User comment history
< Newer [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ] Older >
| News Comments > Gold - Tabula Rasa |
 |
| 50. |
Re: Tabula Rasa |
Sep 6, 2007, 23:00 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
It's actually rather bug-free, though shadows don't like my ATI 2900 card, and there's no word from the developers that they'll fix it.. but surely that is minor 
The game itself is rather bug-free, beyond quests that don't work, but I imagine the quest implementors are just very busy right now..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gold - Tabula Rasa |
|
| 48. |
No subject |
Sep 6, 2007, 22:50 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
TR was indeed fun in June or so, when XP was easy and the DFG killed everything in one hit.
But the razor-thin content can't sustain any sort of real effort, and having to actually spend some time killing things (clicking over and over) ruins it for me. You can often just run past every encounter and live (at least as a sapper), but.. why bother.
TR might be a fun single-player game as-is, for say $30, and at the end you'd kill Big Bad Mr. Bane, but as an MMORPG it just doesn't work. Maybe if you can buy the game and 'beat' it in your first month..
I'd be shocked if TR survives for long, but I've been shocked before. Who knows. I will note that I'm not an MMORPG fan in general, so the fact that TR amused me for 40 hours or so is nice in that respect..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 59. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 16:54 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
But, like I said, I do not think we should be spouting genetic disorder as much as “we” are. 99.99999999% of fat people are fat because of their (or parents if they are still young) bad decisions.
I will always think it's 100%.. I just can't fathom how it makes any sense that you can need to consume 'extra calories' to survive. If your body truly didn't use those 'extra calories', they would pass out your digestive system. In fact, this is what happens with diabetics, as their urine will contain unprocessed sugar - but the sugar is effectively wasted (I suppose you could argue it keeps microbes in the sewers alive).. It doesn't get packed on as fat.
Regardless of whether some people just magically gain weight despite their not actually eating anything (ooh, magic!), I don't see how anyone can argue that fat people and their associated health problems don't create a greater load on society as a whole, as well as making the USA (in this case) look like nothing more than a bunch of fat-asses consuming anything they can get grab with their pudgy little fingers. Ultimately I'm trying to prevent people from suffering, and ultimately I believe I have succeeded. Enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 42. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 15:39 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
If you eat less than your bodies daily caloric intake, and it is not the right nutrition’s your body needs on that day, it will simply slow systems down and lower your required caloric intake. And you can keep doing this until parts of your system shut down.
I completely agree that everyone should eat the proper amount of the base required vitamins and minerals. However, I don't care if you have a thyroid condition, or diabetes, or whatever, the simple fact is that you CANNOT CREATE ENERGY FROM NOWHERE.
If indeed there is someone out there who gains weight despite not actually consuming the requisite number of calories, then it will indeed be a huge breakthrough in science, similar to a gasoline engine running despite having no gasoline in it. While such a breakthrough would certainly make for a more interesting universe (at least for a little while, until everything caught on fire and spontaneously exploded), I personally doubt it will ever happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 41. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 15:34 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
We've tried, and yet you still ignore the attempts.
So feel free to take your own advice.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I fail to see how my analysis is illogical. You have offered no specific evidence whatsoever. I can only imagine that you yourself are a huge tub of lard and you are seeking to defend your gluttonous habits. In this case, you will die soon enough, and probably none-too-painlessly, although you will sadly prove an unfair burden upon the rest of society. Perhaps, though, by eating lots and lots of Cheez Wiz and Twinkies science can learn something or other.. some fantastic new kind of tumor?
Nobody ever said the universe was fair, or even that anyone has to recognize any sort of logic whatsoever, so who am I to complain, really. Eat up, fatty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 35. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 15:08 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Yes, there *are* people who are fat because they overeat, but there are also fat people who consume very little food and remain fat.
If you are fat, and you intake fewer calories than your body needs to stay alive, then your body will burn your fat to keep you alive, thereby causing you to lose weight.
Let's say for the sake of argument that there are some people who need only 500 calories a day to stay alive, walk around, do all the normal things people do. Let us say that this person is 100 pounds overweight, and that each pound of fat can be burned by the body to generate 100 calories. Therefore, each day that the person eats only 400 calories, they will burn one pound of fat.
