Faux
-
Posts
7820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Faux
-
-
at a bar, beer. I prefer light beer most of the time. I hate IPAs, it makes me feel bloated.
at a club, any vodka or rum (cran vodka looks queer but it's amazing)
at home, hard cider
at house parties, shots. Tequila if you want to have a morning you'll regret
-
It's really sad how Americans just approach these killings as if it's just a normal occurrence now (like that guy said "they'll still happen" - [bleep]ing wow). I guess the lives of 20 children is just something you sacrifice so rednecks and psychos can keep buying guns without having to apply for permit/license.
Anyway, I don't even think anymore that changing gun rights will make any immediate impact. There's just too much guns available in America to even attempt to control it now.
-
-
Did you actually get a WC ticket? I think it would be nice to go, but I imagine people who will be buying those tickets will be the mature crowd.
-
Yeah I normally skip the belt with sneakers except on one blue and brown pair of converse (I'd post a picture to prove that it doesn't look nearly as terrible as that sounds but apparently the shoes I have do not exist on the internet). It just looks awkward to me when they don't match, even if the colors are still complimentary, and most of the time it doesn't even make that much of a difference because if your pants fit right you don't need the belt and if you aren't tucking anything in your shirt will probably cover it anyways.
And that makes more sense about the black and white stuff, you seemed to know your stuff a little too much to be honestly suggesting them, haha. Most people who wear those colors just haven't developed an eye for what compliments their skin yet because they normally haven't cared enough to notice, lol.
Oh nvm, misread.
-
Shoes wise I'm thinking of buying a pair of light-grey converse as white just feels too saturated, black is too dense and colour-wise I've got my red Entites/Vans for that.
what do you think of double uppers?
Or stick to standard?
What about them? They're converse and grey. So controversial.
-
I bought about $400 worth of stuff online in the past few weeks and saved at least 30%. Not to mention the money I saved when I went to outlets. Buying full priced clothing is for suckers :)
Am I the only one who goes to malls to try out stuff and buy it online after? I just need to make sure they fit, but it's just stupid how much cheaper it is even if I ship from US.
-
If you haven't checked it out yet https://dotabuff.com/ Tracks all your stats. I have 52-53% win rate so I think I'm doing well. This is my first "moba" so I played horrible my first few games.
My favourite hero is Leshrac. Very versatile hero. Can go on any lane, provides disable, can push well and play support or semi-carry.
I just played batrider. Got carried so hard because I played horrible and won lol. Fun hero to play but I'm so bad with him
-
No idea why there's no thread for this, but anyone else plays it?
It's not a pay to win game unlike other free games, but it's in beta so you do need an invite to play. Game is beautiful and really high quality for a free game. The voice acting alone in this game surprises most people.
The only thing I don't really like about this game is Hispanic/Latin American players who queue in US servers and can't speak English. Other than that it's really fun.
-
I didn't mean $500 as a gaming rig. I'm aware that good gaming rigs cost two to three times more than that. I used $500 as the average person's computer - something a teenager would use for school work and facebook. I meant that since the average person spends that much on a PC anyways, you can use that to justify spending more on a gaming PC.
Example: Someone owns an Xbox that they paid $200 for and a computer that they paid $500 for. They don't PC game. Total spent: $700
Example 2: Someone owns a $1000 gaming PC. Total spent: $1000.
Difference of $300. They're not paying an extra $1000 to PC game in that case; they're paying an extra $300.
I know what you mean. But PC graphics is only "better" when your PC is on par with current tech. If not, you're forced to lower a lot of your graphic settings which most of the time puts it at the same level (if not worse) as consoles.
To keep up with the technology, it will cost more than $300 (about the price of a higher mid tier GPU) in the same span as a console's generation (5-6 years).
Also remember I'm going by American prices. PC parts are even less competitive outside the US. Though most of you probably won't care to know.
OP started this as a rant against people saying PC > console in a 360 vs ps3 thread. His earlier posts came across as saying console > pc, perhaps unintentionally. OP is in denial of this.I actually made this as a satire (though an accurate one imo). Not a rant ;)
P.S. to the other person who keeps denying the popularity of multiple screen setups https://www.google.c...iw=1280&bih=640
-
Dear God, you've opened the can of worms again.
