A nice reason to pick this game back up! Had tons of fun with it, a solid beat-em up.

jdreyer wrote on Mar 9, 2021, 14:28:
I suppose this was inevitable. You don't spend a billion or whatever and not recoup your loses.

Seemed like an instant given once the deal was announced. Why else would they acquire them if they weren’t looking to make existing IPs exclusives and gamble on only new stuff. I just love how they waited afterwards to confirm. What’s the big secret?

Generals was such a great game. How they can’t successfully make a modern version is beyond me. Or EA I guess.

Not the worst thing in the world, maybe you'll end up having something more efficient in the end.

My condolences Blue, Godspeed Uncle Graham.

Parallax Abstraction wrote on Nov 9, 2020, 23:47:

Mysdrial wrote on Nov 9, 2020, 19:47:
Ironically, I think the game was called Quarantine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarantine_(video_game)), or at least that's the game this made me think of...

I loved Quarantine back in the day, despite it being janky. I've waited years for a proper remake of that. This is absolutely inspired by that but yeah, as soon as I saw Ultimate Games, I know it would be shovelware. Hope someone still makes a proper modern Quarantine some day.

Agreed! This is most certainly NOT a proper modern Quarantine.

Mysdrial wrote on Nov 9, 2020, 19:47:
Ironically, I think the game was called Quarantine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarantine_(video_game)), or at least that's the game this made me think of...

Came here to post this lol. I actually loved that game and all it’s clumsiness.

EDIT: should have watched the trailer first. It looks like an exact clone of Quarantine just updated graphics.

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 13:44:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 11:41:

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 11:20:
For the record, Staten Island is only technically part of NYC. It has very little in common with the rest of NYC, and anyone using their experience in Staten Island to extrapolate out what NYC is actually like is entirely incorrect.

The West Village is still thriving. Midtown is dead, but that's because no one lived in Midtown, not because of anything any NY politician did. And Midtown may never come back, again, not due to politicians, but because corporations have learned that they don't need to pay for valuable real estate when we can all work from home, actually working longer hours than in the office because we can take care of personal things without having to stop working, and some of us will even do it for a cost of living pay reduction. As Midtown goes, so will much of NYC. Expect that, if people are free to move to where there's more space and thus choose to move to places there is more space, there will be a blue shift. Texas is already teetering on this.

But it still doesn't answer the question. It just establishes that people in Staten Island can technically say they live in New York City, but they don't really experience New York City.

LOL this is a riot. Pick and choose only what you need and discredit everything else. Accept Staten Island for the tax revenue and access it provides into the city aka roads, because why would NYC actually invest in Staten Island when it's a cash cow. That's why there's never been decent public transportation on it and the roads are a mess. But just thumb it down like the red-headed step child. Blue mentality is beautiful.

Staten Island's GDP per capita is 30,500. That's above The Bronx' 30,100, but behind Brooklyn's 35,800, Queens' 41,400, and Manhattan's 368,500. Yes, the GDP in Manhattan, per capita, is just over 12x that of Staten Island. But sure. You guys are a cash cow. People believe that.

Taxes, not GDP. Manhattan beats everyone, so let me rephrase by changing that to tax cash cow.

sliv wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 11:45:

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 10:13:

So you still won't answer the question, only now you're angry at cities you've likely never even been in.

Ok, so you won't have an honest discussion, and you'll just keep throwing things out to see what sticks. Thank you. To the ignore list you go.

I can't speak for NYC, never been there. I can't speak for CA now, I was born there but moved away when I was 9. I can speak for Texas, specifically Austin area where it's grown from just Travis County being blue in a sea of red to the two surrounding counties turning blue this election that have grown a lot over the past 10 years. We're getting a lot of tech jobs here which is great but the other areas that are not so great have become major problems. The homeless camps here are incredibly sad to see; these all started just recently when public camping was deemed legal by the city council (you can guess which direction they lean politically). The transit infrastructure is a complete disaster. No one can have an opinion anymore without being canceled by the young and brightest graduating from UT. But HEY! we're turning this area even more blue! Wooo!!

