Agreed. It's a joke. Maybe he should apologize to Ted Levine, too. The guy REALLY sounds like that.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Esoog:
>> ^Boise_Lib:
NPH had to apologize for saying, "I've never sounded more like a tranny in my life."

He shouldnt have to apologize for something so funny.

Agreed.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'michael levin, brad kremer, photography, videography, japan' to 'michael levin, brad kremer, photography, videography, japan, Royksopp Forever' - edited by hpqp

Xax, this is in-engine gameplay, there's no question about it. Its only scripted in-so-far as any other modern single-player FPS is. Jeff Gerstman sat down and watched the guy play the demo. To kill the "Big Daddy"-type character, the dude playing didn't have to take out the bridge and could've dispatched him in the traditional way or used other elements of the environment to bring him down. The player isn't obligated to follow Elizabeth's queues for action, you can ignore her if you so choose and do things your own way. The guy playing was in control the entire time, including the cool jousting part on the rail lines.

For the sake of Ken Levine's sanity (Kotaku and a couple other video game "journalism" sites come to mind here with the whole "this is a render and not the actual game" crap), here, watch this (a 45 minute interview with the man about this game, clearing up all the misconceptions flying around and adding even more juicy tidbits about their goals for it). It certainly changed my attitude towards the game real quick from skeptically enthused to "HOLY FUCK THIS IS GONNA BE AWESOME!"

@spoco2: Thanks for backing me up on this one.

@Xax: Have you ever played the first Bioshock? Remember the plane crash? Highly scripted, incredibly fluid sequence that lasted 2 minutes. How about CoD:MW or hell any CoD game? Every game is basically an interactive cut scene! Also, just to add some "official" weight to things, check out this link:

http://kotaku.com/5645527/bioshock-infinites-sky+line-combat-explained-by-ken-levine

If Ken Levine calls it gameplay, and a highly respected gaming website calls it gameplay, i'd call it gameplay too.

On a side note, this looks like it's the true successor to Bioshock. I might have popped a semi-chub when i found that out.

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/05/senator-levin-d.html

Once inside the building, they barricaded themselves in and set to work. Equipment used to make weapon components were trashed and computers, filing cabinets and office furnishings were thrown out of the windows. Once they were done they calmly waited for the police to arrest them. Two activists who supported them outside the factory gates were also on trial. All of the defendants have argued that what they did was not only morally necessary but crucially that it was legal. U.K law allows the commission of damage of property to prevent greater crimes.

Two of the accused, Simon Levin and Chris Osmond have extensive experience of working in Palestine with the International Solidarity Movement. Chris Osmond told the court that ’the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Gaza at that time meant it was imperative to act’. He cited the words of Rachel Corrie, the U.S activist who was killed by an IDF bulldozer in Rafah, as an inspiration. The court heard a passage of Corrie’s diary ’I’m witnessing this chronic insidious genocide and I’m really scared, this has to stop, I think it is a good idea idea for all of us to drop everything and devote our lives to making this stop’.

During the trial the court heard not only from the defendants themselves but from Sharyn Lock, who was an international human rights volunteer in Gaza during Cast Lead. She was inside Al-Quds hospital in Gaza City when it was attacked with white phosphorus. She concluded her evidence by saying that she had no doubt that those who armed the Israeli Air Force ’had the blood of children on their hands’. The jury saw footage of the air attacks on the UNWRA compounds where civilians were sheltering and have been given an edited version of the Goldstone report.

Recently elected member of Parliament for Brighton Pavilion, Caroline Lucas also gave evidence supporting the decommssioners, saying that the democratic process ’had been exhausted’ as far as the factory was concerned.

On January the 17th 2009 the bombs had already fallen relentlessly on Gaza for three weeks. Massive, passionate demonstrations and pickets had been held in many cities around the country and the world in protest against Israel’s war crimes, but to no avail. A growing sense of helplessness was grabbing hold of the movement as the Palestinian body count stood at over 1400 and counting. 300 of the dead were children. It was against this background that the “citizen’s decommissioning” of EDO MBM/ITT took place.

EDO/ITT is an arms manufacturer, based in Brighton since 1946. They were acquired along with the rest of EDO Corporation by the multinational arms conglomerate ITT in December 2007. Their primary business is the manufacture of weapons systems such as bomb release mechanisms and bomb racks. This includes crucially the manufacture of the VER-2 Zero Retention Force Arming Unit for the Israeli Air Force’s F16 war planes.

