User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older >
| News Comments > Master of Orion This Month |
 |
| 5. |
Re: Master of Orion This Month |
Aug 11, 2016, 15:10 |
Red |
|
|
Jagacademy wrote on Aug 11, 2016, 12:30:
my friends and I all loved upgrading our ships and seeing them in action back in '93. I absolutely loved custom building ships then directing them in space combat. It was probably by far my primary reason for playing Moo2 as long as I did.
Then one day I watched my best friend, who also loved Moo2 and played it as much as I did, play the game. I was flabbergasted to witness that he didn't customize ships or even watch the space combat, much less control the ships. He only built the preset ship options the game offered and had conflicts set to just show the final math result instantly. I was like, wtf, you're not even playing the game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 7. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jul 6, 2016, 11:26 |
Red |
|
|
| Happy Anniversary! I remember those days. Blue's Quake Page (something like that) and Mr. Wolf's Quake page were two of the earliest sites I regularly visited way back in the late 90s. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Safety Dance |
|
| 3. |
Re: Sunday Safety Dance |
Jun 27, 2016, 14:30 |
Red |
|
|
| What good can come of this? If extremists' messages cannot be heard over online media, the logical next step is to bring it to as many physical door steps as they can until their message is heard. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > etc. |
|
| 6. |
Re: etc. |
Jun 9, 2016, 15:34 |
Red |
|
|
| I loved the first Resident Evil movie. It went downhill at an alarmingly increasing rate though. The second one wasn't too bad, but that last iteration was one of the worst movies ever. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Metaverse |
|
| 4. |
Re: Morning Metaverse |
Jun 1, 2016, 20:12 |
Red |
|
|
| Can't you just not tell the tv your wifi password? I don't have a Samsung, but the Vizio and Sharp smart tvs I have work just fine as a tv even without wifi access. And I use connected devices (PS4, TiVo, HTPC) for all the content. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Witcher III: The Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine Released |
|
| 33. |
Re: Witcher III: The Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine Released |
May 31, 2016, 19:19 |
Red |
|
|
Creston wrote on May 31, 2016, 17:59:
It just takes some time to learn what to parry, what to dodge, what to roll, what sign to use where, etc. Once you've learned how it works, and you put the difficulty up, it's a fantastic combat system.
See I didn't find any of that intuitive. It felt like combat was trial and error memorization of what counters what for whatever arbitrary reason. And then I always felt clunky trying to execute the various actions. I didn't feel like my FPS skills were relevant, more like I needed awesome spreadsheet skills to kick ass.
With a typical first-person shooter, reflexes and environmental awareness enable you to dodge in an organic manner, not because you timed the appropriate dodge-mechanic button press. Your weapons have a familiar purpose making it intuitive in what situations each would be effective. And you can actually see what's going on because it's ranged combat, not melee where the FOV just doesn't work well and aiming/targeting it awkward.
I don't like saying it's bad. But it certainly isn't my cup of tea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Witcher III: The Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine Released |
|
| 15. |
Re: Witcher III: The Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine Released |
May 31, 2016, 14:29 |
Red |
|
|
ForgedReality wrote on May 31, 2016, 13:05:
ItBurn wrote on May 31, 2016, 11:41:
I'll be playing them eventually, in super easy mode, because the combat is terrible.
I don't know why people say this. The combat is fine. Have you even played the game? You want to dumb it down because it's "terrible," or you just lack the proper skill and it's too "hard?" Hmm... I got a few hours in before I quit because I didn't like the combat. So there are people in that camp. I don't want to claim it's terrible, but for me, it just wasn't fun. I felt like the complexity of it was forced rather than natural, that it was hard in a way that wasn't enjoyable or rewarding.