We hear native Austinites regularly say Austin isn't the same https://www.statesman.com/interactive/news/local/austin-skyline/then-and-now/">as it once was. I've been here since '98 and have seen the growth first-hand. Where I live now used to be out in the middle of nowhere, now we're completely developed and everything is expanding well beyond us. Large tech companies move in, where do you think they're hiring people? They're not growing them in-state, they're telling people in Silicon Valley that you can move here and buy/build a massive house for a 10th of what it costs in California. Trump didn't win Texas by much so make this state blue and you have yourself 38 more electoral points. Nobody would be talking about Michigan, Arizona or Nevada today.

But as long as the rules fits what you want, then let's change the whole thing. We'll just make sure all the farmers, gas & oil workers continue to work their tails off to put food on the table for them (and you) and encourage them to start popping off more kids and more mouths to feed to keep up with the rest of the country just so they don't become increasingly irrelevant.

Adding people to the ignore list you don't agree with = safe space

Agreed. I've been in Manhattan ever day (up until this pandemic) for the past 21 years. Never have a felt so unsafe walking those streets as I do today. And literally in a matter of 4 years. It was on the downward trend at first with DeBlasio's first term, but after he lost his pathetic attempt at a Presidential bid he's completely shut down and let the city tear itself apart. I was in Manhattan 2 days ago, ITS ALL BORDERED UP. And don't say it's because of the election. It's because of the lawlessness that has been allowed this whole summer leading up to it.

Combine that with a pandemic where people are struggling (and the rich will just run out and turn some other poor state blue because yeah there's blue %1 and they don't give a shit about you), new laws allowing no bail for most cases except the most severe felonies, the emptying of the jails, the wasted money trying to combat the mental problems that has not even made a dent, a police force that is handcuffed from doing their job and criminalized everything they're faced with a split second life or death decision (they die or i die). It's a damn recipe for disaster and NYC is not coming back from it.

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 11:20:
For the record, Staten Island is only technically part of NYC. It has very little in common with the rest of NYC, and anyone using their experience in Staten Island to extrapolate out what NYC is actually like is entirely incorrect.

The West Village is still thriving. Midtown is dead, but that's because no one lived in Midtown, not because of anything any NY politician did. And Midtown may never come back, again, not due to politicians, but because corporations have learned that they don't need to pay for valuable real estate when we can all work from home, actually working longer hours than in the office because we can take care of personal things without having to stop working, and some of us will even do it for a cost of living pay reduction. As Midtown goes, so will much of NYC. Expect that, if people are free to move to where there's more space and thus choose to move to places there is more space, there will be a blue shift. Texas is already teetering on this.

But it still doesn't answer the question. It just establishes that people in Staten Island can technically say they live in New York City, but they don't really experience New York City.

LOL this is a riot. Pick and choose only what you need and discredit everything else. Accept Staten Island for the tax revenue and access it provides into the city aka roads, because why would NYC actually invest in Staten Island when it's a cash cow. That's why there's never been decent public transportation on it and the roads are a mess. But just thumb it down like the red-headed step child. Blue mentality is beautiful.

VaranDragon wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 10:03:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:53:
Lol love this woke generation that will make sure to change the world in their favor. OH JUST BECAUSE I WANT IT AND MOST PEOPLE AGREE WITH ME IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY! Hey most people want to go out and cheat on their wife I guess it’s ok in your book!

Nice strawman you made there, would you like a match and some gasoline to go with it? Some nice old-fashioned (but couched) biblical sins thrown in for good measure. Now before you go and light that sucker up, maybe you should consider the fact that one person one vote is not exactly a radical idea. I even agree with you that democracy is probably not even the best form of governance, and that mob rule (or vote) is in many cases is hardly desireable, even misplaced.