Over the years, EDO have consistently denied supplying Israel, and despite over fifty court cases campaigners were not able to properly expose the links between the factory and the IAF. However the serious nature of the charges against the seven (the factory sustained nearly £200,000 of damage and may not have recommenced production for weeks) means that for the first time courts took the argument that EDOs business is fundamentally illegal very seriously.

Paul Hills, the Managing Director of EDO MBM, spent his five days on the witness stand last week being confronted with all the evidence gathered by campaigners over the years –evidence which exposes a complex network of collaboration between British, American and Israeli arms companies and the way in which their deals are clouded in secrecy. The Decommissioners were able to present Mr Hills, for the first time, with a dossier of evidence showing how EDO MBM use a front company in the U.S.A to indirectly supply components for the F 16 to Israel. Under U.K law the supply of weapons components that might be used in the Occupied Territories is actually a crime.

After hearing Hills’ explanations of his company’s business practices, Judge George Bathurst-Norman said that, despite Hill’s denials of dealing with Israel, it was clear that their was enough evidence to justify a genuinely held belief they did. He also offered the opinion that End User Certificates required for arms export licences were “ not worth the paper they are written on” as they can be easily manipulated.

There is a history of juries in British courts finding anti-war activists not guilty when they attack machinery used in war crimes. In 1996 four women from Trident Ploughshares decommissioned a Hawk jet that was about to be shipped to Indonesia – they were found not guilty. In 2008 the Raytheon 9, who damaged a factory in Derry supplying weapons to Israel during the 2006 Lebanon war, were acquitted by a jury and only two weeks ago a group of nine women carrying out a similar action at Raytheon during the Gaza attacks were also found not guilty by an unanimous jury.

On Friday, the jury found Simon Levin, Tom Woodhead, Ornella Saibene, Bob Nicholls, Harvey Tadman, Elijah Smith and Chris Osmond not guilty of “Conspiracy to Cause Criminal damage” by unanimous verdict in Hove Crown Court.

Chris Osmond said “This action was taken because of EDO MBMs illegal supply of weapons to the Israeli military. We brought the suffering of ordinary Palestinians into a British courtroom and confronted with the evidence they took the brave decision to find that our actions were justified.”

The decommissioners’ stance made it clear to companies like EDO that they can no longer count on not being held to account for their actions. There are now a growing number of people in the international community who are willing to risk their own liberty to stand up for the people of Gaza and to challenge Israel’s war crimes through whatever means possible.

>> ^RedSky:
Do you think it's still worth playing? I somehow managed to avoid ever playing System Shock 1/2. Don't mind if it's graphically aged but I heard that it has a few too many similarities to Bioshock? Still worth going back to?


Bioshock and System Shock 2 are both by Ken Levine, and Bioshock's design is a simplified, console friendly version of System Shock 2. A lot of the same elements are present (Audio logs, hacking, different ammo, augments, powers), but SS2 also has things like RPG character stats (str, agi, end), inventory management, weapon customization, etc.

The main difference between the two games are the settings. SS2 is more of a deep space survival horror, like Dead Space. The atmosphere was excellent for its time, and it's one of the scariest I've ever played. If you don't let the poor graphics (very low poly models, even for 1999) distract you from the immersion, or let things like degrading weapons and the difficutly frustrate you, then its definitely worth playing.

This site has a nice faq on technical issues, and also includes links to the Rebirth high poly mod and the SHTUP high res texture mod.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Pick up Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny. It illustrates how far the US has fallen from its conservative roots and neatly explains the difference between a Statist and a Conservative.
Do liberals learn anything? Sinking Europe implies that they do not.

You get more flies with honey, sweetie-pie

>> ^quantumushroom:

Pick up Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny. It illustrates how far the US has fallen from its conservative roots and neatly explains the difference between a Statist and a Conservative.
Do liberals learn anything? Sinking Europe implies that they do not.


You're implying that one can be a Liberal Statist but not a Conservative Statist?

How old are you? What are your parents like? What socioeconomic location were you raised in?

You sound like the neo-con younger brother of Dr. Weird from ATHF.

Pick up Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny. It illustrates how far the US has fallen from its conservative roots and neatly explains the difference between a Statist and a Conservative.

Do liberals learn anything? Sinking Europe implies that they do not.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'senator levin, wall street, goldman sachs, corruption, fraud' to 'senator levin, wall street, goldman sachs, corruption, fraud, shitty, deal' - edited by lucky760

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

The only fail here is a failure in BansheeX's sarcasm detector. It's really sad that you cannot tell I was being facetious. You're wasting your time.
Oh and even in jest I didn't say TPers and Libertarians were the same thing. Get your eyes checked (maybe your brain as well while you're at it).

