All Posts by SagaBoy

A sign of the times I suppose.  My friends joke about it even now - the fact that we simply have to ask for woman's ID at some point before bump'n uglies.  I have my whole game plan and everything.  I ask a chick where she's from and the jokingly tell her I think she's lying.  At which point she has to produce some form of verification showing her birthplace...which also (conveniently enough) shows her age.  I say about 57%'ish of the time it works.  The other method is just to ask for age directly and then, upon hearing it act so utterly shocked that you simply must have proof.

Fact that such plans have to be made nowadays is just kinda sad to me.  It use to be "if there's grass on the field - play ball," but that sh*t almost blew up in my face a while back *shivers while thinking of prison and a guy named bubba*

#1 Lenny Williams - Cause I Love You (needs no explanation)

#2 Donny Hathaway - A Song For You (His voice and the mood the piano sets is just awesome)

#3 The Temptations - Treat Her Like a Lady (How I think a woman should be treated + nice instrumentation)

#4 Boyz II Men - There'll Never Be vs Switch - There'll Never Be ( leaning more towards switch's cover)

#5 Luther Vandross - Don't You Know That (Yes)

*EDIT* wow I was off the mark there, I previously just listed 5 of my favorite songs - by chance 3 were love songs.  New list with all love songs!

Don't  take away my man card on this one but this girl just really isn't that hot to me!  Usually I am but a zombie in the presence or mere sighting of cute foreign women, but this chick just annoys the hell out of me.  I find the accent both seductive and mind-numbingly irritating at the same time.  I find the intelligent delivery she provides, makes her a bit more appealing to me but...something about her just makes me want to close youtube.

I play it but there isn't much to be said about it.  First f2p game I've really given a chance and I mean it's nice but it's just another grind fest.  They recently opened their cash shop and let's just say some of the prices are utterly ridiculous.  I assumed they'd want the average player to spend ~15 bucks a month as if it were a p2p game; however, I missed the mark.

I liken the game to Ragnarok Online in terms of the game mechanics (the way stats work).  It's also similar in that the forging or upgrading process is based on luck (which I hate).

So yeah I play it and it's one hell of a grind but it's free.  Until WAR comes out I'll just keep griding away, and should WAR suck - I'll probably keep grinding away.

Originally posted by CaesarsGhost

 

Originally posted by Vendayn

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20080605-0938-ignoredhit-and-run.html

 

"HARTFORD, Conn. – Police released chilling surveillance video of a hit-and-run accident in hopes of catching the unidentified driver who ran down a 78-year-old pedestrian, paralyzing him, and to show the callousness of bystanders who did nothing to help.

The gripping one-minute video shows the violent May 30 accident and bystanders' apparent lack of sympathy. No one rushes to Angel Arce Torres' aid, and no one bothers to stop traffic as Torres lays motionless in the street."

 

it's because the "Good Samaritan Act" isn't in full effect anymore... anybody who "helps" and worsens damage can be held liable and sued.

 

Happened around here a few times recently... the only people who rush over to accidents anymore are Lawyers.

Bingo.  I've had members of my extended family actually go through something like this and she (my aunt) was a registered nurse.  That aside, there are still "somethings," that could have been done in that situation what wouldn't risk the one rendering aid, of being sued.  Someone could have at least tried to stop traffic in some form or another and called 911; however, I realize that the media, like historians, put a spin on the story so that it follows their own desires.  Could be that he was hit in a heavy traffic area where the simple act of trying to stop traffic could have proved fatal to someone else.  Who really knows.  I have to believe that basic human instinct sides with the good of all mankind mantra, else I'd give up on society.

I would say it's a matter of incentive and motivation.  I've played grinders (Ragnarok Online, L2, etc.) and the only thing that really drove you or rather "me" was the simple need to complete something.  I just have issues with things remaining unfinished, even in games.   Other than the shiny new skills or great little attribute points that come with each level, there just really wasn't much incentive to log into the previously mentioned games.  True, having a good group of like minded individuals around you helps a bit, but it doesn't erase the mind-numbingly painful grind all together.

Then you take quest based games like WoW.  In WoW questing actually gave a competitive alternative to the grind.  Following a line of quest actually made for a quicker leveling experience.   But, even if we forget about the speed at which questing allowed one to level the WoW way of doing things was just.... smoother.  It's one thing to be told to get kill X amount of enemies for the hell of it, but quite another to know that at the same time the one step is unlocking the next (Quest lines).

Not being some avid lore junkie, even I knew some of the major benchmark lore of Warcraft simply from playing the RTS games.  That was actually a bigger plus to me that I once realized.  To know that the story was already set in motion and that you were actively pushing it forward.  I mean taking down Blackwing is/was actually a pretty big deal lore-wise so it kinda gave an added bonus to the task at hand.