One day I'm going to try again with the difficulty lowered so I can see everything else Witcher has to offer. So many people have given it really high praise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Mobilization |
|
| 6. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
May 24, 2016, 19:00 |
Red |
|
|
| I didn't realize voice assistants were AIs. I guess the ones that don't suck as much as Siri might be considered rudimentary AI. But if speaking commands to your phone really is the next big thing, all Star Trek like, couldn't Apple just integrate it from Google as a last ditch effort? I'm sure Google would take them up on a licensing deal. They already put all their apps on iOS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 10. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
May 16, 2016, 18:07 |
Red |
|
|
descender wrote on May 16, 2016, 16:51:
One does wonder exactly which intelligence that is testing. Don't intelligence tests generally focus on pattern recognition rather than knowledge? And that test is clearly a pattern recognition exercise as the actual math involved is trivial. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 24. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
May 9, 2016, 19:18 |
Red |
|
|
Beamer wrote on May 9, 2016, 18:19:
And, while ownership is nice, I felt that way about DVDs, and when I go back and watch them the quality is so terrible that I just end up paying the $3 or whatever to rent on Amazon. I find that DVD quality is about on par with HD downloads from iTunes or HD streaming off NetFlix. Amazon Prime streaming is noticeably worse than all of those; it's my last resort for watching anything. Blu Ray is handily superior to anything I can [legally] download or stream online, but it is also by far the biggest hassle so I only have special favorites on Blu Ray. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 18. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
May 9, 2016, 18:13 |
Red |
|
|
| It's a shame that Blu Ray was ruined so badly. I had a high end HTPC/projector setup back in the days of DVD (1300+ titles) but never could justify the move to Blu Ray because of all the crap they overloaded it with. Now I just use my PS4 to play the occasional Blu Ray but accept the inferior quality of DVD and HD streaming for most stuff. Blu Ray just isn't worth the hassle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Mobilization |
|
| 7. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
May 9, 2016, 18:01 |
Red |
|
|
On the opposite side, Apple's update practice is bloody obnoxious. It pretty much forces the update down your throat, downloading it onto your device, prompting you daily until you cave and install it. For every damn 0.0.1 release. I feel like a build server forced to load every snapshot their engineers produce.
And then I have to click through each of my devices telling me about how a new device is using my account for facetime and imessage. No it's not! That's the same set of devices that have been using my account, just +0.0.1 versions moar!
Or my kid doesn't know any better and clicks update then complains that her iPad is stuck downloading and rebooting for the 20 minutes she's allotted to use it before bedtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine This Month? |
|
| 11. |
Re: The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - Blood and Wine This Month? |
May 9, 2016, 17:50 |
Red |
|
|
To those of you who've played through Witcher 3, what makes it so awesome? Story? Exploration? Puzzles? Combat? Crafting?
I ask because I have it for PS4 and tried to play it, but I personally couldn't stand the combat mechanics. It made me not want to play. I was considering changing it to the easiest difficulty so that I could try the game without worrying about mastering the combat, but is the game worthwhile and fun enough to warrant going through in easy mode?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Mobilization |
|
| 2. |
Re: Morning Mobilization |
May 4, 2016, 16:55 |
Red |
|
|
Cutter wrote on May 4, 2016, 13:30:
The only thing Megan Fox belongs in is porn.
But is she good at porn? Is there evidence? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Fallout 4 Far Harbor This Month |
|
| 9. |
Re: Fallout 4 Far Harbor This Month |
May 4, 2016, 16:53 |
Red |
|
|
Tachikoma wrote on May 4, 2016, 14:25:
Building a proper survival mode/game is not as easy as everybody trying to jump on the bandwagon thinks it is. It takes much more than just slapping on some rudimentary diseases and fiddling with a few stats.
But does everybody think it's easy? I've seen some pretty thoughtful and thorough posts on various forums also explaining that doing survival correctly is a lot of work and needs to be considered far more deeply than Bethesda seems to grasp. I think it's just Bethesda that thought it'd be as simple as slapping in some conditions, fiddling with stats, and adding arbitrary overhead tasks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 25. |
Re: Measles: Out of the Blue |
Apr 28, 2016, 17:02 |
Red |
|
|
descender wrote on Apr 28, 2016, 15:56:
I don't care what an individual parent thinks That makes you close minded. You aren't open to curiosity, to understanding, to reaching shared agreement. Your stance is that of a zealot, convinced of his own righteousness above all, refusing to even consider new evidence or expand upon existing evidence. That's not science. Your stance originates in science, but you're not presently practicing it.