Faux, you can't win this, no matter how valid your points are. Most people that frequent these forums probably play PC's anyway.
I don't mind.
The only point I agree with that has been made in favor of the console side is the price difference. If you don't have much money to spend, then console gaming is probably for you. If you don't mind paying a bit extra for quality, then go with PC gaming. Since most people are going to own a computer that costs at least $500 anyways, it's not a huge price difference when you look at it.
Just my 2 cents.
Just an example.
BF2 - released in 2009. Let's say it's around your typical "$500 budget" (which it probably isn't because the GPUs alone cost $200 back then).
Recommended specs:
Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz or AMD Athlon XP equivalent
1 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 256 MB or ATi Radeon 9500 256 MB
3 GB of free hard disk space for Windows swap file and save data
BF3 - released 2011: Quick check off newegg.com, GTX560 costs $270, on sale for $233. Not even looking at the cost of a quad core, and the extra ram. new MB and the new OS.
Recommended specs:
Windows 7 64-bit
Intel or AMD quad-core
4 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 or AMD Radeon HD 6950
Two years apart...
-
Since you (Faux) have not yet argued this same point for consoles, it is more than fair to say that yes, your argument is in fact that console gaming is superior to pc gaming, and you probably shouldn't be trying to deny that when your title and opening post say otherwise.
No it isn't. It's honestly simple logic you can't grasp. PC gaming sucking doesn't mean console gaming doesn't suck.Both of them can suck differently. I can also make a list of why console gaming is also horrible (better than your attempts to, anyway), but that's for another thread.
I made this thread for the "PC gaming race superiority" rats that plagued the other thread. That's all. Stop trying to act like you know me personally. It just makes me laugh tbh.
-
In this case, I'm not talking about casuals like you who think they're PC gamers when you haven't even heard of SLI/Crossfire setups, multiple monitors, RAID, etc. which you most likely don't have on your "gaming PC".
If you can't admit PC gaming costs more, this argument with you is futile. Even I never denied PCs have technical superiority.
I said I had a midline gaming laptop and several consoles. I never said I had a top tier desktop PC. I don't have the funds to build a top of the line machine yet. If lacking the funds to build one defines you as a "casual" - which is a laughable term, especially when used as you have - then I have to wonder where you fall in this ambiguous "casual" and "pro" labels you chuck around.
I am well aware of the advanced features that you claim I don't know about. Long gone are the days where you had to be an "advanced user" in order to have a top-of-the line, home built PC, though. RAID, btw, isn't necessary for a top tier gaming rig. They're for advanced users who want redundancy and insurance against hdd failure. To mention it as being one of the "defining" traits that separate "casuals" from "pros" in gaming is confusing, to say the least.
You imply that having multiple gaming consoles devalues them as a gaming enthusiast. Please explain what you mean here, because that seems like quite the assumption. And an incorrect one at that. They are not a mutually exclusive thing by any stretch of the imagination, and to imply otherwise only lessens your credibility and weakens your argument.
As for what you claim are my own assumptions...if they were false, you would have an answer for my questions. You show your ignorance about what you're debating against when you bandy about terms you don't even understand and fail to listen to the people you're actually talking with by citing things they never even said.
To put it bluntly, you're talking out of your ass. You don't understand what is essential and what isn't when building a desktop (let alone purchasing premade!) and how it affects the bottom line price of what you're paying. You quote RAID, xfire, and dualmonitors as if they're essential to your build. You can't conclude that anything is more expensive than the other when you don't even understand what the costs are associated with it.
So now we're talking about essentials? Coming from the person who brought up the multiple console point that started this line of debate. Lol.
Also, most people own more than one console or handheld (Source: gamefaqs daily polls x, most even have every iteration of consoles from the same publishers x, x, x, etc etc etc) Not to mention that with add-ons in the form of DLC, accessories, repairs out of warranty (happens to everyone, PC or Console), etc your costs become less skewed than you can imagine.
