What's wrong with being in Canada?

>> ^quantumushroom:

You should probably save your energy (and money) for the next country to be bailed out of the EU's failed model. And if you're in Canada...my apologies..that you're in Canada.
>> ^EMPIRE:
I'm sorry to say americans... but when you have people like Rick Perry (and unfortunately many others like him) in politics, you are all fucked.
I am still confused how a country can be one of the most powerful nations of the world, and still have such retardation in its political scenery.

Oh, i'm from Portugal, so I'm already prepared for the shit-fest this country is going to be in the next few years, to be able to comply with the IMF's demands.


>> ^quantumushroom:

You should probably save your energy (and money) for the next country to be bailed out of the EU's failed model. And if you're in Canada...my apologies..that you're in Canada.
>> ^EMPIRE:
I'm sorry to say americans... but when you have people like Rick Perry (and unfortunately many others like him) in politics, you are all fucked.
I am still confused how a country can be one of the most powerful nations of the world, and still have such retardation in its political scenery.

You should probably save your energy (and money) for the next country to be bailed out of the EU's failed model. And if you're in Canada...my apologies..that you're in Canada.

>> ^EMPIRE:

I'm sorry to say americans... but when you have people like Rick Perry (and unfortunately many others like him) in politics, you are all fucked.
I am still confused how a country can be one of the most powerful nations of the world, and still have such retardation in its political scenery.

Power doesn't require intelligence, only aggression.

http://www.unc.edu/~eoslavic/projects/bombsites/index.html

>> ^EMPIRE:

I'm sorry to say americans... but when you have people like Rick Perry (and unfortunately many others like him) in politics, you are all fucked.
I am still confused how a country can be one of the most powerful nations of the world, and still have such retardation in its political scenery.

I'm sorry to say americans... but when you have people like Rick Perry (and unfortunately many others like him) in politics, you are all fucked.

I am still confused how a country can be one of the most powerful nations of the world, and still have such retardation in its political scenery.

I just finished The Pacific. I really liked Band of Brothers, so I had high hopes, but in the end I felt it was not completely up to par with its predecessor. Nice to learn a little bit of WW2 history from the other side of the globe, though.

Right now I'm at a loss as to what I should watch next. I watched the first two episodes of Mad Men, and while I enjoyed the retro scenery, the storyline didn't really drag me in. I'm thinking of continuing on with season 3 of Dexter, and watch Arrested Development for comedy, since everyone speaks so highly of it. When Game of Thrones comes out, I will watch that. I would love suggestions, though. Things I've seen and enjoyed in the past:

-Deadwood
-The Wire
-Battlestar Galactica
-Firefly
-Doctor Who
-Rome

As I stated on another forum when this video was posted there, the reason everything looks so good is because almost everything shown is static and the engine only needs to render a single object or group of objects. The forest is so very high res because almost every polygon is used to create scenery. The child seen at a distance is probably no more than a thirty or forty thousand polygons, leaving at least half a million others for scenery. In the next part all you have is a square room with little detail and a vehicle. Most the shots focus entirely on the vehicle itself, so they are able to use every poly in the scene for making the most amazing vehicle they could.

Compare this to actual gameplay where not only do you have a background scene but you have a variety of things going on, from half a dozen enemies shooting at you to things exploding. The poly and texture budgets are far more cramped in an actual game than it is in a technical demonstration like this video. It's why tech demo's 'never' represent an actual games graphics, just the absolute high end of what the engine is capable of.

Besides the beautiful but completely unrealistic scenery (in terms of how good that would look in an actual game filled with enemies, explosions, debris, physics objects, etc) the technical aspects such as being able to hand animated in Maya while directly connected to the game in real time is pretty cool as is the engines rendering pipleline. Still, over all it's not as impressive technically as Id Tech 5.

Great vid, has a lot of spectacular Icelandic scenery, and of course, the music is good if you enjoy the band.

Clever. Liked the scenery a lot (I am an Alumnus). I grew a beard when I was there but didn't let it grow that long. Was hoping for January shots covered in ice.

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^Deano:
While this parodies the tedium of CoD rather well I still can't help but recall that Epic give us Gears of War which features OTT machismo and gravelly voiced marines who look like steroid-abusing body builders.
Bulletstorm is a bit ridiculous but having played the demo I'm not seeing much long-term interest for me. Brink on the other hand intrigues me a bit more.

Lucky guy. PC gamers won't be getting a demo. Reportedly because Cliffy B thinks we suck and are, like, super lame.
http://www.bluesnews.com/s/117742/cliffyb-on-no-pc-bulletstorm-demo



I don't think you should lose much sleep to be honest It does feel like a console title through and through.