If this example doesn't make sense to you, please kill yourself, because you are too stupid to exist in any sort of semi-advanced society without well-meaning people endlessly giving you hours and hours of guidance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 23. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 12:55 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Yes, different people have different rates of metabolism. So, if you have a lower rate than average, eat LESS FOOD.
How is this so hard to understand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 19. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 12:29 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Fat people are rude for consuming an excess of food just so that they can excite their taste buds for a few seconds. The US is a global joke because of the population's propensity for just eating and eating and eating, and the country is getting fatter all the time. Wait and see what happens if the trend continues.
You can say I 'don't know what I'm talking about' all you want, but if you don't possess a basic understanding of the universe-ruling concept that you can't get energy from nowhere, I can't help you.
Have fun having heart attacks, diabetes, and cancer, while the rest of the world finally gets tired of the general population's selfishness, invades, and the fat-assed people are unable to do anything but become prisoners of war!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 16. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 12:17 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
So only eat as many carbohydrates as you need for your brain to survive. Conservation of energy, anyone? There's no law that says 'Sugar tastes good, I MUST EAT IT'.
Additionally I would also point out that the vast majority of diabetes cases are caused by excessive intake of sugar day after day after day. Eat up, fatty, let everyone else pay for your utter lack of self-control. Oh, and kindly fall through a rickety bridge spanning a mile-high ravine immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 11. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 12:01 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Do you guys know basic physics? How is it logically possible to gain weight if you eat the same amount of energy that your body needs to survive? Please explain, it will be a huge breakthrough in all known science.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 5. |
Re: oops |
Feb 14, 2006, 11:24 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Nobody is fat due to genetics. Your body needs a certain amount of energy to survive, and if you consume more than that amount of energy, you will gain weight. Certainly different people need different amounts of energy, but lack of moderation is ultimately a personal decision - unless you'd rather regard yourself as completely without any level of conscious thought whatsoever, in which case you need to be killed immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Half-Life 2: Episode 1 Facts |
|
| 56. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 13, 2006, 19:07 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
True, DX did have some cool moments like JC's brother in his apartment (the final time), and uhh.. eh, I dunno. I think DX and HL2 are even. You don't really 'know' anything more at the end of DX, either. DX had too much of the 'throw in every generic conspiracy group ever'.. At the end I had no idea WTF was going on, just that the Illuminati were evil and Globocorp (or whatever) was evil, blah blah blah..
I think SS had the best atmosphere of any of them, though the graphics are dated nowadays.. but during SS I really got the feeling I was on a real space station that had gone a bit off-track. HL2 was similar but it had a bit too much of the 'magically transport here,' 'suddenly it's X weeks later'...
All great games, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Half-Life 2: Episode 1 Facts |
|
| 45. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 13, 2006, 18:04 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
DX plot = throw in every conspiracy group ever, have the protagonist run around to a few different cities while chasing who knows what, pick which conspiracy group wins, the end.
SS/SS2 plot = AI goes crazy, run around and kill lots of robots while flipping switches and finding keys, kill the AI, the end.
DX, SS, and SS2 were all great games, but their plots are no deeper than the average Twilight Zone episode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 40. |
Re: Biker vs. Squirrel |
Feb 13, 2006, 17:39 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
That was good stuff. Luckily you survived. Squirrels are pretty smart. If they were really smart they would realize they could swarm us and defeat us all (ditto for ants).. someday, my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Half-Life 2: Episode 1 Facts |
|
| 30. |
Re: No subject |
Feb 13, 2006, 16:47 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
HL 2's plot is good enough. It's no worse than Deus Ex's or Half-Life's or System Shock 1/2's plot, and it's more detailed than Doom 1/2/3 or Quake 1/2/3/4 or Return to Wolfenstein, all of which sold many copies.
At this point only RPGs have any sort of detailed plot. Maybe as more money is put into games we'll get both immersive environments and real plots, but right now it's either one or the other.
This comment was edited on Feb 13, 16:48. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 25. |
Re: Happenings |
Feb 10, 2006, 17:04 |
zincthallinide |
|
|
Once an attention whore, always an attention whore.. it's just that Madonna is somewhat good at staying in the news. See also Jewel, Britney Spears, Mariah Carey, Jessica Simpson, Angelina Jolie.. same shit.
I never got the whole Madonna thing either. She seems a bit insane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
665 Comments. 34 pages. Viewing page 16.
< Newer [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