The intelligent anti-vaxxers aren't even challenging your stance. They just want more testing, further reduced risks, even safer drugs. How can you possibly be against any of that? It is fact that vaccines aren't truly safe; drugs generally aren't. They're merely safer than the diseases they cure. What is wrong with insisting that ratio must improve further?
descender wrote on Apr 28, 2016, 15:56:
No amount of "evidence" will ever be enough for the people who make these type of complaints. Simply not true. All you're doing is proclaiming that your pedestal is so high you can't bother listening. Get off of it. You're wrong that no amount of evidence would sway people. There are real and reasonable requests being sought which would help alleviate concerns. Mandating obedience is not a good solution. Actually hearing people and addressing their concerns, not the concerns you think they have, is how you gain trust and compliance.
If your true goal is higher vaccination rates, why would you give up on a harmonious resolution? Why so belligerently cling to the mantra that everyone who isn't already convinced is just stupid and wrong and needs to be punished or controlled, when that approach makes for such a rough battle? Is your goal just to assert dominance, and vaccination is merely a cause on which to pursue that crusade?
descender wrote on Apr 28, 2016, 15:56:
The one thing they hinge their entire movement on is the autism/mmr vaccine report which is basically completely misunderstood and willfully misrepresented. I'm genuinely sorry you're that completely ignorant of the anti-vaxxer movement. That report has to be one of the worst examples and biggest thorns in the whole ideal. The propaganda machine pushes that incident as hard as it possibly can because it knows how damaging it is. The only people who put any weight in that report are the vacuous pro-vaxxers using it as their sole counterpoint.
descender wrote on Apr 28, 2016, 15:56:
I'm glad that they think they are doing research and helping their own child's chances, but they are WRONG and they need to be treated as such. Stop making excuses for them. Being unconvinced is not the same as being wrong. Analyzing statistics and making a decision based on the odds isn't wrong, either. It's selfish from the perspective of humanity, but it's also very specifically what makes us human.
I'm not making excuses. I'm pointing out that we're all human, and everyone's voice should be heard. You're not even listening.
And by you, I mean not just you specifically, but the unfortunately great number of people who share your mindset.
Sepharo wrote on Apr 28, 2016, 13:44:
By that irrefutable logic the best course of action would be to hermetically seal your child into a safe environment where no disease or disaster can reach them. Also they probably shouldn't be allowed to interact with any other individuals or animals because anything could happen. If we just wanted to make ridiculous observations, the safest course of action is not to have children. But that's not very [re]productive.
The fatal assumption here is that they are understanding and implementing those "statistics" correctly in the first place. That is a huge assumption and not... statistically likely. :p I think you edited that in during my long-winded reply. I will say that I think you're probably correct on that point. However, I also maintain that further increasing the safety of vaccines, creating tests to identify at-risk children, better testing the the effects of stacking too many vaccines in one visit, etc.. all those things which would push those statistics even further towards the advantage of vaccination.. that would help everyone more easily reach the same data-driven decisions.
This comment was edited on Apr 28, 2016, 17:19. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 22. |
Re: Measles: Out of the Blue |
Apr 28, 2016, 12:05 |
Red |
|
|
descender wrote on Apr 27, 2016, 14:44:
They're logical, playing the statistics in their favor.
Great post but I have to disagree here. They are only assuming that they are "decreasing their own risk" in that scenario, and that assumption is at the base of the underlying problem.
If they are actually that worried about it they could probably get their own child tested to see if there would be any complications, no? Rather than compromising the entire system because of their own concerns. I totally agree that they could screen patients for these issues but just because that screening isn't mandatory doesn't preclude parents from taking those precautions anyway.
There is no such test. That's the problem. Unless your kid is immune-compromised or a sibling of a child that suffered a vaccine injury, you have no choice but to roll the dice.
Because big pharma has literally zero liability, and because most pro-vaxxers are so vehemently disillusioned that vaccines are totally safe (vs a matter of weighing pros/cons), and because the vaccine injury chance is still relatively small, no one cares enough to develop a test. Essentially, the few injured children are viewed as acceptable casualties. Statistically insignificant.