In the end though I think it all comes down to quality.  In WoW, as a raid leader for example, I could actively monitor dps output, healer mana consumption, average tanking damage, etc.  Just simply understanding the mechanics of a game and having "easy access" to their function and the collecting of data as it relates to them was an experience in itself.  Forgetting all the lore that asian grinders typically lack save "Long ago there was X god and now X people are in trouble so go kill X enemy to save the world," there just aren't as many distractions from the true purpose which is the grind.  You say that Wow was a quest based grind system; however, I'd counter that and say that they did a damn good job in making you forget it was.

Does this hold true for all quest based games?  Nope!  Some quest based games feel like just as much of a grind as asian grinders do.

Well as of late I've been playing Guild Wars to bide my time.  Wasn't really interested in AoC and still a toss-up on the whole WAR thing, so here I sit playing guild wars.  To begin with I'll state outright that Guild Wars isn't all that fun for me and that's kinda why I play it.  After putting in the time I use to put into WoW I pretty much refuse to ever put that much time into any video game, not because it's unhealthy or any other socially shun reason, but just because of the stress that was involved.  It's been about 3 years with no WoW and during that time I've slid from Ragnarok Online (you think you know a grind?) to DaOC, over to Planetside for a decent portion of time, then CoV, only to then go cold turkey with no MMO for about 6 months, then finally end up playing Guild Wars.

In Guild Wars I was often asked by my guildmates, how I liked the game thus far.  My usual honest was reply was, "It's good but it feels like something is missing."  They'd of course ask what exactly that something was, to which I couldn't give a clear answer.  I mean Guild Wars had what I thought were all the necessary components to an MMO; however, I couldn't fight this feeling that there was just something out of place.  It's like when you walk into a foreign house and something, some intangible something nags at you so.

Well, I've since grown tired of Guild Wars, I mean it's an excellent game, but from what I can see it is just the same ole same ole.  Not that, that is a bad thing but nowadays I just require true motivation to keep me playing MMO's  (I know I know....I'm getting to the point)

Well I really got to thinking about it and the thing that I noticed, or rather that I found lacking in Guild Wars was that no matter where you were, or what group of people you were with - you just kinda felt alone.  Sounds idiotic but there was no real sense of dependence on another player to accomplish x,y, and z.  I know this doesn't much hold true in Hard Mode but I still hold to the statement.

As much of a headache as WoW was, the sense of a bond, of a community, I experienced in my guild during my time there was pretty awesome.  It's something that I actually thought more of an annoyance than a blessing during my time in the game but reflecting on it all makes me appreciate it all the more.  Raiding was tedious and boring, but raiding for the sake of an in-game friend really did give new polish to the antique chester.  I mean I vividly remember times where I was happy (while exhausted) to have another go at a raid boss with the unselfish desire to see X, Y, and Z guild mate get a piece of gear.

Another aspect of WoW that I'm now seeing I actually enjoyed was the massive groups of people that gather in the major cities for auctions and the like.  Now, when I was playing I told myself I hated it, referring to Lag-Forge  and umm (I really can't think of any other major WoW city name other than Ironforge!).  It was nice to come into Ironforge and just see the globs of people idling around.  On a similar note, the transition zones between cities and major raid points were also a blast.  Having to group up as a guild of 40 people and simultaneously fly to a gripphon point to engage a horde presence that was blocking entrance into Blackwing's Lair etc.  It was all just good times.

I have no intentions of going back to WoW, but there were some things they just did right.  True, there are other games with similar atmospheres, but none brought me in as much as WoW did.  I guess I'm just saying that the thing I miss now that I didn't realize I would miss was just being around other large gatherings of people in a virtual world.  Not saying it doesn't happen in Guild Wars but it really just isn't the same.  And so it goes, you don't really know what ya got til it's gone or in this case no longer readily accessible.

After I got through reading this I noticed my hand was trembling.  I then noticed my heart was beating rapidly.  I had no choice but to deduce that I was PISSED THE FUCK OFF!  (Forgive the language) The smugness that comes across in this article just makes me sick to my stomach.  I won't knock their hustle, but man does it rub me the wrong way when it comes off as no more as a comedic game to them (the oilmen).

Thank god I went with a Honda or I just don't know how I'd stomach the commute in Atlanta.  Honestly, I don't much mind the high cost of gas.  The economy fluxuates as does the flow of foreign affairs.  It's when American based companies, especially those with a monopoly over the product which they distribute, take advantage of a bad situation (declining economy) to make record profits each and "every," quarter that it just starts to bother a person even as apathetic as myself.

But after the emotions cool and all things are considered - this is what America is built on.  Get what ya can, when ya can and the rest be damned I suppose.