If anything, I'd propose that only an idiot would say they're any different in cost in the long run. When you're not comparing identical traits, it's apples and oranges. When you are, it pretty much all comes out in the wash. It's downright laughable to do otherwise and assert that one side is better than the other (be it in quality, cost, whatever) as if it were an absolute truth and not a matter of preference.
Also, just a tip: people don't throw out their PS2 because they bought a PS3. So yes, most people actually do have multiple consoles.
Actually, being both a PC and console gamer myself, I can say that price has nothing to do with why I chose to play on the computer or the Xbox360. I have 2 computers able to play any game that is out right now (one desktop that is 3 years old, and one laptop that is 1 year old), and a 360. I usually will go with what feels good between the computer and the xbox for what games I get. For games like cod, it's going to be the xbox of course because of the sheer amount of people that plays it which is much lower on pc, but then again, I don't really car if the game is on pc or xbox, it all comes to the same, and most people are probably like me, they don't care about the price.
You're out of touch of "most people" if you think price doesn't matter.
Sorry, I did sort of end up removing my direct answer.
Yes, if two people enjoy PC and console gaming equally, then price is likely to be the point of contention.
My point was that I consider this irrelevant, since price has no direct impact on how enjoyable the experience is. It only impacts on which is more likely to be bought, which doesn't correlate with what people find most desirable. Generally, the most expensive items are considered the most desirable, which is why they are the most expensive. In this case, it is complicated by the fact that a computer of some sort is pretty much essential for functioning in the modern world, which means most families have at least one. Consoles need to be cheep to attract people, because they are essentially siphoning money out of peoples computer budgets. You need to be able to afford both at once, or your not going to have nearly as many sales.
Kind of inane to just limit the scope of what is enjoyable. How about just simply calling consoles more enjoyable because 4 people can enjoy it at the same time vs a loner on a PC?
-
edit: lol nvm.
-
The graphics are not worse than dota 2...I tried it again and it's too grindy.
The hero prices are out the roof. 6,000 points to get a dude and you get like 100 a game... yuck. 60 games to try out a dude or wait till he comes around once every 3 months. I'm not spending $100 to find somebody decent and fill up that rune page with appropriate stuff.
FYI, HON is like 100% free too as in you can pick every hero. You only spend money if you want that one special skin or voice actor.
Just be prepared to mute everybody at the start of each game unless you like listening to clowns cry.
at least you can get past the shitty graphics. i told my friend i'm playing dota2 and he recommended this game. i looked it up on youtube and laughed at the quality.
When's the last time you saw Dota2? LoL looks like 2D sprites...
-
I tried it again and it's too grindy.
The hero prices are out the roof. 6,000 points to get a dude and you get like 100 a game... yuck. 60 games to try out a dude or wait till he comes around once every 3 months. I'm not spending $100 to find somebody decent and fill up that rune page with appropriate stuff.
FYI, HON is like 100% free too as in you can pick every hero. You only spend money if you want that one special skin or voice actor.
Just be prepared to mute everybody at the start of each game unless you like listening to clowns cry.
at least you can get past the shitty graphics. i told my friend i'm playing dota2 and he recommended this game. i looked it up on youtube and laughed at the quality.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvYXoyxLv64
The cinematic trailer for Mists of Pandaria came out yesterday, it's looking good. Pretty excited for MoP.
how many times did you relapse back to playing this game :?
-
large fonts and bla bla
The gun being legally purchased is, well, obvious. You pointed out the lax Wisconsin gun laws in the first post.
And you think I contradicted myself, but I didn't. You seem to think the federal government controls state governments...that's not the case*. Technically, the Constitution should only limit the powers of the federal government. The Supreme Court has ruled otherwise for the most part, except on gun laws, or the Second Amendment. Consequently, I believe that state governments should exercise their right to limit gun laws to prevent them falling into criminal hands. Of course, it won't do much, as I've pointed out--but it'll help considerably when a schizophrenic prone to violence is prevented from buying a gun from the normal routes. Such a person is unlikely, due to their illness, to find another route. The same goes for many other situations (children, teens, and young adults, for example, would find it mighty difficult to procure a gun even with the power of the internet or real life blackmarkets...).
