/endrant

argumentum ad hominem. it's not my job to do better; it's rockstar's job to do better. we weren't talking about me or anyone else until you changed the subject. i'd say that bethesda has been doing better open world games since the mid-to-late 90's, konami's silent hill series has been better at telling stories (read: making one feel like playing through a movie, which rockstar wishes they could accomplish), and just about any third-person game from tomb raider to max payne has a better 3-rd person targeting system than that broken-ass excuse rockstar has been trying to fix for 10 iterations or so. so pretty much everything that GTA has been mashing up into a huge meaningless sandbox of drivel has been done before in a less broken fashion, with more variety, less linearity, less repetitive gameplay, and without falling back on hopelessly cliche, hackneyed mafioso stereotypes and slipshod driving mechanics.

but if you wanted to give me money to write a game and pay some programmers and artists and designers, absolutely! i'd be happy to present to you a game that is better than anything rockstar has produced to date. until then, fanboy, defend this mediocre studio with some actual points instead an ad hominem logical fallacy... or just stfu about what i or anyone else should be doing better than rockstar. rockstar puts out unoriginal crap with semi-impressive tech and people like you eat it up, bloat their egos, and line the pockets of corporate lackeys that are afraid to do anything new with an old IP. there's better work out there. you must not hear about it because it's not mentioned in your gamepro subscription. so go preorder this re-hash bullshit, and rest ignorant of the knowledge that people like you are destroying this industry, and this community, by buying into the hype machine of some fake gangster-sim crap with nothing new to offer since version III. and don't tell me that I should put up with it because there's nothing better out there, wtf sort of defense is that?

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^jackhalfaprayer:
GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.

You...or ANYONE do better. Seriously we've seen other sandbox games try and fail...this is like criticizing WoW for being what it is. Do something better or accept that this is as good as it gets right now and shut up.

GTA III was the last time there was any innovation in this series. I'm tired of sandbox missions with a half-assed organized crime drama throughline. I'd rather watch Goodfellas or something where there's real writing and acting. Rockstar games are overhyped and underdeveloped.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Occam asks: Why would the demolitioninjas collapse the building in an orderly manner that would arouse the suspicions of conspiracy theorists (and 1500 construction experts)? Why didn't they wire the building so it would fall over?

>> ^marinara:
Let's say WT7 had 20 columns holding up 47 floors (that's big). So these big ass columns get pushed around by by the "flooring under heat expansion" and then the other 20 ginormous columns fail instantly, and the whole thing goes down.
If one column can bring down WT7, it wasn't a skyscraper, it was a deathtrap.



You're mis-wielding the Razor. 1) The construction of T1/T2, and I assume 7-- steel-structured buildings in the old WTC site were such that they *would* impolode in the face of structural failure, not fall over. this limits casualties from outside the buildings. 2) The assumption that there are demoninjas necessitates the sub-assumption of the fact that demonninjas do not care what conspirators think, because conspirators will not be able to prove anything, because the ninjas are ninjas. 3) Because, in theory, the demoninjas are making so much money off of this that risking the ire of 1500+ construction experts, demo experts, engineers, and internet users isn't nearly reason enough to stop them taking the risk.

Can I just say... (I lived a few short blocks away in NYC at the time of the collapse. And I am a truther of sorts.) ...I'd like to stop the idea that conspiracy "nuts" are akin to religious zealots, suffer from some kind of mania, think that Illuminati lizards control the world, etc. The government's official story is BOTH a conspiracy (religious nuts in a cave in Afghanistan conspired to crash two planes into two of the largest structures in the financial capital of the west) and a theory (there has been no trial, there is very little hard evidence, there was no comprehensive official investigation, and both the Commission and NIST reports were produced by government institutions or congressionally appointed committee, and neither were conclusive- both were, in the end, speculative.

yah. lotsa places outside of the US sell them as pets. not to say it's entirely sanitary either way, but.

actually Beck here is referring to Nancy Pelosi having to shoot communists in the head to keep American office safe. [http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/f5r9c/glenn_beck_61010_youre_going_to_have_to_shoot/c1dhop2] It's not better; actually i think it's worse. it's a means of veiling violent "shoot xperson in the head" rhetoric that is inflammatory, divisive, and from my own personal "slant," as it were, seems completely lacking in research or connection to reality. I listen to all sides and I find that the more I listen the more I hear baseless arguments on either side of media that I would call Disinformation with a capital D. The simple fact is that nobody in a news outlet is willing to step up and brave the political ramifications of digging into some real fact and actually changing the tides. I think Assange's current work has people scared of consequences... not to mention what may happen if all of the sudden some truth got leaked into American homes. Truths like "The Cold War is over" or "Communism was never really a threat in the first place," perhaps with the exception of the Cuban Missle Crisis- which was a total SNAFU. I guess point being that anyone who says if you find a communist in the US government, shoot them in the head- is either completely insane or is playing a part that pays very, very well. /end rant

>> ^TheFreak:

And yet, how many of this cop's peers will actually condemn his actions publicly? If you do not step up and actively stand against people like this in your midst, then you're complicit in their actions.
So yes, all cops who passively allow this type of action are bad. For those keeping track...that's all cops.


Yeah, looks like the article answered a few things. Your mistake tho, Freak, is assuming that people know *how* to fight something like this. You can't just go over and tackle the guy, that's assault. You can't yell at him either. Actually, the only thing that can be done is by the person who's being assaulted in this video. Repeat after me: "I'll cooperate in every way, officer, but..." Then after but, add things that are within your rights. "I'd like to be informed of what law I've broken." "I don't consent to a warrantless search." Or ask questions like. "Am I being detained?" Etc. Not many people are aware of how to do that.

"those who do nothing are complicit" is an interesting viewpoint, but not exactly fair to citizens who aren't always educated about what to do exactly. Since this is technically an off-duty cop, the people would be in their rights to report him or to go for a citizen's arrest... but who's going to take down the guy with a nightstick and pepper spray, for a stranger? and stay there all night? Nobody in that car. But they posted it, and the video will lead to more discipline. Therefore they did not stand by, they did something. By your definition, they are not complicit. Bravo, camera people.

Not all cops are bad. This one is.

sounds like schizophrenia

Umm... Religious doctrine? Cults? Market research? Corporate policy? Economic policy by banks, hedge funds, Wall St.? Big Pharma? Big Agro? Big Oil? People who blame government for everything don't understand government. Government fails because of people, not because of intention. If you are down on government save us all the time and just denounce humanity and go live in a cave somewhere. Build your own running water system, police, and fire dept. while you're at it.

Also, if you don't like it, don't fly. Maybe instead of bitching about the TSA you could suggest an alternative? Do something constructive? I'm not going to sit here and scream "GROPING" and "PORNO" for these measures, even though I don't like them either. Call a spade a spade. The kid will be just fine. He'll get over it. Check your rhetoric. It's a brave new world. Educate yourself about it before you turn into the very type of radical that gets everyone into trouble.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Ever notice how the only thing in human history that EVER creates that kind of mindset is government policy?

This is also stating the obvious, but subsurface scattering, per-particle physics, lens synthesis, and all the photon tracing in the world won't get 3D out of the Uncanny Valley. This is very pretty, tho.