However in this case, you are voting for ONE very powerful office. Or you should be voting for ONE office. Leave congress and the senate out of it. So if you are putting ONE man into this office of huge power, maybe just maybe the majority should decide who gets to sit in the big chair.

LOL, strawman nice one. I did reach with that analogy, couldn't think of a better one quicker. I'll go down with it. Just as you're all go down with the strawman you're voting for. Why is he a strawman? Have you watched him and seriously think he has the mental capacity to carry it through the next year let alone 4 years? Or what about the questioning of HIS foreign contacts? Why is it so SERIOUSLY BAD to have foreign contacts on one end, but ABSOLUTELY OK on the other? What about the MacBook that is a setup? The double standard for a strawman who will end up being replaced by the end of his term.

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 10:13:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:51:

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:35:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:30:

Beamer wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 16:27:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.

Should someone's vote count for more simply because they live further away from their neighbors?

I don’t know you tell me? So a whole state swings one way and one little county that holds the mass of the population calls the shots? That’s fair?

I can’t believe how many of you are so quick to shit on the little guy because “they’re too stupid to know any better.” I can say the exact same thing about the public housing system in our fine cities that are cultivated because of their stupidity. Oh and which way do those buildings usually vote? How has that been working out for them for the past 30-40 years. They’re still in the same spot. Give me a break.

You're looking at states. I'm looking at people. Why should my vote be worth less than yours? You haven't given a satisfactory answer yet.
You've lashed out angrily, and you've tried to make yourself a victim, but you've yet to tell me why your vote should be worth 50% more than mine.

All of our votes alone mean nothing. It’s the states that are voting.

It’s not about your vote having more or less weight than mine. It’s about properly including the thoughts and mindset of ALL voters whether it’s a popular decision or not. And those decisions hold more weight on a state level (where it is meant to affect you directly) than on a national level.

And let’s call a spade a spade. The population in cities has dramatically increased almost to dangerous levels. Look at all the social issues popping up across them (and please don’t say a any president is responsible for that). They’re struggling in those cities so they’re voting for a way out (aka hand outs). Meanwhile everywhere else in that state is just fine looking at that city to just clean up their mess. That delta in the popular vote is from all the unfortunate constitutes in these run down cities just hoping that hey maybe this time around we’ll see some change. There’s almost 60000 homeless in NYC alone. They’re not going to vote for the person that’s telling them to get up and go to work.

So you still won't answer the question, only now you're angry at cities you've likely never even been in.

Ok, so you won't have an honest discussion, and you'll just keep throwing things out to see what sticks. Thank you. To the ignore list you go.

Lived and worked in NYC my whole life up until a year ago, just moved next door to NJ. Seeing what NYC has turned into the past 8 years, you bet your ass I have some contempt for it. A place I LOVE ran into the ground because of irresponsible leaders. Now after this pandemic it'll never recover, and anyone who says otherwise and starts talking about the "NY Spirit" is blowing smoke out of their asses (or trying not to get killed when they finally unload their overpriced property).

I did answer you. Your vote does matter, so does mine in deciding on how your state (with all your local neighbors, not just the ones you like) votes in the EC. Been like that since 1776 for a reason. You guys are so angry but as usual get nothing done but blubber in front of whoever has no choice but to listen.

VaranDragon wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:45:

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:35:
You're looking at states. I'm looking at people. Why should my vote be worth less than yours? You haven't given a satisfactory answer yet.
You've lashed out angrily, and you've tried to make yourself a victim, but you've yet to tell me why your vote should be worth 50% more than mine.

He can't. That is because he is full of shit. There is nothing he can say to justify himself or the stupid system of preferential voting (which the electoral system absolutely is). If Trump manages to turn Nevada he might cling to the presidency. And he is only 7.5k votes shy at the moment.

This is nothing new people. G.W. Bush managed to scrape bye, despite losing the popular vote in his first election, 9/11 happened and the worst US president in history (yes I believe World History will deem him worse than Trump, despite Trump being a bully and a loudmouth) paved the way for all that came after him, including illegal wars, the patriot act, and of course eventually the reinvention of the republican party as the pulpit for Trump and those of his ilk.

