Ok, yes that was bad ass. but I really hate to say it. Everything in the video is something already seen in a star wars film.

Dude with a red face fighting with a light saber staff thing.

Droids with duel blasters.

Chase through an asteroid field.

Fast ugly tough cargo ship owned by a smuggler with gun ports on top and bottom. (They just need to name it the Aluminum falcon)

Big triangle shaped ships.

Mentor Jedi dieing while rookie lives.

Flying through some kind of structure.

The disturbance in the force pause and sad face.

Storm/clone troopers.

Smuggler saves the day. But, I will admit this one makes Han Look like a whiny little girl.

An R2D2 wannabe

and the escape in to hyperspace.

And apparently I'm not the only one to see this as several people already pointed it out.....
Whats truly sad is I don't have a computer that will run the game. So, I'll have to miss this one.

It isn't just Han Solo that's being ripped off. The whole time I was watching it seemed like they were putting old ideas in new clothes and changing the order around.

Smuggler guy who cares about money, helps the Jedi, and happens to have the fastest ship - Han Solo
The Sith ship that landed in the docking back looked an awful lot like the Millenium Falcon
Man the guns while I get the hyper-drive ready - escaping the Death Star in Episode IV
Tiny bit of Empire while they dodged some asteroids
The Jedi apprentice's master is killed and now she must carry on the fight against the Sith(I, IV, VI)
Flying through the Sith ship looked an awful lot like going into the Death Star in Episode VI

I understand the necessity of continuity in this universe they've created. A lot of its not only necessary, but fun. Still, they need more new ideas. The trooper being a character that gets developed may be the only new one. Also, the Jedi chick left her lightsaber with her master so that's probably a starting point for the game - you get to play as a Jedi, but you don't get a lightsaber for a while.

Still, this video did look freakin' awesome!
>> ^rychan:

What the hell... this was better than 90% of the prequel content. All four protagonists (two jedi's, captain, and stormtrooper) are already more likeable than Anakin and Padme. We got to see a storm trooper actually doing cool stuff. The smuggler was clearly a Han Solo rip off, but still. It's such a great universe, why do you have to run it in to the ground George Lucas.
Unfortunately, the actual gameplay footage I've seen looks pretty pedestrian.

I'm commenting as I watch here, he's already screwed on the "problem" of evil. He's got the whole thing ass backwards. The only way to really solve the problem of evil from a theistic point of view is as he rightly points out the "lack of perspective argument" ie "Maybe there is a larger plan"/maybe it isnt evil after all/maybe its all part of gods plan or similar nonsense.

The point about bringing up this from an atheistic point of view is that there is of course a much more elegant, more logical, more reasonable and more probable solution to the "problem" of evil: There is no god.

It seems like Keller hasnt even considered this as a real possibility, because if he did, he would realize that the problem dissappears entirely. And its not just for human acts of evil, of course. Think of the recent Japan Tsunami..Thousands pointlessly killed by the physics of tectonic plate movement. In a godless universe there is no "why?!!" here, we live on a thin crust wrapping around a lava ball, partially covered by water. A tsunami now and again is inevitable.

If you believe in god, you'll have to make up lots of shitty excuses for these kind of events

None of this proves that there is no god, its just one of those many things that makes it unlikely.

Oh and now his dragging Stalins corpse out again to bash atheism. Nothing to do with atheism. Stalinism was a sick personality cult catering to creduilty and superstition in order to promote a form of marxism. The reason they went after Christianity was because they were competing to convert the gullible to a new mindless cult.

Its not just that its pointless "keeping scores" as it were, I would like to see him tackle Hitchens 2-part Challenge:
Part 1: Name for me one good thing done, or one nice thing said, in the name of religion, that it would be unthinkable that a secularist/atheist could just as reasonably say or do.

I've never hard a satisfying answer to part 1.

