nin wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 11:28:

Instead of looking out the cockpit the pilot goes heads down and lands as he would in adverse weather

How's he going to see the instruments if the laser hit him in the eye?

RollinThundr wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 10:57:

ldonyo wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 10:53:

RollinThundr wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 10:11:
Funny how the libs here ignore posting on stories like these two. No the government isn't out of control and corrupt, no they're not taking measures to destroy privacy rights and turn the US into another nanny state not at all!

The FBI has been trying to get as much power as they can to watch everything imaginable for far longer than the current President's terms in office. But, that's okay, you keep those blinders on nice and tight and make sure you turn up the talk radio volume to drown out anything else you might otherwise hear.

No kidding, I didn't mention Obama did I or blame him for it? No? Ok then. That being said, thinking that giving government more control on anything, is generally a pretty fucking terrible idea.

nin wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 10:34:
Perhaps you should stumble over to the bioshock threads and pay attention?

SimplyMonk wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 14:26:

Beamer wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:45:
I don't get it. Are you trying to say Square Enix is a healthy company reporting a loss to pay less in taxes, laying off their CEO to make it look more accurate, and lost a third of their value on the stock market because, hey, why not?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he is only saying that a loss of this size when they vast majority of the expenses are on restructuring doesn't necessarily mean that Square-Enix is in dire straits and doomed for bankruptcy. They can handle and most likely counted on this drop in stock price before they made the decision to restructure and are looking to recoup losses after them. Which also means that SQENIX could be a good buy if they restructure well.

At least that is how I interpreted the news and Creston's comments. Which is also the reason for my confusion on the President's resignation as this looks like a calculated plan rather than just bad decisions being made.

So you are correct... no company WANTS to be in this situation, but unless this repeats for multiple fiscals it really isn't that bad and just how publicly traded companies work. To answer my own confusion, maybe the President resigned to lessen the impact of the restructure costs and give the market a larger sign that things are changing for the better and their entire outlook from President down is changing for the better.

<shrug>

Agent.X7 wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 15:16:

Beamer wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:33:

Creston wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:24:

Agent.X7 wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:22:
You need to know accounting to understand what we mean when we say we are operating at a loss. On paper, our expenses are more than our profits. However, if I was really losing $7 to 11K per month, I wouldn't still be here.

What? That's crazy!

I don't know what it is about this board, but people seem to love claiming that losses are losses and what you describe is absolutely impossible, no matter what every CPA in the US says.



Creston

And, again, Creston confuses the operations of a small, private business with a large, public company.

Some people kept claiming THQ was losing money on paper. Then it ran out of money and went out of business.

Whoopsies!

Here's a good indicator: if your CEO gets shown the door, you probably actually lost money. If you're running a business that doesn't really have anything to depreciate yet you're showing a huge loss, you probably are losing money.

If you are running a business that has nothing to depreciate, you are doing it wrong.

Redmask wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 15:58:

RollinThundr wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 15:38:
Has it ever actually been proven that publishers pay for game reviews?

For the one or two people who actually doubt this happens, go check out the EGM review of Aliens Colonial Marines. I've never seen a more blatant example. Whether it's direct or indirect they definitely 'sponsor' reviews let's say which in real world terms means they are buying them off with advertising dollars. Did that happen with this game and IGN? It doesn't like it matters because most of the user scores seem to be in line with the reviews.

I am really looking forward to playing this now, thanks for all of the info everyone.

Creston wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:37:
And again, you seem to believe that the ability to write off literally everything and anything under the sun disappears once your company reaches a certain size, no matter what the actual tax laws say.

We've already had this discussion, so go right ahead believing what you want to believe, but quit it with your pathetic little snipes.

Creston

Creston wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:24:

Agent.X7 wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 13:22:
You need to know accounting to understand what we mean when we say we are operating at a loss. On paper, our expenses are more than our profits. However, if I was really losing $7 to 11K per month, I wouldn't still be here.

What? That's crazy!

I don't know what it is about this board, but people seem to love claiming that losses are losses and what you describe is absolutely impossible, no matter what every CPA in the US says.



Creston

Darks wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 12:54:

Quboid wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 12:41:

Darks wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 12:18:

wrlwnd wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 11:09:

Verno wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 09:46:
The game isn't perfect but after spending some time with it I have no problem recommending it to people for $60 or less.

Sorry, but 15 hours of gameplay isn't worth $60.

I'll wait until it hits about the $20 price point.

I’m sorry, but I have to laugh and shake my head when I read this kind of comments. So, 10 to 15 hours of game play is not worth 60 dollars. But many of the same people claiming that this game is not worth that price will go out and have gone out and spent just as much on a 5 hour game like COD.

How do you all justify that reasoning when this game is far superiour in all regards? I’m truly baffled at comments like this. Just because a game does not have MP does not make that game any less of a game especially when the game play and story are far better.

Are you sure about that? A great many people play CoD for multiplayer, which gives them hundreds of hours play. I doubt that many people who are claiming this isn't worth the price bought the latest CoD just for single player.

Let’s be totally honest here about COD. In all of the COD games released and the MP portion of the game. What is really different about each of those MP games? Truthfully I saw not a lot of difference except newer maps. It’s the same BS over and over. Kill me, kill you. Boring!!! So basically you got kids buying this game for newer weapons that in the end all do pretty much the same thing and some different maps to play on. Again, boring!

InBlack wrote on Mar 26, 2013, 09:31:
How do companies keep operating when they pile on loss after loss after loss? Or is this one of those fictive losses, the company is still seing a profit but its not on par with their projected growth numbers so its declared as a loss as a result?

KilrathiAce wrote on Mar 25, 2013, 14:03:
Ue3 sucked so they better step up here.

Hobeaux wrote on Mar 25, 2013, 11:56:
let's see: full-screen DoF and Motion Blur, steady-cam style camera tracking, fog and lighting effects, dynamic hair system, water particle system, materials-based reflections, lots and lots of detail in the meshes, and something scary looming just around the corner. that's a lot in a couple of seconds.

Redmask wrote on Mar 23, 2013, 16:25:
This seems to be a tactic of yours in general though, people bring things up, you change the subject to some slanted rant, accuse everyone of being a liberal and then pontificate more shit you've absorbed from the telly. You don't have a single original thought of your own, everything is bits and pieces from other sources and I have yet to see you actually answer any challenges to your positions, you just change the goalposts and hide behind incensed rants.