Lol love this woke generation that will make sure to change the world in their favor. OH JUST BECAUSE I WANT IT AND MOST PEOPLE AGREE WITH ME IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY! Hey most people want to go out and cheat on their wife I guess it’s ok in your book!

Beamer wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:35:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 5, 2020, 09:30:

Beamer wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 16:27:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.

Should someone's vote count for more simply because they live further away from their neighbors?

I don’t know you tell me? So a whole state swings one way and one little county that holds the mass of the population calls the shots? That’s fair?

I can’t believe how many of you are so quick to shit on the little guy because “they’re too stupid to know any better.” I can say the exact same thing about the public housing system in our fine cities that are cultivated because of their stupidity. Oh and which way do those buildings usually vote? How has that been working out for them for the past 30-40 years. They’re still in the same spot. Give me a break.

You're looking at states. I'm looking at people. Why should my vote be worth less than yours? You haven't given a satisfactory answer yet.
You've lashed out angrily, and you've tried to make yourself a victim, but you've yet to tell me why your vote should be worth 50% more than mine.

All of our votes alone mean nothing. It’s the states that are voting.

It’s not about your vote having more or less weight than mine. It’s about properly including the thoughts and mindset of ALL voters whether it’s a popular decision or not. And those decisions hold more weight on a state level (where it is meant to affect you directly) than on a national level.

And let’s call a spade a spade. The population in cities has dramatically increased almost to dangerous levels. Look at all the social issues popping up across them (and please don’t say a any president is responsible for that). They’re struggling in those cities so they’re voting for a way out (aka hand outs). Meanwhile everywhere else in that state is just fine looking at that city to just clean up their mess. That delta in the popular vote is from all the unfortunate constitutes in these run down cities just hoping that hey maybe this time around we’ll see some change. There’s almost 60000 homeless in NYC alone. They’re not going to vote for the person that’s telling them to get up and go to work.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 20:56:

Cutter wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 18:15:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.

Great so the least populated states like NoDak/SoDak/Wyoming with less than a million people each all get 2 Senators where California with 40 million people also only gets 2 senators. You've got it completely backwards anyway. Eliminating the EC and doing it by popular vote or even ranked vote means everyone is equal in the decision. The EC means the exact opposite of that. Every election it always comes down to a handful of 'battleground' states that determine the outcome of the election by actually appointing a President. That means everyone else's vote doesn't matter.

It's even worse than that: politicians need only to appeal to the handful of battleground states, and essentially ignore the needs of the states where the result is predictable.

You mean they just need to focus on the battleground states. If the shoe fits wear it. Why waste time as a red candidate stumping in a historical blue state, and vice versa. That’s just the lines of this country making different territories, ahem states.

Cutter wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 18:15:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.

Great so the least populated states like NoDak/SoDak/Wyoming with less than a million people each all get 2 Senators where California with 40 million people also only gets 2 senators. You've got it completely backwards anyway. Eliminating the EC and doing it by popular vote or even ranked vote means everyone is equal in the decision. The EC means the exact opposite of that. Every election it always comes down to a handful of 'battleground' states that determine the outcome of the election by actually appointing a President. That means everyone else's vote doesn't matter.

What are you even taking about dude. Cutter I respect you but this is a terrible take. The electoral votes are by the house representatives. That are adjusted ever 10 years by the census according to population. Every state gets 2 senators to balance the house, they’re not the ones voting in the president. Three branches of government to prevent dictatorship.

WTF are they teaching in these schools????

Beamer wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 16:27:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.

Should someone's vote count for more simply because they live further away from their neighbors?

I don’t know you tell me? So a whole state swings one way and one little county that holds the mass of the population calls the shots? That’s fair?

