Ginger_Warrior

Hmm... that's probably the only criticism I'd have of Brawl. That, and its atrocious online system. It's sad when SH -> Bair -> Bair counts as a combo. -.-

If they're in public view, they'll become littered with opinionated, even racist, people who are frankly not all that knowledgeable on that country's culture or structure. Imagine all the anti-American/anti-French comments? I like this idea. It's just one problem that gets me - how do you prove someone's from the country they say they are? I mean, you could check IPs, but that's not exactly fool-proof.

So you keep saying. None of Nintendo's major competitive games (if you can even call them major) are hard. They're really just not. My brother who never plays console games can usually take one stock off me in a four stock match, despite me playing daily, if I don't gimp him. Technical, I'll give ya. It's really way too early for people to start making judgements that Brawl is easier than Melee. Not one of the characters in Brawl (even MK, TL, and Snake, who've all received huge attention at various points in the last eight months) can possibly have been perfected yet. Therefore, we simply don't know how technical and complex each character's meta-game will eventually become.

McCain thinks there's a border between Iraq and Pakistan now. Biden didn't know who was president eighty years ago. Make your own mind up.

Maybe there lies the real point. For all my opinion's worth, the one word you cannot describe RuneScape as is "challenging". Getting 99 woodcutting is not challenging, neither is killing Jad. Something is only challenging, by definition, when it requires the use of all resources and abilities - in other words, when it reaches the point where at any higher difficulty, the task would become impossible unless the person expanded their own ability. RuneScape does not test a person's ability to their fullest. It requires attention, and effort, perhaps a little bit of knowledge in regards to knowing how to do a task, but it never really pushes someone to that breaking point. Fundamentally, the combat system rides too much on luck over whether you hit them, for how much, or whether you get hit yourself, and for how much. The drops system is even more dependent on luck. I don't think there's a single person who would say, "being lucky is a challenge". If they redid the combat system to make it more consistent, and so it requires actual skill, maybe fighting monsters in RuneScape would be a challenge.

OK, acid test. Look at this picture, then see if it's really stress "relief": [hide=Graphic image, you may be disturbed. You've been warned][/hide] Point made?

Arsenal got 6 against Sheffield... Why waste good energy and risk fitness in a meaningless fixture when you could have just gone with 2? I sense this is gonna be another year of show boating from Arsenal, while they finish third/fourth again.

I think you're right. It's a case of this: All sexist people have a controlling nature. A controlling nature aids in work. All aids in work increase the likelihood of receiving a higher wage. Therefore, all sexist people have an increased likelihood of receiving a higher wage. Am I right, or are there holes? It's not so much a controlling nature = more aids = higher wage, as opposed to people with controlling natures tend to make more confident leaders, and are less fearful of risks than those who take a more introverted stance on life. Therefore, these people will tend to work in managerial positions, or jobs which have a "high risk, high reward" basis. They'll also tend to work for longer hours, thus earning more money. That said, I'd hate to have an overly controlling doctor, and they earn bucket loads. ;)

NASCAR is no where near as dangerous as F1.

Or it's less college tuition, food money, gas money... Way to assume that everyone is unhealthy and well, stupid. :| Way to assume that's what he was talking about. He was referring to trading luxury items in the real world for luxury items in RuneScape. Nothing wrong with a Big Mac or a drink every now and then. If you've been told otherwise, you've been told wrong.

It's a bit sad you use the deaths of 9 innocent people to promote political agendas. As far as I recall, no one has really said that either.

(Oh [cabbage], this thread's been redirected from the Gen Board...) Occasionally I used to slip out the odd "lol" by accident, as in the full 'word', not the letters. It was embarrassing. That was when I started to realise I was on MSN way too much for my own health. :?

Be yourself. And yes, I am annoyed at all the "PUA" talk as though it ought to be the way to pick up a girl. Not only does it create the idea that a female is more easily impressed than a male (vicious sexism), it's also leading with false pretence; in other words, lying about who you are. I despise liars. How many times have people come onto this thread saying their relationship is falling apart because they weren't being true to themselves in the first place? If you want a one-nighter, by all means, be a PUA. I won't stop you. If you want a relationship, don't. That's my simple advice.