Part 2: Name for me one bad thing done, Or one bad thing said, in the name of religion,that it would be unthinkable that a secularist/atheist could just as reasonably say or do

I bet you thought of something after reading the fifth word in that sentence.

Its not a tie.

Kelller parroting atheist argument:"Until you prove there is a god, I dont have to believe in god!"

What a dishonest douche.

I've never actually heard any atheist make that argument. Heres how the argument really is: I've never seen a shred of evidence, ever, anywhere, in the history of everything that would even suggest, in the slightest,remotest possible way that there might be a god. None. Zip, Zero. I'm not demanding that you come up with a mathematical proof or anything, far from it, but until there is some evidence, ANY kind of evidence, I dont see any reason to believe in god, any more than santa.

More rubbish: Why do I assume god is "inside" the universe? I dont, douchebag, I'm not assuming anything, its your invisible friend, moron, you can fantasize. Oh great, there you go now... "He might be outside of everything", please do go on wasting brainpower trying to make that work..

"You cant prove anything" "So why do you say to God.."---BEEP-- I dont say anything, Keller, I dont talk to invisible things that arent there.

"You cant prove there is no god, so not believing is an act of faith" Yup, I take the same risk you do, Keller, But I'd wager disbelieving in Cthulhu will land you in much more trouble than the mere wuzzy little lake of fire I'll be surfing on (while listening rock music).

Oh fuck. "Fine-tuning" now.. Yep, this universe, that has almost NOTHING but vaccum at minus 270 celsius instantly deadly to any living thing, where the extremely tiny exceptions are 99.999% nuclear fireballs that will burn anything to death once its close enough not to freeze to death. So among a hundred billion galaxies with a hundred billion stars, we know of exactly one that has a planet at just the right distance. What are the chances, eh? Ten thousand billion stars and one of them has life around it (and in few million years its gonna toast that motherfucker too). Ergo: stars are perfect places to have life around. Yup Finetuning. Four aces? more like one ace and ten thousand billion worthless cards, but whatever.

Of course, if I was god, I might make just , I dont know, lets say ten stars, with lots of fine planets around them with lush green envirionments and no nasty earthquakes, asteroids, hurricanes and so on, perhaps I'd even make sure that the sun doesnt blow up and kill everybody in the end. But then again, what the hell do I know..


Ok, that was half an hour. maybe I'll do the rest tomorrow.

Good points, I agree with you. I was on the fence about posting it because of your reasons. (I didn't even think of Mr. Incredible, but now it's very obvious.)
In the end, I also enjoyed it, and here it is.>> ^acidSpine:

Overall I liked this film. The first act was cool and unexpected, it really worked setting up the character and the situation then straight into the second no messing about. I thought it was a bad choice to fade out before he hit the asteroids, it was pretty weak. I thought you could have got way more out of that scene if you saw the ship fly through with the asteroids colliding behind it.
It also has to be said that character was such a rip-off of Mr Incredible (I'm pretty sure some of the performance and camera angles were nicked too but I'm too lazy to prove it). Still I liked it

Overall I liked this film. The first act was cool and unexpected, it really worked setting up the character and the situation then straight into the second no messing about. I thought it was a bad choice to fade out before he hit the asteroids, it was pretty weak. I thought you could have got way more out of that scene if you saw the ship fly through with the asteroids colliding behind it.

It also has to be said that character was such a rip-off of Mr Incredible (I'm pretty sure some of the performance and camera angles were nicked too but I'm too lazy to prove it). Still I liked it

I have to completely disagree with the formation of your argument. Unfortunately, you have presented a very shallow, 1 dimensional view of violence; most would refer to it as a scarecrow. I wish to state before I go further that I wish I lived in this world you imagine. I long for a world where violence isn't an answer. Let us take on your examples one at a time, then go into the thrust of the issue.

As far as terrorism goes, it is hard to even understand what terrorism is. It isn't very rigidly defined. Is it terrorism to force people to pay taxes, or is it only when you blow them up when they aren't expecting it? Terrorism is more of a red herring word used to justify actions rather a "thing" itself. that is a dodge of the issue, but then again, so was this word all along. So lets move into some of your better examples.