I can’t believe how many of you are so quick to shit on the little guy because “they’re too stupid to know any better.” I can say the exact same thing about the public housing system in our fine cities that are cultivated because of their stupidity. Oh and which way do those buildings usually vote? How has that been working out for them for the past 30-40 years. They’re still in the same spot. Give me a break.

sliv wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 16:24:

no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Let's look at this worldwide:
Here are the 10 most populated countries as of July 1, 2020
1. China 1,394,015,977
2. India 1,326,093,247
3. United States 329,877,505
4. Indonesia 267,026,366
5. Pakistan 233,500,636
6. Nigeria 214,028,302
7. Brazil 211,715,973
8. Bangladesh 162,650,853
9. Russia 141,722,205
10. Mexico 128,649,565

and if we had to elect one world leader, do you think the US and anyone below would have much to say? China and India's population numbers are staggering. What do either of those countries care about what happens here? The President should not be elected by a handful of heavily-populated counties that negate the rest of the country that they could be clueless about. The rural areas would be hit hardest where they would have zero representation. Sounds familiar. Oh, and I wonder what parts of the country our food supply comes from? It sure isn't LA or NYC.

Might doesn't always make right, just like the 61% you say who want to abolish it. Adding warm bodies doesn't automatically increase intelligence or understanding. 10 sheep or a 10,000 sheep; it's still just a bunch of procreating sheep.

For the election itself, I don't believe one man can make or break an entire country. Trump didn't cause this civil unrest; it's been going on for years/decades, he helped expose it by people becoming more vocal either for or against him. How close was the Bush/Gore election? Hanging chads, anyone? If Biden wins, you can't seriously believe that all of a sudden we'll be singing kumbaya in a giant country-wide song circle? Please....

I'll take the gaming community as an example. I would say this community adopted technology and access to instant information sooner than most of the world in the early 90's/2000's. Why? Because we built computers which was somewhat taboo for the average household and very expensive. Having witnessed this first-hand and now a father, I've been careful to shield my 8 and 11 year old boys from the toxic environment the gaming community is. It hasn't changed in 20+ years; just keeps adding new members. My boys are fascinated with electronics, computers, VR, etc which has a heavy online element and they've already witnesses the condescending nature that many/most/all? gamers tend to have. My only guess to why is we felt informed with the loving blanket of information wrapped around us 24/7.

Now everyone has a computer in their pocket, 24-hour news cycles, instant access to as much real or fake information so now everyone has the opportunity to act condescending to each other just as gamers have for 2.5 decades. Facebook? That's basically an online forum now where (like this thread) anyone can call anyone an idiot and be completely okay with half the US population completely vanishing, Thanos-style, just because you don't agree with them.

It really is sad and appalling and regardless of what you think one elected official won't be able to fix it. Civil War? We very well may be on our way to repeating history. UNLESS, grown adults start acting like it and learn to have real conversations (not shouting matches armed with torches and pitchforks) with those that you don't agree with which very well means opening up your decades-old, closed minds just a smidge. A little perspective would do all of us well.

** Though I am little curious how well the countless hours of COD played all these years will help if the bullets really do start to fly.

Thank you someone who gets it. The founding father chose the EC not because of colonial times, but because it doesn’t alienate the minority vote, it gives them a fighting chance. Another thing that makes this country great that people would love to see gone. People need to start reading history books before trying to plan our future with the values they learned on Facebook.

Orogogus wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:41:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 4, 2020, 15:24:
Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

Is that not true the other way? Fewer people living in the rural counties making decisions for the larger number of city-dwellers they despise?

Equality! Ain’t it great? Popular vote will negate all that quickly as the little guy will quickly lose their voice and tip the scales in favor of the populated cities, then you’ll really see a civil war.

Beyond the fact that they're idiots, no matter who wins the EC has to go. 61 percent of Americans support its abolition.

Great, so the mass populated cities can make the decisions for the rest of the parts of the country they either don't understand or just flat out hold disdain for.

I'll take this the complete opposite way, the EC should be broken down by counties on the state level. Maine and Nebraska has it right.