why the file size is insane on the second file. UTW is far beyond any other release week group in average file size. Even gg manages to only have 500 meg files.

[Death BOO Z]

I remember ten years agi, when I was archiving on cd-roms. if a file was above 180MB, I just wouldn't download it. or mannualy cut away the ED to make four episodes fit into one cd-rom.

[Kraco]

I reckon many anime group encoders these days don't have any settings for a targeted file size but rather some mathematical level of quality that would depend on how much changes from frame to frame throughout the episode. In an episode with lots of action and effects, that number would be high, resulting in a big file size. Similarly a static episode with only talking heads would give a small file size. Thus all episodes in a season would look the same, quality wise. Otherwise calmer episodes would have better video than the ones where stuff happens.

All in all, I would also accept smaller file sizes. I'm not a quality freak anyway. It's kind of annoying that when the prices of bigger HDs slowly get more humane, in fact relatively speaking they aren't anymore any bigger because the stuff you save on them has got larger as well.

[Animeniax]

I watched this Discovery channel show about the US Secret Service and they show the latest in "bulletproof" body armor. They test-fired all sorts of light caliber ammo and it passed pretty much all the tests. What I don't get is, they tested it against 5.56mm NATO rounds (which penetrated after multiple shots). The problem is that our enemies mostly use 7.62mm rounds (like in the AK).

When I worked overseas, we had "up-armored" vehicles that had 1/4 inch composite armor plating that was rated to stop a 5.56mm NATO round. This was in the Middle East where our enemies mostly use 7.62mm rounds in their AKs. Are armoring companies so shitty that they don't even rate their equipment's' effectiveness against the most common ammo that our enemies use?

[Animeniax]

There is a recall of Chobani yogurt because 89 people got sick from eating their products. What I don't get is that the consumers noticed the yogurt packs were bloated and smelled bad, but bought them and ate them anyway. What is wrong with people that they wouldn't know to not buy and/or eat yogurt that is swollen and smells bad? Do people not know how yogurt is made, and that it's not a far jump from good yogurt to poison? Are they too busy tweeting and texting to even notice?

[Buffalobiian]

If they're unfamiliar with the brand or type of yoghurt (if it wasn't ordinary yoghurt), then perhaps they thought it was supposed to smell like that. I was like that with cheeses. Fermented stuff in general can smell pretty inedible, now that I think about it.

The bulging could give it away. I'd put it down to trust in the overseeing authorities and their ability to pick up bad things.

[Animeniax]

That's a misguided and lazy trust. Gov't regulations are generally lax and I see expired food at the grocery store all the time. Smelly yet edible cheese is one thing, but I've never heard of smelly yogurt that was safe to eat.

[Sapphire]

They probably don't know that bloated = bad.

I have a lot of Chobani yogurt in my fridge... :confused:

[Kraco]

They are the same people who would eat bulging canned food and experience the wonders of botulism.

[shinta|hikari]

They cannot be the same people because those people are already dead.

[Animeniax]

They probably don't know that bloated = bad.

I have a lot of Chobani yogurt in my fridge... :confused:

Few things in life that are bloated are good...

"Chobani has since identified affected products as those bearing the code 16-012, with expiration dates between 9/11/2013 and 10/7/2013."

1559

I ate one yesterday that was from the same plant but outside the expiration date range for the recall. No problems here, but it wasn't bloated or smelly yogurt either.

[Ryllharu]

People at work had a few in the range. They also noticed a number of them in stores with bloated tops or even burst lids.

I think Chobani tastes terrible. I stick with FAGE (http://usa.fage.eu/) (which tastes the best) and Dannon Oikos (http://www.oikosyogurt.com/greek-yogurt/) (which has the better flavor varieties).

[Animeniax]

Did they eat them anyway?

I'm not into the greek yogurt thing and that was the first Chobani I tried. Is it supposed to be healthier or what? Cause it doesn't taste better than the HEB FotB I like.