Was the objective of Vietnam and Korea to stop Communism? If so, then the success rate is 50%. As far as things go in the world, those aren't terrible odds. South Korea still exists as a democracy, violence won out in that case over rivaling violence.

The world war 2 example is a curious example to use. It actually shows a different picture then I think you would like to present. In the end, Germany ended up with a ruined country, as you say. But, that is only because it met up against resistance/violence. In the end, Germany was BOMBED into submitting, not talked into it. A greater force of violence stopped the lesser source of it. It was the rule of the jungle carried out in its most prime. Countless attempts by Brittan and France to talk Germany out of taking over its neighbors had no effect, only when the grind of blood and bullets was too much for her to bear did Germany relent. Indeed, WW2 is a horrible example for you to use...probably the worst I can think of.

Instead you should of used people like Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther, and Martin Luther King Jr. These people were truly non-violent and changed the world. However, they are the conspicuous examples. The reason they stand out in history is because all to often, non-retaliation results in certain defeat. Look at the plight of the native Americans. While history tells the tail of all the tribes that fought, many did not. Many made deals with the White man. The history of these arrangements is grim indeed. For the White man would constantly renig the terms and send into exile the native Americans. Even the great Jefferson, the champion of democracy, sent the native Americans further and further down the trail of tears. They did not fight. The suffered...and suffered. Perhaps, if they fought, they would off been completely eradicated, so, instead, they choose exile and decimation. Which is better, I am not one to say. But surely, their non-violence did not result in one could consider a victory.

You need to remember your fathers. And I don't mean the founders of the USA. I mean 2 billion years of evolution on this planet. Humans are not some sanctimonious super being. We are composed of the same shit, sweat, and tears as everything else. The history of all animals is almost wholly violent. The lion doesn't solve his mating deputes with a rival by any other means than brutality. Your immune system doesn't win out by being less virulent than the infection it sees to mend. Your food won't survive long enough to reap if you don't stop the insects and vermin from eating it. Washing your hands is akin to mass murder of bacteria. Anti-bacterial soap is akin to genocide. But we resolve ourselves of these sins almost constantly so that we can be naive in the construction of our morality when dealing with each other. In this world, it is life for life. Nothing alive doesn't take life as well, spare most planets. Plants are only noble creation along with some fungi. Most every animal on the planet exploits unto pain through violence some other organism. herbivorous being the most foul violator eating the only noble life on the plant. Carnivores are their penitence.

This world is a cycle of pain, and its root is violence. Violence is what drives evolution forward. One of the expatiations of the Cambrian Explosion is the arrival of carnivores. And billions of years later, you stand on the top of the tradition of exploitation. And you won't be rid of it be ignoring it inside you. You might construct a society that can slowly cope and perhaps even bread out billions of years of evolution. And in perhaps 10 thousand years, you can look back and see that you reduced human violence by 20%. And that would be a great accomplishment. Only to then be wiped out by a asteroid ending all human life to be replaced by the new slug overlords. The great comedy of life is to think you can make a difference in the 80 years we have vs the billions that the history of life has been with us. Unless you are talking about complete genetic experimentation to change the face of what it means to be human, I don't see anything working. Maybe you make a government system that handles the nature of man better, but the nature of man...the 2 billion year old murder animal, is still set before you.

Like I said, I don't like this world. I would rather live in your fantasy world. A world of reason, of peace, of progress. We don't have that world. We have a world of brutal, violence. It's only true self is that of conflict and competition that is all to often violent. It the a 2 billion year old rule that we didn't make up but have had to better realize, lest make poorly designed strategy to deal with the beast that is man.

>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^BoneRemake:
UPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

VOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTEEEEEEEEEEE

"violence doesnt solve anything "
and yet we go to war, explain that mrs former cop.

