wtf_man wrote on Jun 15, 2013, 00:07:

Xbox One Games At E3 Were Running On Windows 7 With Nvidia GTX Cards

Ok... that's just fricken lame.

Beamer wrote on Jun 14, 2013, 22:09:
The car analogy is also so flawed it's painful. A car is something extremely expensive that most people cannot afford new. At all. It's also not really a luxury in this day and age.

Most importantly, its value drops. There's good reason to want a new car versus a used one. Less risk, it's cleaner, it will run better, etc. A used game? It's identical to a new game. Zero flaws based upon it being used. It simply does not degrade. Cars do.

Your post was nearly a meltdown and it is pretty far off base.

Krovven wrote on Jun 12, 2013, 19:08:

Quinn wrote on Jun 12, 2013, 18:10:

I understand that's a bummer for many, but to me.. replaying a game ends up with either making the exact same choices or making different choices and feeling horribly uncomfortable in doing so.

I put myself in the protagonist. Changing the decisions I'd normally make for the sake of replayability just... rubs me the wrong way.

But what you don't seem to understand is that those decisions you made, weren't actually decisions at all. ie: Would you like orange Juice, Coke, Milk, or Water? You choose Milk. I hand you Coke in a Milk bottle. Your choice meant nothing when the end result is always the same.

I would have preferred to see those choices mean something. So if I saved that guy and let the kid die, how does the story change? How does that kids father treat me throughout the story? How does the guy I saved impact the story if he lived?

In the end, the Walking Dead game was so good because of the story and the acting, not because of the gameplay.

So, why provide the questions to the player when the answers mean nothing? It's a false sense of choice. The developers should just let the point and click adventure play out as they want it to, rather than trying to trick the player into a sense of false gameplay.

Fion wrote on Jun 11, 2013, 17:00:
Ah the infamous boy's bathroom in the south park school.

Can't f'in wait for this game. Uplay does kinda suck, but it's still better than Origin!

Prez wrote on Jun 11, 2013, 02:18:
Yeah, Uplay is pretty shit, but but least Uplay allows an offline option, and Ubisoft still sells games on Steam.

Beamer wrote on Jun 6, 2013, 00:56:
Again, depends on the jurisdiction.

In fact, this has been done before elsewhere. It was found that a password wasn't incriminating because there was already evidence. Applying that logic to this, since they already know there is porn on some hard drives then making the guy decrypt the rest isn't fifth amendment protected.

Personally, I don't agree.

jdreyer wrote on Jun 5, 2013, 16:22:
@jimnms: Right, so compelling him to open decrypt the drive violates his Miranda rights? That seems in direct violation of the fifth amendment, to my (admittedly amateur) ears.

Beamer wrote on Jun 5, 2013, 02:10:

Cutter wrote on Jun 5, 2013, 01:59:
I suppose it's a contempt charge. Same as if he had a safe they couldn't crack and had issued a warrant to see its contents and he refused to open it.

In general, if he has the key he has to open it. If it's a combination he does not, as admitting he has the combination says he owns, or at least has access to, the safe and its contents.

So, by and large, a password should fall under that. It depends on what state, as several have gone one way, others have gone the other.

I'm not particularly in favor of defending child pornographers, but the 5th amendment seems to apply here. The Court in the case agreed a few hours ago. Sure, he is already incriminated, but if those remaining files are all child porn he's clearly looking at much more time than if they aren't. Therefore, using the password, which shows possession, would be incriminating himself.

He's gross regardless.

jdreyer wrote on Jun 2, 2013, 19:32:

Cutter wrote on Jun 2, 2013, 16:44:
Matt Smith is leaving? What a fool! Enh, while he's ok, he's never really blew my hair back as the Doctor anyway. Last good one after Tom Baker was David Tennant. And whilst the weepy angels are great, for a guy who can travel the universe and through time he sure runs into the same enemies all the damn time. Surely there must be more out there than Cybermen and Daleks.

I thought the one season Chris Eccelston did was fantastic. He was great as the Doctor.

Orogogus wrote on May 31, 2013, 18:08:
Well, I agree that most people I've met don't know how to use the Start Menu. If I had a nickel for every time I opened an old version of Windows to find the Start Menu filled with crap going past the screen height... In practice I find that the majority of people I know use desktop icons for everything, and the Start Menu is just there to shut down the computer.

I can sort of see how that mess ended up as the W8 interface, especially after all these people were apparently able to manage tablet and smartphone interfaces just fine. But not so great for people who were able to navigate Windows in the first place,