[Ryllharu]

Greek yogurt has a lot more protein in it, something like double. All the benefits of regular yogurt plus more protein. It's not really "healthier" when there is still a lot of sugar added to the fruit or other flavorings.

As for my coworkers, they ate some of them, but definitely noticed an off smell. The lids were not bloated on the ones they had purchased. The contamination wasn't harmful to most people anyway. The mold strains that were in the contaminated yogurt generally wouldn't get anyone sick (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/chobani-mold-yogurt-carry-disease-20180950).

I suspect a number of the people claiming that it made them seriously ill are out for a check.

[shinta|hikari]

Bloated yoghurt not making people sick?

Reminds me of people over here who got over swine flu in just a few days... without treatment.

[Buffalobiian]

I like Greek yoghurt because it's generally more flavourful (comparing non-flavoured varieties) than standard. I'm not a fan of the syrupy-sweet flavourings, so my favourite flavouring in normal yoghurt would be French vanilla. That's loaded with sugar as well though, so I haven't had it for ages now.

When I feel like a kid, I take the chocolate-flavoured ones.

[UChessmaster]

I don't get why they call the action of pooping taking a dump, shouldn't they call it to leave a dump?

[Animeniax]

I don't get why they call the action of pooping taking a dump, shouldn't they call it to leave a dump?

I saw this posted somewhere recently. I think it's because the act of shitting is a collective process, a unit of action if you will. Thus when you take one, you're "taking" that action. Same as taking a nap, or taking your time, or taking a break.

[Animeniax]

I don't get why Karl Urban tries to be witty or funny in his roles. He can't pull it off and just comes across as a bit whiny or smarmy. He does it as Bones in the Star Trek movies (where it's in character at least) but it also seems to be his character in Almost Human. He should go back to minimal lines like in the Bourne Ultimatum where his best line is saying "SP" repeatedly.

[Animeniax]

I love Natalie Portman as a person and an actress, but how did she get cast in Thor? Was the part portrayed as a short girly person in the comics?

edit: After watching it again, I don't get why I liked the first Thor movie as much as I did. It's pretty terrible. I especially like the scene where the robot from The Day the Earth Stood Still bitch-slaps Thor and sends him airborne, and 75 pound Dr. Jane runs to catch him.

[UChessmaster]

My friend is celebrating on FB that she paid 130 + w/e shipping for a book that cost 85 + 7...

[Animeniax]

My friend is celebrating on FB that she paid 130 + w/e shipping for a book that cost 85 + 7...

That's what I love about fb and 99% of the people who use it... flying their idiot flag for all the world to see.

[enkoujin]

My friend is celebrating on FB that she paid 130 + w/e shipping for a book that cost 85 + 7...

People just love talking about themselves and their purchases. Give them a mic (social media) and they'll abuse it.

[Buffalobiian]

Shows you why Rolexes sell. Starbucks too. Not that starbucks doesn't taste nice, just that the whole "I paid X amount for Y product, how good am I?" idea works.

[Ryllharu]

On this coast, we call it Starburnt, so no, it doesn't taste nice. It's bad overpriced coffee. You legitimately get better coffee at McDonalds, and Consumer Reports blind taste tests back this up.

There's a reason most people drown it in sugar and lightener, and why you often can't find the price of a regular black coffee on their menus.

[Xelbair]

On this coast, we call it Starburnt, so no, it doesn't taste nice. It's bad overpriced coffee. You legitimately get better coffee at McDonalds, and Consumer Reports blind taste tests back this up.

There's a reason most people drown it in sugar and lightener, and why you often can't find the price of a regular black coffee on their menus.

I've only had tea at starbucks - because i hate coffee... and well - i can buy a whole pack of green tea(leaves) for price of one mug... and the pack is of better quality.

[Animeniax]

There's a reason most people drown it in sugar and lightener, and why you often can't find the price of a regular black coffee on their menus.

They have different roasts available, but it still equates to a cup of black coffee if you choose to not add sugar and cream.

[Ryllharu]

...

It appears that the nuances of that sentence eluded you.