By the way, you forgot to quote her whole comment, which in its entirety goes:
"My message to the young people out there is that violence does not solve anything. It can get you into more trouble than what it's going to solve. [If you are being bullied] don't suffer in silence: find a trusted a adult and let them know what's going on."
So first off, your question about wars was completely off-topic. But I'll take a shot at answering it anyway.
She didn't say people were smart. She didn't say people don't ever get violent. She instead pointed out violence doesn't solve any problems. Did we solve the terrorist threat with the Iraq and Afganistan wars? Did we stop Communism with the Vietnam and Korean wars? Part of the reason Germany went to war in World War 2 was because their economy was in the crapper after World War 1 and they owed money in reparations. Did they solve that problem by getting their country bombed to rubble?
Nations go to war for many reasons. There's the ostensible reasons like "spreading freedom" that the population is forced to buy and there are the actual reasons like securing resources or the sheer madness of the country's leadership. My question for you is, at the end of the day, can you really think of a war that "solved" a problem in a way that couldn't have been solved peacefully?

>> ^visionep:

Last time? Until we discover that asteroid that we need to go land on and blow up. Then they'll be pulling these things out of museums as fast as they can.


And using Bruce Willis.

Last time? Until we discover that asteroid that we need to go land on and blow up. Then they'll be pulling these things out of museums as fast as they can.

I would really like to see a movie where aliens invade that don't have awesome, hugely advanced technology, and every facet of their war was in line with real weapons and real consequences.

Say, they get here not by FTL travel, but generation ships or cryonics, or a physiology that allows them to hibernate for years, like some earth organisms do. When they land, they have guns. Not lasers, or plasma rifles, or antigrav gunships, or weird fucked-up magic death rays that suck you up into the sky through your eyeballs (Skyline was teh suck). It could be an allegory of Iraq or Afghanistan. First would be an alien Shock and Awe, as they use EMP to knock out infrastructure and technology and drop asteroids on cities and installations. Superior firepower only due to them having the "high ground", and a ground occupation more like WW2 or WW1 as all our fancy shit was toast and we EMP'd the crap out of their tech too...

Shit... I should copyright this post.

They know damned well that nothing short of an asteroid can stop all human crime. They are playing the "I'm going to take everything as literally as possible so I am not forced to concede anything" game.


>> ^MaxWilder:

I think we're stuck on the word "prevent". Nothing can prevent crime, only discourage it and punish people who are caught committing crimes.
So the real question is: would your system do a better job discouraging people from harming one another? And when someone inevitably does, what happens when they are caught?
Currently, we have courts and police to discourage crime and attempt to punish those who commit crimes.
I see no alternative, other than vigilante justice, which in my humble opinion would suck balls. Please explain how it would be better!

LOL, it's an asteroid, not some galactic pendulum.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Why would he "die"?
If he can breathe in space he can breathe underwater.


That is a little bit to literal especially considering the asteroid attained consciousness and a neck less/leg less body evolves and swirls through atmospheres dodging clouds.

at least thats how some people have told me when I dont understand childrens shows.

I tried to comprehend the energy released, the scale of seeing such a thing move so fast with so much momentum behind it.

we really are just dust in the wind compared to a lot of things out there. I mean the asteroid is that big, and it is moving that fast, my mind just keeps coming up with questions.

God must of been shooting for a long ball into the cup but overpowered it a little and it just kept going.

How many movies are set on an asteroid?

First of all, this is the first apology for not upvoting that I've seen. You even have the right to downvote if you think this video doesn't belong on the Sift, and you would be within your rights to do so.

That being said.... LOOK AT THE AMAZING SWIRLING DOTS! OMG THEY ARE SO AMAZING! YOU... CANT... RESIST... UPVOTING...

>> ^Sagemind:

Sorry, I can't upvote - without the text description, the video in itself is boring and doesn't mean anything - and since we are upvoting videos here...