That works fine when talking about humanity as a whole, but parents are creatures of instinct. Our nature is to selfishly protect our own offspring above all others. It is impossible for me to accept that my child is statistically insignificant. Until sufficiently few children are being vaccinated for a particular disease that the odds of catching it combined with the odds of a serious side effect outweigh the odds of vaccine injury, an intelligent parent will see that the safest choice for their specific child is not to vaccinate. That's not really up for debate. It's not an assumption. It's statistics.
That's the battle that so many pro-vaxxers are blind to, because they don't realize science and data and logic are being used against them. They joined the side of science without actually doing any real research. They are as foolish and clueless as the religious zealots giving a bad name to the anti-vaxxer side.
If you want to stop the anti-vaxxer movement, you need to first ask them why. Ask them what it would take to change their minds. Don't assume they're idiots and call them names. Don't keep throwing the same data at them. It's clearly not convincing enough. What's so unscientific or unreasonable about needing more evidence? They're unwilling to follow along on faith that big pharma and the government have their children's best interests in mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 20. |
Re: Measles: Out of the Blue |
Apr 27, 2016, 11:38 |
Red |
|
|
BobBob wrote on Apr 26, 2016, 15:56:
If you vaccinate your own kid and your neighbor doesn't, what do you have to worry about? Is there a chance of a mutation that will override what's been vaccinated?
Herd Immunity is the basic reasoning used to justify why everyone must get vaccinated. And it's not just that some compromised people can't get vaccinated. It's also the fact that vaccines aren't 100% effective. Some aren't even close (flu vaccine isn't even 50%). So the less chance of anyone having the disease, the less chance that the unvaxxed or vax failure cases will be exposed.
I'm not against vaccines personally, but I do have a serious beef, as a parent, with one aspect of the thought process. And that's that we put little or no effort into effective means of pre-identifying children who will have adverse reactions to vaccines. We accept that Herd Immunity is critical to protect the kids who can't be vaccinated, but we don't test kids to see if they should be in the group that shouldn't be vaccinated. However small that group may be (and yes, it's pretty tiny, but vaccine injuries are a very real thing nonetheless), that's no consolation to the parent whose kid winds up being permanently damaged.
No parent wants that for their child, and so it's very easy to sympathize with the mindset not to take the risk. It's quite logical, really, if you expect everyone else's kid to be taking the risk to the benefit of your own. Selfish, yes. Very selfish. But also, very logical, and truly the safest decision when considering only your own child. And as a parent, quite honestly, I do want what's best for my own children, even if it's at the expense of yours. That devotion is what ensures my genes, which I'm rather partial to, carry on.
Point being, many anti-vaxxers aren't Christian extremists or morons. They're logical, playing the statistics in their favor. They're gaming the system for their own family's best interests. They evaluate every vaccine differently, deciding the risk level of each scenario, getting only the vaccines where the odds aren't in their favor. If you want to convince those people to get the vaccines they're currently not getting, name calling just doesn't work. These are people who've done more research and are generally smarter than your average pro-vaxxer. You need to shift the odds for them, and testing kids to determine vaccine injury potential would go a very long way in making the case.
This comment was edited on Apr 27, 2016, 11:53. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 11. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Apr 26, 2016, 13:38 |
Red |
|
|
RoboNerd wrote on Apr 26, 2016, 12:06:
Re: Six cases of measles confirmed in Tennessee outbreak. Measles was eradicated in the U.S. in 2000.
Don't care for all the name calling in this article. I would also like to know if the influx of folks from outside the country where vaccination efforts are slim to none played a big role. But, we are never going to see reporting on that aspect - it's not PC. Sad, because disease will never respect PC "rules". People like the author of this article give vaxxers a bad name. There is virtually no information in this report. It's just name calling. What is the source of this outbreak? Was it even related to anti-vaxxers? Is there documented reduced vaccination rates in that area? How many of the infected were vaccinated vs not? How many outbreaks has the US had since the disease was eradicated?
This author comes across more ignorant and close minded than your stereotyped antivaxxer and wonders how that group gains momentum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
202 Comments. 11 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