"There is a reason most people drown it in sugar and lighter" ::
Starbucks coffee is burnt, and most people don't like the harsh and bitter taste of burnt coffee.

", and why you often can't find the price of a regular black coffee on their menus." ::
Starbucks expects customers to either buy their specialty mixed coffee drinks, or load their coffee up with sugar, lighteners, and added-cost flavorings, so they often won't even put the price of black coffee on their menu. They found people don't really care for their burnt coffee taken black.

The comma separates the two clauses of the sentence, implying a related, but different subject. This would be the equivalent to a verbal pause. Coffee is the subject of the first clause and Starbucks is the passive subject of the second clause. Had I reworded it to where Starbucks was the subject in both sentences, a semicolon would have been the most appropriate.

[Death BOO Z]

speaking of which, I just started reading a book "by" howard schulz (starbucks ceo). I don't know whether it's a bad translation or a horrible book, but it clearly isn't well written.

[Animeniax]

speaking of which, I just started reading a book "by" howard schulz (starbucks ceo). I don't know whether it's a bad translation or a horrible book, but it clearly isn't well written.

I don't get it, are you equating the book's quality to their coffee, or are you in the wrong thread?

Do you tend to read books in English or translations into Hebrew?

[Buffalobiian]

I don't get it, are you equating the book's quality to their coffee, or are you in the wrong thread?

Do you tend to read books in English or translations into Hebrew?

I think he just made the link with Starbucks.


", and why you often can't find the price of a regular black coffee on their menus." ::
Starbucks expects customers to either buy their specialty mixed coffee drinks, or load their coffee up with sugar, lighteners, and added-cost flavorings, so they often won't even put the price of black coffee on their menu. They found people don't really care for their burnt coffee taken black

It's been a while since I've had it, but I don't remember being impressed. For one, the paper cup was constantly leaking.


------------------------------


I bought an item off ebay, and a component wasn't up to scratch. The seller offered to refund the cost equal to that of the component, perhaps slightly more. Do they deserve a green or a neutral feedback?

(Details: I bought a "gripgo" GPS holder, 2A car charger and USB cable. Main issue is that the USB cable doesn't charge at 2A. I've cross-tested with my own wall-charger and USB cable to isolate the new cable as the problem. The charger itself isn't faulty.

The impact of this is that my phone ends up using more power than it is being delivered. It will still lose charge while plugged in, so it can't function indefinitely as a GPS device.

I should note that the seller sold the items as various "combos". You could buy the holder, holder + charger, and holder+charger+cable at increasing prices).

[Kraco]

Fortunately enough it ought to be easy for you to use any decent usb cable instead of the lousy one, the cable being the most easily replaceable component of those three.

Dunno. It's clear they are selling a subpar component, which ends up wasting everybody's time even if they refund. But since they do refund willingly, I guess they don't deserve negative rating as such, especially since we are obviously talking about cheap shit here. All the more so if you are happy with the remaining two items. If you can't decide, let a coin decide.

[Animeniax]

Hanging out with my niece, we sang along to "5 little monkeys jumping on the bed," and other classic children's songs. I remember when I was a kid, the lyrics went, "one fell off and broke his head" as sort of a hard reality lesson for kids to play safe. However, all the versions I found on Youtube had it as, "one fell off and bumped his head." Does anyone else remember this song having the harsher lyric?

[Ryllharu]

It's one of the many sanitized versions of Shortnin' Bread (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortnin%27_Bread), so any variations are probably valid. I've even heard one with "hurt" instead of "bumped."
Another link referencing the two. (http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/games/songs/childrens/tenmonk.htm)

It's not exactly a great song for real little kids these days:

http://youtu.be/4v5rsEa9vUI

[Animeniax]

It's one of the many sanitized versions of Shortnin' Bread (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortnin%27_Bread), so any variations are probably valid. I've even heard one with "hurt" instead of "bumped."
Another link referencing the two. (http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/games/songs/childrens/tenmonk.htm)When I searched for what I remembered as the "original version" I found references to the "Shortnin' Bread" version, though with even more of a racist tone than the one you posted (instead of "5 little monkeys", it has "5 little d*rkies" and the doctor's advice is to feed them shortnin' bread instead of not to jump on the bed). I couldn't find any references to the version with "one fell off and broke his head." Now, searching specifically for that line, I found a couple versions with that line in it, so I'm not losing my mind and I did remember that version from my childhood. Thanks.