*: It goes to show you don't know much about the United States government, its foundations, the reasoning of the founding fathers, etc. Implying "one government fits all" is pretty... idiotic. There is a reason why the United States has been successful, regardless of what you think.
semi-unrelated: By the way, you know what causes more harm than good in the United States? Food. The state of school food is absurd. Unhealthy food is considerably cheaper than proper sustenance. But I don't see you railing against crappy food? Why? Shouldn't the government focus on the "greater good?" More people die because of unhealthy life choices (imposed on others, no less!) than guns...
The fact that you brought up food in a weapon argument really doesn't help your case. People who eat their life away do so within their own rights. People who die from guns are on a separate sphere. That's how shrewd your logic is. Just because people die by obesity doesn't make it okay for people to be killed from shootings. That's like saying how more people die from old age makes death by murder even better. Kind of [bleep]ed up.
And your variance on federal vs state is irrelevant. Whether it's the state or on the federal level, limiting freedom is limiting freedom. It's the generality of it all that matters. Even if half your country bans guns, it won't make a lick of difference because of your open borders where people can cross states without being checked.
-
"gaming laptops"
10/10 would laugh again
http://www.alienware...gs/laptops.aspx
Laugh all you want, but there's a reason why Alienware is still around. And it's not because no one buys it. :?
I would like to see what I said was false. You should try participating more in discussion. I can't very well read your mind, now can I?
Or you can just stop making assumptions. You're obviously not very good at it.
I still can't get over how you think console gaming on average costs more than PC gaming. If you're comparing a person with multiple consoles, then I guess I can bring up real gaming enthusiasts. In this case, I'm not talking about casuals like you who think they're PC gamers when you haven't even heard of SLI/Crossfire setups, multiple monitors, RAID, etc. which you most likely don't have on your "gaming PC".
If you can't admit PC gaming costs more, this argument with you is futile. Even I never denied PCs have technical superiority.
-
Good job contradicting yourself in the first two paragraphs. You just said USA should restrict gun purchasing but at the same time not lessen your "freedoms".
Anyway, update on the shooter:
He was armed with a.The gun wasby Page in Wisconsin.Four people were killed inside the temple, and two people, plus Page, died outside. Page killed five men and one woman, ranging in age from 39 to 84.Three men were transported to, including one of the responding officers.Sounds like the guy was an Army veteran who had issues coming off his duty. 6 people dead because... well NY's Mayor Bloomberg said it for me,
"The fact that criminals, terrorists and other mentally ill people have access to guns is a national crisis," Bloomberg said during a visit to a Sikh community center in Queens. -
33 states don't regulate private sales of guns.
That's a majority.
-
I think it's fair to say that most states have liberal gun rights. Even for the stricter states, nothing actually prevents someone from taking a gun from another state and bringing it over. If people can smuggle guns to Canada from US, crossing states would be a breeze.
As for your second point: http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States
tl;dr: individuals "not engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales within their state of residence, are under no requirement to conduct background checks on purchasers or maintain records of sale (although even private sellers are forbidden under federal law from selling firearms to persons they have reason to believe are felons or otherwise prohibited from purchasing firearms).
-
Rifles and Shotguns
I'm pretty sure the reason we have these is wildlife, whether for hunting or defense.
Semi-automatic guns (e.g. converted AKs) are legal. Overkill for wildlife, imo.
Any time someone says something like this it just shows how they have no clue what they are talking about. An AK styled semi automatic rifle is no more dangerous than any other semi automatic rifle, but since they look scary people rush to ban them. In fact an AK or AR 15 actually shoots a smaller round than say a M1 Garand, which is legal even in Canada.
M1 might be legal in Canada but you actually need a license to own a gun. In USA, you can walk up to a store and buy one without any background check.
Like I said, I'm not for banning guns because I understand their use especially for people living in rural areas. But the gun laws in the USA is just stupid.
-
Everyday. Shower with shampoo/soap. Conditioner when I'm going out. I use deodorant + cologne (not body spray). I don't recommend body sprays. A decent cologne is worth investing in imo.
Miss hottie 2015 Quaterfinal 1
in Off-Topic
Posted
Alba and Beckinsale. Feels more like 2005 than 2015