DiabloFans

Quote from paralleluniverse

LOL.

That has got to be the stupidest thing I've heard all year.

Wow. The short-sightedness of that astoundingly moronic statement is overwhelming.

I've been sitting here for 2 minutes trying to think, if Blizzard generated infinite money from an item-selling store, what could they *possibly* do to make Diablo 3 better? Nothing. Can you think of anything?

A item-selling store will utterly destroy the game such that no amount of money can possibly fix it up. It's the point of no return.

Oh the irony.
You accuse someone of short-sightedness when you've shown that you are clearly unable to factor in how more money *can* lead to the improvement of D3?
I am not saying it will but you need to be pretty thick-skulled to be unable to grasp such a simple concept.

Quote from paralleluniverse

But the strongest argument against a vanity store is basic fairness. Vanity stores, and any stores that sell in-game things for money, destroys the integrity of the game. It is fundamentally not fair that after purchasing the game you're not allowed access to all the features of the game, including vanity features.

Fairness? In terms of looks and features that don't influence the killing power of your character? Remind me again why you play diablo? Oh ya, to show everybody you are wearing the coolest armor and weapons. Even if that was your primary reason, is it so difficult to grasp why vanity items will never have the same bragging value as a farmed rare item?

Quote from paralleluniverse

I would argue that it is better for Blizzard to raise the price of the game than to offer a vanity store, because at least everyone will have the same access to everything in the game.

I think this is the strongest piece of evidence that your brain might not be functioning properly. Do you realize this will make the game even more inaccessible? How much can you raise the price to cover what you get through a vanity store?

Quote from paralleluniverse

Customization is essential in RPGs, which is why it is incredibly unfair to force people to buy these vanity features, if they want them, instead of having these features be part of the game that everyone can access, without additional charge. The fact that customization is such a core component of RPG games only makes vanity stores even more unacceptable.

Only if you have some serious character flaws, will you feel 'forced' to buy vanity items. You are conveniently choosing to ignore all those relevant customization features like runes and thousands of builds available to whine about how you won't be able to wear a magenta-colored headgear unless you shell out a few bucks. It's time you return to our universe because there's some serious problem of tunnel-vision in yours.

Quote from kanzaki_urumi

Glad to see that hope remains.

Some people still have a good thinking process coupled with a mind that opposes an ever growing stupidity brought along by these modern times that we live in.

You again? All your 'contribution' in this thread so far has been about how anybody not having the same opinion as you is stupid. I strongly advise you stop with that bullshit. There are actual valid arguments on both sides- possible advantages and disadvantages.
A stubbornly unilateral approach like yours- with complete disregard and utter contempt for what the other side has to bring- is what constitute the very essence of stupidity.

Lies! These are all lies. The beta doesn't exist!

Ideally though, I would like some cookies during the beta. And a tall glass of vanilla-flavored milkshake.

I am presently campaigning for people laughing or displaying any outward signs of happiness within a dental practice to receive an immediate death sentence through decapitation with a blunt axe.

Join me and support this noble cause.

No it hasn't changed, meaning that I still consider the system as it is to be almost completely useless.
All the mechanics/gameplay facets progress throughout the game- skills, loot, artisans. The reason given for followers to be the exception to this rule is nothing short of lame.
Either the system is scrapped or it works like D2 because right now it looks like a half-assed attempt at implementing a merc system.

At least they were frank with the Talisman.

Quote from paroxysm2010

whats wrong with you people?

Well technically it's not my fault. I tried to explain to her that putting her head inside the wood chipper while I banged her from behind doesn't constitute a new sex position but she insisted we try it.
And then I don't know how it happened but the machine got switched on while we were doing it.
Sometimes shit happens, man.

I'm suddenly reminded of this.

Just that in our case, the likes will give us something. It will most probably not be worth it though. So yeah...

Quote from Cyber_Cheese

sorry, that was supposed to sound more sarcastic, i forgot about the limitations of text

I forgive you, son.



I hereby declare that I fully agree with Blizzard's proposed follower system after becoming a member of the Society for the Protection of Gamer Grandmas and Children(PGGC).
Cast away your doubts and join us.
Amen.

Quote from Corrupt08

possible sign of beta? maybe!

LMAO.
+1.


And ya, I do understand Dae on the point he's making. Cheering on death is...ugly, almost barbaric.
It's almost inevitable though that this would be the case, given that people must probably see this as some way of 'getting back' at that guy...though he is dead.

I'm just relieved he died- the guy was being hugely detrimental to our species.

...creepy dragon...Sixen paying people and then playing with himself...some guy hitting his shaft on the ground...speaking on mute...
+1
Awesome.