It's really sad that you think you sounded facetious.

The only fail here is a failure in BansheeX's sarcasm detector. It's really sad that you cannot tell I was being facetious. You're wasting your time.

Oh and even in jest I didn't say TPers and Libertarians were the same thing. Get your eyes checked (maybe your brain as well while you're at it).

>> ^BansheeX:

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
If they're going to deregulate then they should just scrub all the fraud laws. Hell why stop at economic relationships, why not de-regulate interpersonal relations too? Murder, rape, et al. Get big government out of my mass grave! Nosy bureaucrats, poking their noses into every little murder.
C'mon Libertarians, isn't that what you want? Don't Tea Partiers want the freedom to shoot illegal immigrants, suspected illegal immigrants (ie brown people) and (on a slow day) a few legal immigrants too?

There is so much fail in this post, I don't even know where to begin. First of all, the tea parties were started by libertarians but have since been hijacked by typical party-line neocons. Only a fraction of people there are libertarians.
Second, fraud is illegal and has been for a long time. Misrepresenting a product is fraud, which is exactly what Goldman did. You seem to think libertarians are anarchists who don't want contract laws to penalize fraud and other laws to penalize coercive behavior like murder. You are incorrect, sir.
Concerning regulations, the problem is quite simple:
If the government insures commercial bank deposits, the risk of losing one's deposit is offloaded onto holder's of dollars (mainly foreign central banks now) not involved in the transaction. With depositors having no skin in the game, banks wanting to make risky investments are more easily able to obtain deposits with which to speculate. To prevent that from happening, the banks have to be restricted on what they can do with deposits when they take FDIC.
Glass-Steagall was a 1933 Roosevelt bill that provided FDIC with restrictions. Clinton and most politicians from both parties were heavily lobbied by banks to keep the FDIC but remove the restrictions, and that's exactly what they did with the "Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999". No longer restricted from doing investment banking and unfearful of losing customers on deposit safety concerns, the inevitable happened.
Libertarians want FDIC eliminated because offloading risk onto other parties changes human behavior. Greed is normally offset by the fear of loss. When you eliminate the fear, all that's left is the greed and shit happens. We only support Glass-Steagall on the condition that we can't get rid of FDIC. Understanding now? Good, only 97% of the population left to go.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

If they're going to deregulate then they should just scrub all the fraud laws. Hell why stop at economic relationships, why not de-regulate interpersonal relations too? Murder, rape, et al. Get big government out of my mass grave! Nosy bureaucrats, poking their noses into every little murder.
C'mon Libertarians, isn't that what you want? Don't Tea Partiers want the freedom to shoot illegal immigrants, suspected illegal immigrants (ie brown people) and (on a slow day) a few legal immigrants too?


There is so much fail in this post, I don't even know where to begin. First of all, the tea parties were started by libertarians but have since been hijacked by typical party-line neocons. Only a fraction of people there are libertarians.

Second, fraud is illegal and has been for a long time. Misrepresenting a product is fraud, which is exactly what Goldman did. You seem to think libertarians are anarchists who don't want contract laws to penalize fraud and other laws to penalize coercive behavior like murder. You are incorrect, sir.

Concerning regulations, the problem is quite simple:

If the government insures commercial bank deposits, the risk of losing one's deposit is offloaded onto holder's of dollars (mainly foreign central banks now) not involved in the transaction. With depositors having no skin in the game, banks wanting to make risky investments are more easily able to obtain deposits with which to speculate. To prevent that from happening, the banks have to be restricted on what they can do with deposits when they take FDIC.

Glass-Steagall was a 1933 Roosevelt bill that provided FDIC with restrictions. Clinton and most politicians from both parties were heavily lobbied by banks to keep the FDIC but remove the restrictions, and that's exactly what they did with the "Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999". No longer restricted from doing investment banking and unfearful of losing customers on deposit safety concerns, rampant speculation ensued.

Libertarians want FDIC eliminated because offloading risk onto other parties changes human behavior. Greed is normally offset by the fear of loss. When you eliminate the fear, all that's left is the greed and shit happens. We only support Glass-Steagall on the condition that we can't get rid of both FDIC and interest rate price fixing. Understanding now? Good, only 97% of the population left to go.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.