It does remind me of Gears though but it's an FPS and you've got that leash. So no getting stuck to the scenery when you least want it, so that's an improvement. On the other hand it's so OTT I wonder if the ATD crowd who this is aimed at will be able to cope.

>> ^Stormsinger:

>> ^kceaton1:
Anyway, the point I was making at the end is that God has not stopped me from typing my little ditty, because He can't or "does not have that power" so he gives us "Free Will". But, to give me free will in any classical sense means you must deny yourself from action whether you can use it or not...
So he isn't omnipotent. His prescient abilities seem off, again as this post is making it through.
My post is but a window with a shade. If you don't like whats behind the shade, I suggest a change in scenery.

I'll chime in to point out the biggest flaw in the Christian idea that God is both omniscient and omnipotent...you cannot be both without bearing responsibility for every single thing that happens. This is doubly so when you supposedly created every single thing that exists.
If you do so knowing what the outcome would be (which you did, being omniscient), and still refused to make things better (which you could, being omnipotent), but then decide to place the blame on your creations (for doing precisely what you created them to do and knew they would do)...I can think of no other words for that behavior than "evil" or "psychotic".


Thank you. That would be my point. Plus, it'd be nice to know what rules he's making; the rules or laws being: good and evil. Both are very contrived definitions and even in the course of the bible the definition changes (which was once a strong point in my understanding of God and being Mormon; you would need a prophet or relay to update "the rules" as time changes, otherwise "the works" would be forever outdated).

But, more to the point on a very simple design layer. What rules in Gods world (this was one I couldn't counter in my Mormon days) are below or above God. Good and Evil seem to be at a priority level above God, as they are "obvious". But, if God made them and controls them that negates ANY reason to have them in the first place, because as I said before they would be contrived values. Which would force me "morally" to not follow God as he seems to blame people on some sort of whimsical basis (Isiah is full of it, for the religious; the old testament is a living breathing example of this in action--constantly). As you said it seems he's schizoid or sociopathic, or both (could have multiple personality disorder, which explains A LOT). On the believing side and from a "Devil's Advocates" view; God seems to have possibly "made up" the Devil. There is very little information on the Devil and Hell. The one reference we have to punishment in Hell talks of burning lakes. The devil himself is almost never described, or attributed; the same as Hell. There's half as much information about the "bad guy" as their is about Jesus. We never even get a quote for or from him, post angelic contributions.

Anyway if evil is a "given" value, even as simple as: doing the opposite of what God wants. That means evil and good are laws on a level above God's control, although he can manipulate it. That shows that even on a fundamental "physics" or "architecture" setup, there are things that are already more powerful than him (such as *any* law that runs heaven, hell, Earth, God's "nature" (if you can describe it or he can, then it already shows that language is at a higher level as it cannot be communicated otherwise).

Anyway, none of this is factual proof, but a lot of these type of things should be sufficient enough to put the whole idea or question of God of to the side for this life. It should also make you realize that even if you run into a God later on, you should still question ALWAYS; or least you may follow the Devil...

>> ^kceaton1:

Anyway, the point I was making at the end is that God has not stopped me from typing my little ditty, because He can't or "does not have that power" so he gives us "Free Will". But, to give me free will in any classical sense means you must deny yourself from action whether you can use it or not...
So he isn't omnipotent. His prescient abilities seem off, again as this post is making it through.
My post is but a window with a shade. If you don't like whats behind the shade, I suggest a change in scenery.


I'll chime in to point out the biggest flaw in the Christian idea that God is both omniscient and omnipotent...you cannot be both without bearing responsibility for every single thing that happens. This is doubly so when you supposedly created every single thing that exists.

If you do so knowing what the outcome would be (which you did, being omniscient), and still refused to make things better (which you could, being omnipotent), but then decide to place the blame on your creations (for doing precisely what you created them to do and knew they would do)...I can think of no other words for that behavior than "evil" or "psychotic".

Anyway, the point I was making at the end is that God has not stopped me from typing my little ditty, because He can't or "does not have that power" so he gives us "Free Will". But, to give me free will in any classical sense means you must deny yourself from action whether you can use it or not...

So he isn't omnipotent. His prescient abilities seem off, again as this post is making it through.

My post is but a window with a shade. If you don't like whats behind the shade, I suggest a change in scenery.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'northstudio 360, panorama, canadian tenors, hallelujah, scenery' to 'northstudio 360, panorama, canadian tenors, hallelujah, scenery, leonard cohen' - edited by therealblankman

Tags for this video have been changed from 'tag' to 'northstudio 360, panorama, canadian tenors, hallelujah, scenery' - edited by Stingray