Quote from Jetrall

Original: "I think I'm lost. Can you help me?"

Verbose: "I believe the actual coordinates of the current location may be in disharmony with my assumption on the latter. Will you be able to provide me with some means to resolve this matter?"




Original: "Plump women makes me horny."

Keep this thread alive with some of your favorite house, techno, or electronic dance music songs

Globally there is some AWESOME music in this genre, so share your favorites!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EcsipR9hGo

Quote from Denius1704

I consider myself a very logical person, but at the same time i am human as well. The need to believe in something is one of the strongest psychological needs.

I don't thik belief has anything to do with it. But I would assert that the social community provided by many religions are something that makes up a foundation of many societies.

Quote from Denius1704

Now as for the proof that you want so badly. As i said it is about perspectives. From the example with the egg that you said that:

I think you're confused. I don't need to proof the absence of god. I'm not pursuant to that end. All I need to do is insist we have no evidence for god.

Quote from Denius1704

This is an assumption. In-fact i've read from modern physicists that the matter and energy could have both appeared and exploded all by natural forces that we understand.

No. That is the assumption. Natural forces do not happen by themselves, even scientists still adhere to causality on macro level and when it happens on quantum level they just start working with probabilities, because as even Hawking has said, they might be missing a factor which would explain the way certain elements behave (ok side tracking here). So all in all, at the end even they can't really explain why the Universe would have exploded and they can just "assume". Well i as a determinist don't assume, i give that unknown factor a property: Intent.

All I need ask you here is: where does that evidence god or first cause? I'm well aware that quantum mechanics is based on probabilities and that Hawking, like any other scientist or mathematician, cannot speak about absolute certitude. They aren't attempting to explain the universe in absolute terms because they do not have to. They can assume and infer because they are not making absolute claims. Regardless of how we label factors in the probabilities of the universe we are not coming any closer to the truth of things which we do not have evidence for.

Quote from Denius1704

You see the thing is that we can keep going back and forth with every type of theory and belief. The annoying part is that (and i'm sorry if it's offensive) atheists are too scared to believe in anything so instead they choose to believe in nothing EXCEPT the facts, which as i stated in my previous post, tend to change with the times. I have gone through all the possible stages of belief, i have been baptized as a christian, then i had my doubts and went through a stage where god did not exist and finally i am where i am, and it is a good place. I have no big questions, i have no doubts, i have no fears. At the same time i also accept that in the case where i might be wrong, i wouldn't care once i'm dead, because well... i wouldn't even know i existed.

You see, this is the most dangerous kind of pseudo-argument. You are offering a juxtaposition of theory and belief as though the two things represented similar levels of understanding. They do not. A theory has to withstand scruitiny by the scientific community. A theory must stand up to evidence, testing, observation, etc. A belief has no such standard. A belief can be changed or it can be absolute and dogmatic. A belief has no rhyme or reason except that one person holds it. Once you take this dangerous position, you are immidiately tellng these great physicists that their work is no more valuable than the ramblings of a preacher at an evangelical church. This could not be further from the truth.

If you actually had no fear, no big questions, no doubts, then you would have absolutely no reason to believe in any such god that might or might no exist. The very concept of god that is being prescribed here is one that fills in our scientific gaps and uncertainties. All I am insisting here, is that no such concept is required. We have not established, at any point, that there is a need for such a thing.

Quote from Denius1704

Infinite-regression arguments for first-cause (flying in the face of quantum physics and the concept of space-time) do not provide proof either

First of all it is not "infinite regression", it is in fact quite finite and it goes back to the First Bang. That egg could not explode by itself

This is an assumption. In-fact i've read from modern physicists that the matter and energy could have both appeared and exploded all by natural forces that we understand. I cannot say that is how it happened for sure and I cannot rule out some god igniting the fire by hand, but to assert as you have that this condition of "first bang," is a proof of creation concept, that's just not correct. We know better than that.

Quote from Denius1704

As for the proof lying with the Theists, that is not true either. They are not the ones that want the proof, they rely on belief and faith and that is enough for them. It is the Atheists that are not ok with that and hence they demand the proof, but the thing is that they simply cannot prove that God does not exist. Those 50 proofs that someone posted in the begining are just funny, and they don't really prove anything. Don't try to disprove the christian or muslim God, try and disprove a Creator, a First Cause, something that had intent.

This, as i've been trying to point out with another poster, is a fallacy. Belief and faith are not discriminatory, they are credulous and should apply to a great many things. However, when one observes what a religious person puts their faith in, it turns out that only very specific things make that list. Almost everything else in the unvierse falls under the same rules that rationalists would use to judge what is and is not proved to be true to real. I don't think i've wasted any time disproving a particular sect rather than simply point out (as with you) that arguments we are certain of a god are false. Nothing demands that god exist. That isn't to say a god doesn't, but there is no reason to assume one does either. The universe works without god.

