Posts by Thrik

I think a major thing to consider is that the 360 has been out for ages and naturally has a vast software collection. When the 360 was at the same stage the PS3 is currently at, everyone was saying how destined for failure it was due to its shit, uncompelling game library. Weirdly, everyone seems to have since completely forgotten about this.

Make no mistake, some seriously good games will hit the PS3 regardless of Sony's pre-release marketing (which I think the negative aspect/criticism of was overblown, personally).

It's not like the Microsoft isn't massively deserving of criticism considering they've had 360s breaking down en masse since release and have only recently even acknowledged it and gone some way towards appeasing the huge number of people affected.

I'll get both eventually as I love games and will want to play exclusives (even if only time-limited exclusives) on both. Who really cares about the cost if you work, considering what you get in return?

RD:

Not been on IRC in four months.

Can't remember any recent posts on the forums by him.♦

What the hell?????

Hahaha.

And for the original post announcing the new warranty:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/petermooreletter.htm

I think it's a good thing they've at least stepped forward with this, albeit after quite some time. Was getting kind of ridiculous that the UK repair centre receives around 1500 360s per day yet Microsoft kept totally silent on the matter.

No, I was just speaking personally. I wasn't trying to make some point about whether or not it should be legalised on a mass scale; I just reckon he ought to be killed shitless.

Let us have some more "Oh my God that is sick as fuck" posts instead. I was thinking on the way home on the train today about just what could have possibly been going through their mind as they killed that young boy begging for his life, cutting through his throat like it were butter. I mean, :wtf::wtf::wtf:?????

Of course it has something to do with it. It's certainly not the only factor nor is it likely to be a predominant factor, but it's nonetheless a factor. There's less fear of committing crimes, and no removal of those who commit the extreme ones.

And like I said, I'd only support it if completely undoubtable evidence was presented. I don't mean a dodgy video that could have been warped to paint a false picture of the scene. We can't even be sure this guy did exactly what the news article says (although it's very likely), so I'd never give a thumbs up or down without absolute evidence.

This isn't anything that could be policed effectively, and there'd inevitably be false convictions if the death penalty returned to being standard fare; therefore, I'd never support the death penalty as an actual policy or law. I simply think that in my personal opinion this fuck deserves to die if he did what's claimed.

To a certain extent I agree, living in a country where the death sentence isn't allowed. However, for certain extreme cases (taking a completely innocent 8-year-old boy into your hands and cutting open his throat with a blade), I believe no level of redemption is possible and to support his continued life in prison would fall onto the taxes we all pay as a nation. Of course, UK prisons are morbidly overcrowded as we don't kill anyone.

It's a very fine line, though. I was speaking more out of emotion than anything else; I wouldn't truly support a death penalty unless the guilt of the killer was in absolutely no doubt whatsoever, which only something like video footage or an abundance of forensic evidence could prove.

That's pretty sick too Frie. Chokeholded his son to death? God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Beno ... er-suicide

There's something about family murders that gets to me, probably because you can relate to it so easily. Just thinking about one of my sisters or something being naive and bringing some psycho home as a boyfriend and him specifically doing everyone in while they sleep (a random burglar probably wouldn't bother)...

And let's face it, it was mostly the boyfriend. I'd imagine once he'd killed her parents she was so overcome with emotion, shock and sensory overload she barely realised what she was doing when she stabbed her brother.

If any kind of complication stops that guy being given a thousand death sentences then this world has failed. I feel bad for the lawyer who has to defend the fuck in court and try to stop him going down for his tri-murder including extinguishing the barely-begun life of an eight-year-old boy for no reason whatsoever.

Seriously sick as fuck.

When you just read the titles/headlines/brief descriptions of these type of things it's not so bad, but it's the detailed testimony that makes this really chilling and uncomfortable to read (especially with my younger brother being almost eight so comparisons are unavoidably drawn).

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story ... trial.html

Quote

Girl admits stabbing brother, insists she didn't kill her familyThis story contains disturbing details

Last Updated: Tuesday, July 3, 2007 | 9:00 PM MT

CBC News

A 13-year-old Alberta girl accused of slaying her family admitted to stabbing her little brother once, but said her much older boyfriend was the one who slit the child's throat and killed her parents.

The Medicine Hat girl, who spoke in a whisper that could barely be heard in the packed courtroom, took the stand in her own defence Tuesday at her first-degree murder trial.

She cannot be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

She testified that the night in April 2006 when her family died, she had called her boyfriend Jeremy Steinke, then 23, and told him she wanted to kill her parents because they were mean to her.

She told the court in Medicine Hat that she had been only joking, but that night she woke up to the sound of Steinke breaking into her house. Her mother went downstairs and screamed, drawing her father and her eight-year-old brother out of their bedrooms, she said.