[UChessmaster]

Why is star wars II called attack of the clones, if the clones don`t actually attack anything?

[Buffalobiian]

Why is star wars II called attack of the clones, if the clones don`t actually attack anything?

They don't launch a offensive against the droid army?

[Kraco]

Yeah. They attacked Geonosis, thus starting what was known as the Clone Wars.

[Buffalobiian]

Magi 2015 Calendar, now with 0% Morgiana. WTF?

https://www.tumblr.com/search/magi+calendar+2015

[shinta|hikari]

It's pretty obvious who the target audience for this calendar are. (Read: Male female ratio)

[Buffalobiian]

Indeed. It took me by surprise given the show wasn't particularly about appealing to girls despite the large male cast. Now that I know, I can go with the F/SN one.

[Buffalobiian]

Basic monitor calibrations (such as windows) will tell you

"The next page will look at adjusting brightness. The pictures below show you what too much, ideal and too little brightness looks like. When you go to the next image, adjust your brightness so the image looks like the middle one below"

What I don't get is, on uncalibrated screens how do they get the reference images to be displayed correctly for comparison?

[Animeniax]

I don't get how there are torrents for Ex Machina DVD and bluray available already when the movie is still in theatres and not been released on DVD or bluray. Can anyone clear this up?

[Buffalobiian]

Either they're fake, or the BD/DVD sources were leaked from production studios. I'm not aware of any rule that says DVD mastering must be done post-airing. From a resource perspective it probably makes more sense to do all the post-photography work at once.

The release delay had always made sense to provide a movie-going / financial incentive.

[Kraco]

Might be a screener as well. It's not like a BD rip would have menus and other such things marking a full BD (DVD). As I recall, screener leakage has been a problem forever. No idea how they try to combat it. Watermarks? Movies are already digital these days by default, so it doesn't take a whole lot of work to make a basic BD (DVD).

[Edort4]

I don't get how there are torrents for Ex Machina DVD and bluray available already when the movie is still in theatres and not been released on DVD or bluray. Can anyone clear this up?

I believe that its more like a DVD quality Rip. No menus, subs, multi language, etc. Just some1 that managed to get a press release copy or maybe even plugged into the cinema reproducer and ripped it with good audio/video quality. Russia is famous for this. They provide DVD/BR quality Rips then each country only needs to get their own good audio sample to localize.

[Animeniax]

Oh ok. I have a decent amount of experience with movie torrents and I don't think I've ever seen a major movie released in HQ while the movie is still in theatres, though I admit I usually don't search for them because I only expect to find telesyncs and cams. What threw me off is that the rips are from a reliable source and they are labelled as blu-ray and DVD rips and are in fact HQ. I'm not endorsing the practice of torrenting copyrighted works.

[Kraco]

I'm not endorsing the practice of torrenting copyrighted works.

Right. This is a forum that has endorsed the practice of torrenting copyrighted works since over a dedace ago. Quite a sudden wake-up call, huh?

[Edort4]

You never know who might be reading :D

Greetings to my friends of the NZA, CYA, FBY, and any other acronym thats out there.

[Buffalobiian]

I've heard the English word energy pronounced both as "energy" (ie pretty close to English) and "e-ne-ner-gi" or something similar in anime. What factors influence people pronouncing one or the other (and understanding one or the other)?

[shinta|hikari]

Should be e-ner-gi (hard g) in Japanese.

[Buffalobiian]

In that case, what's the "eh" in front of e-ner-GI that I hear every single time someone says that?

For example: at 15m30s here

http://youtu.be/f1MqEDEnNM4#t=15m32s