Quote from Denius1704

As a side note i am still to this day puzzled about the amount of energy the atheists spend trying to disprove this and this religion or trying to get in the way of this and this religion. Yes i know that ignorance bothers them and they want to show the world that hard facts and empirical evidence are the gods of our Universe, but then again, ignorance comes in many shapes and forms and religion is faaaaaar from the worse. Religion has given us a lot of things (not all of them good i admit), because of which civilization is what it is today.

I explained why I am effected by religion a few pages back. But curiosity is a big part of it too. Learning about the universe includes learning why other people (part of our universe) act as they do and choose the beliefs that they have. I haven't taken the time to say that religion gives us more good or evil because in terms of the OP, I don't feel the need to make that assertion.

Quote from MonkManD3

Quote from LichinK

Did you know birds can actually fly?

Ostrich, Emu, Cassowaries, Kiwis, Rheas?

But they can take airplanes, right? Epic win N°1!

Yo,

This thread is for discussion of anything Dark Souls related.

So earlier this year, I pre-ordered Skyrim and was extremely excited for it's release on 11/11/2011, until I heard about Dark Souls.

Dark Souls is everything that I have been looking for in a game, and more. It's a forbidding, dark, harsh rpg in terms of story, violence, etc. But what makes it even better is that it is difficult (hence the website name preparetodie.com). Probably too hard for little jiblet players. This makes the game a challenge, and gives more of a sense of accomplishment while playing.

Consoles: PS3 AND Xbox 360

This game is preceded by Demon's Souls, which is a game that came out in 2009 on PS3.

Awards for Demon's Souls
In their 2009 Best and Worst Awards, GameSpot awarded Demon's Souls with Overall Game of the Year,[69] Best PS3 game,[70] Best Role-Playing game[71] and Best Original Game Mechanic for the online integration.[72] Game Trailers awarded it Best RPG[73] and Best New intellectual property.[74] IGN also awarded the game Best RPG for the PS3.[75] X-Play awarded the multiplayer Best Gameplay Innovation.[76] PC World awarded it Game of the Year.[77] RPGamer awarded Demon's Souls RPG of the Year 2009, including Best Graphics and Best PS3 RPG.[78][79][80]

Awards Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon's_Souls

Official Website:
http://preparetodie.com/en/

I have included some of the latest and best trailers below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7U-a9pJtHQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xp6YBQqzkc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ-Gbb0hRjE

Dark Souls will be released Oct 4, 2011 in North America.

For Trance fans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO-TQHTTZhg

Easy for me:
a car that won't be ashamed of being seen in street racing.
a scorpion or two
a very large fish tank capable of holding flathead catfish, large mouth bass, trout, etc... and maybe a saltwater version as well.
a crossbow capable of piercing 1 inch thick steel from 200 yards away
a forge
a bad ass gaming computer that can handle work (inventor and autocad) as well.
a German Shepard and Siberian Husky
a kayak that I can fish from
a Peregrine Falcon

That's all I can think of.

Because Canada produces 95% of the asbestos products manufactured in the world and the economic job loss would have been too great, so they lobbied and fought us banning it. The EPA banned it in 89, but that was overturned in 5th circuit court. OSHA was tagging with banning it back in the late 70s and never did squat.

anyway.....


Alex Jones is a fear mongering Demagogue. Whats worse is, most demagogues are at least funny/entertaining to watch if you don't take them serious, he is just annoying.

Sorry, spouting off baseless accusations like a shotgun blast trying to throw something up on the wall and making money off of playing on other peoples fears is not something I respect. Doing more is educating yourself with the facts, not charging people money to hear you throw around theories that have no actual basis in fact, other then you can construe the facts in some random way that makes people think their is a connection.

Because of course, the government is always out to get you..........

BTW, back on topic, I personally wish that the 1st responders were invited, but I would put a higher priority on the victims families being there. Also, I don't have a list of politicians who will be there, all I know is that Obama will be there(sitting president makes complete sense to be there) and Bush will be there(president at the time of 911 has to be there) I would assume Bloomberg and Giuliani will be there. Not sure who else, but I seriuosly doubt it is a large enough number that they are the reason the responders aren't invited. If they were going to invite everyone who was involved and needed to be invited, they would have to have the thing at Yankee Stadium or something.

And again, this is a memorial service, which means it is honoring those who died that day, that is where the importance needs to be. They have had one of these every year for the last 10 years, and the 1st responders have never been invited.

Awesome music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbhJ9c-pFoI