The girl said she could hear her father and Steinke fighting downstairs, where she later saw her mother lying in a pool of blood.

She said she raced back upstairs and grabbed a knife she had hidden in her closet in case she needed to protect herself. Steinke came up the stairs, staggering and covered in blood, and screamed at her to kill her brother, she said.

"He yells at me 'Stab him, just stab him! Slit his throat!'" she said. "I said, 'I can't, I can't,' and he said, 'You have to. I did this for you.'"

Weeping as she spoke, the accused said the little boy pleaded with her, saying: "I'm scared. I'm too young to die."

The girl testified she stabbed the boy once somewhere in his upper body, but couldn't do anything more. Steinke then grabbed the kitchen knife and slit her brother's throat.

She said she couldn't look, but heard the boy struggling to breathe.

"He was gurgling," she told defence lawyer Tim Foster.

During her testimony, the girl wore a blue blouse and black pants, and had her hair tightly pulled back behind her head. The conservative outfit is a stark contrast to the internet photos the girl posted online before the killings, which showed her dressed in tight black clothing, sucking on her finger suggestively.

The girl was 12 years old when the bodies of her parents and younger brother were found in their Medicine Hat home.

'Hypothetical' conversations about killing family

Earlier in her testimony, she said she and Steinke had "hypothetical" conversations about killing her parents.

She said they used to talk late at night about how much she hated her parents, who didn't approve of their relationship.

She said they discussed possible ways of killing them, including making it look like a murder-suicide or hitting them on the head while they slept and then burning their house down. She said the plans included killing her brother because he was too sensitive to be an orphan.

But the girl said she never took the conversations seriously and considered them no big deal because all of her friends talked like that. She called it "stupid talk."

"This wasn't unusual for my group of friends — talking about killing people."

The accused said that a week before the killings she snuck out of the house and went with Steinke back to his trailer where they had sex. She said they had sex again in a friend's apartment after the killings, only hours before her family's bodies were discovered by her brother's friend.

"I loved him so much. I thought it would bring us closer together," she said, when asked why she would have sex when she was just 12 years old.

The girl will be cross-examined by Crown attorney Stephanie Cleary on Wednesday.

Steinke also faces three charges of first-degree murder, but his trial date has not been set.

Display More

Edit: I meant slaying in the topic.

Voted because I am in such a kind mood, but the results aren't looking good for that school.

Maybe the others have parents who use internets too.

From what?

Never heard of her.

Quote

[Blocked Image: http://kokosovar.free.fr/grah.gif]

Hahahahaha, is that smilie based on the ASCII one?

Steal the mini-map code from DOD:S.

I was thinking more about situations where pinpoint accuracy or headshots might be a bit more useful, such as other greater ranges than "spray and pray".

Even DOD:S has ironsights so it's not like I'm unfamiliar with the process and I know they're good.

As I said I've not played INS yet so I have no idea how the theory carries over into actual gameplay, and it's simply a concern. I just have bad memories of the old Day of Defeat sniper rifle which had no crosshair when in normal view, but still had the accuracy and immense power of the sniper rifle. People would very frequently add something to the middle of their screen (using their other weapons' crosshairs as a reference) and then go around with an extremely effective rifle that can also zoom in.

Are you telling me that there's no potential for people to abuse this and get an unfair advantage in Insurgency? And I don't mean while running around -- I would assume the accuracy'd be reduced while moving anyway. Simply being able to stop dead and immediately start firing with a crosshair rather than moving into iron sights view sounds like it could make all the difference.

I'm also a fan of the no crosshair thing, but I'm aware that it can be exploited having been on the receiving end of people using a crosshair market in clan matches/etc in other games. This is why many games grounded in realism have tried it and then later abandoned it.

Ah, something to play tonight. Totally forgot it was coming out and forgot to check yesterday.

Having read the manual I do have some concerns about how fun it'll actually be, and I'm very concerned about the crosshairs. According to the manual you have no crosshairs when in normal view, but your gun can still fire accurately.

Are we being serious here? Games learnt years ago not to do that, despite the realism, because people very frequently would simply stick a piece of paper to the middle of their screen where the crosshair would be. In fact, I mentioned this in #insurgency when it was moderated on Sunday and got about ten PMs from people all "lol yes that's what I was planning to do, but with marker pen".

The fact something like that seemingly made it to release makes me concerned about the overall gameplay balance, but I'm looking forward to giving it a go anyway. One thing's for sure, an excellent job has been made of the actual production and I hope it'll help all involved to get nice careers in the games industry.

I really do think is the best emoticon ever invented, with the only exception of . It can be adapted to limitless uses depending on what face it accompanies and is wholly superb.

Not got that problem here!

Yeah, same. The best style I can compare how the game looks to is (again) UT2004's Onslaught maps, which similarly were very adequate but weren't very compelling on the eyes.