Life isn't fair. Yet you seem to believe that some people wasting their real life time (which could be spent getting real life money) for RuneScape money is somehow better. I don't think there should be any benefits for using real life money to gain RuneScape items, but I see nothing harmful with a novelty item for those people who donate money to Jagex. The common argument against that is "No, because it creates an elitist system", but I've been on other sites where they encourage donations like this and it really hasn't created this attitude at all. People with wealth gain an advantage. Welcome to Planet Earth, people.

I didn't actually know either until I got invited. Ignorance is bliss. I thought we agreed I wouldn't be in any tourneys from now on anyways.

It needs some form of excitement. Usually, I watch the start, then I go away. Unless something major happens, the positions won't change after that.

Why are you shocked? Did you honestly believe sexism no longer exists, both in the workplace and at home?

RuneScape... ...I mean Star Wars: Jedi Outcast on the GC.

Ah, right, because people wouldnt complain after a while saying that its not getting any better? Developers wouldnt dare think "Hmm, I wish I had more processing power or space with which to make a game", would they? The DS and the Wii are perfect examples of how competition pushes developers to think outside the box in order to gain that strategic advantage in the market. Compare that to the pre-Sony situation, where you had NES, then the same console twice as powerful, then the same twice as powerful again, and even then, the NGC after that wasn't overwhelmingly imaginative.

And because there'd be no competition, neither would have any incentive to improve their consoles whatsoever. I like it.

Eventually, we'll enter recession. I don't think there's anybody doubting that, even Alastair Darling. And yes, you should be worried. The government has had to put loads of public money into the banking system to stop it collapsing on itself by renewing confidence and writing off all the 'bad debt' that couldn't be repayed. This means two things: 1) Either the government will raise taxes. Probably not in the short term because it needs people to spend money, rather than take it away from them. But eventually, this could be a possibility 2) A reduction in public spending. Universities, libraries, schools, hospitals, council services - they all suffer massively in a recession. Because the banks will attempt to keep a hold of every penny they have at the moment, getting a mortgage will be near impossible. Gone are the days of getting a mortgage, doing your house up, selling it for a higher price and moving up the property ladder. This means people will likely be renting rather than buying their own houses, which means business for builders, plumbers, contractors and the like will suffer massively. Such industries are the foundation of civilisation and economic expansion, so that will have wider repercussions, including a reduction in the demand of primary goods. Companies will earn less money - expect to see job cuts. All this against the backdrop of rising fuel and food prices. The extent of a recession is far reaching, and in some cases, puts people under extreme difficulty. My government seems intent on energy saving - that's not gonna help the people who will freeze to death during the winter this year because they can't afford to heat up their homes.

I remember reading "Face" (a novel) when I was in High School. It was really inspiring and it opened my eyes a bit to the world around me.

Is it Benjamin Zephaniah's Black and White? EDIT: Looking on Google apparently it's called "White Comedy":

You can argue about raising taxes and, yes, America is a less taxed country than some in the EU. However, this is the crucial bit. This crisis was caused because of two things. Firstly, your ordinary person, who has to take out a mortgage for their house, borrowed way over the odds for houses they simply could not afford. Secondly, banks were allowed to lend money out irresponsibly in the first place. Last week was about confidence in the banking system, but it all has its roots in the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. There is absolutely no way I should be allowed to borrow a sum of money five times greater than my salary for a house, or any other material item like a car, or a holiday. If it means I can't afford that house, tough - you do not need a $250K house to survive (especially not in a country as rich as America) - but financial responsibility had to improve, not only in America, but across the world. If nationalisation, and becoming "French" is the way to improve that responsibility, I'll happily foot the bill on the promise that regulatory bodies will have more power to stop these ludicrous practises happening again.

With the money you'd save buying a N64, buy a whole load of games. Or buy a Wii, and use the Virtual Console.