I may stand alone here, but I feel the last Hulk movie was really terrible.  I mean I hadn't read up on the Hulk or even knew who he was outside of those old reruns that use to air every now and again.  But, for such a strong "thing," the Hulk, as portrayed in that movie, was such a wuss that it just killed the whole image for me.  And, the bit with his father was not only unclear but it was so....so... poorly done that it just left a bad taste in my mouth.  It wasn't bad cinema, oddly enough; meaning I couldn't point to any one thing the movie really did wrong.  It just didn't have the vibe of a good comic book / superhero movie.  But, I suppose Batman Begins and now Iron Man are really raising the bar as it pertains to comic book-to-movie films.

I have to see this movie just to gain faith in the Hulk.  It can't get much worse than that last attempt...I HOPE!

I am a really introspective person.  I say that only to preface my point that this particular thought (marriage) loops through my head an aweful lot.  I too am like the OP save some subtle differences.  I'm 23, currently single, in excellent shape, with a solid financial foundation.  The thing that really sparked this question for me was, that at church and on the job the question kept getting thrown at me over and over.  "You're 23 and not married?"  I mean people would look at me like I was the black guy at a KKK rally or something.  I just didn't understand what the hell people found so shocking.  So naturally I thought back to my college days.  When you have a problem you research it, consider as many viewpoints as possible, and explore each option til a suitable answer presents itself.

First I called my parents who are still married (35 years as of this posting).  Now I grew up in their household and I witnessed the rage, compassion, (the ups and downs) a married couple goes through.  I even realized how hard it was to raise a "mad at the world" kid like myself.  I called and asked my father in very simple terms.  "Sir, why did you get married?"  His answer was similar to those you presented earlier.  He couldn't stomach the thought of not being with my mother - blah blah blah.  After all the mushy stuff he said something that kinda wow'ed me.  "And...I kinda wanted to marry her just to see what it (marriage) was like and if I could be good at it."  I think with all the curiosity surrounding the concept of marriage; that's actually a pretty good reason.  Sounds stupid I know but curiosity alone is a powerful thing.

When I asked my mother the question she simply replied that she felt the time, the man, and her heart were all in the right place, to which she asked me "so why not?"  She then asked that I recall an event that happened not to long ago.  At my college graduation I turned to my parents, looked them straight in the eye, and simply said Thank You.  She said the feeling you get knowing you have raised a good man (or child) brings about a feeling of such fulfillment that you are actually content with you life no matter what stage it's in.  That made sense as I wouldn't wish supervision of my childhood on my worst enemy.

I started reading head shrinker articles and all of those pointed to the need to fill a void or validate one's own existence by having a partner act as a sort of biological camcorder that makes note of the important events in one's life.  Then there are the religious bunch who feel that GOD sends that special someone to them so they aren't forced into a union; as the union is ordained by GOD. 

For now the only way I can possibly justify marriage is by weighing the pros and cons.  If the union will be emotionally, financially, and physically beneficial to each member involved then it makes sense.  But that's the catch 22, you really don't know!  I mean you can research the financial and get a good  idea of how well maintained the physical will be, but the emotionally portion of marriage is a slippery slope at best.  I have seen men, who do absolutely everything for their significant other only to have them walk out and destroy the poor bastard.  This very second I know men who have what I would view as a stable home (wife and kids) and still feel the need to cheat with no feelings of remorse.  The more and more I think about marriage the more and more it vexes me.  I suppose it's just one of those uncertainties where the fluxuation in variable change can not be accounted for; which again leads me to believe that marriage is better served for older individuals.  I say that simply because as you age, people tend to become set in their ways and are less willing to make major life style changes.  So, if two older people enter a relationship it's pretty much a hit or miss situation; whereas, younger people tend to swallow some annoyances for the sake of what they believe to be love.

Originally posted by beastliest21

The sad thing about this election is there is no good candidate only to decide which one will do the least amount of harm. I usually hate republicans but if obama and hilary were the best they could come up with .. I am voting mccain.. at least he won't do as much damage as the others.

The thing is I believe in healthcare reform .. just no one  has a decent policy for that yet, instead their ideas cause more problems instead of fixing them.  I am smart enough to know that before we went into Iraq .. there is no way we will be able to leave anytime soon, if ever.

No I don't want our brothers, sisters. mothers and fathers over there but I do undertsand it would be  huge mistake to remove them. When we went into iraq we killed their defenses, those do not rebuild themselves overnight and you cannot expect them too, if we kill their defenses we must be their defense until they can defend themselves. If we pull our troops out too early we have just gave up the biblical site of armegeddon to all those wishing to come in and start it. The other countires did not enter iraq before because they were afraid of saddam and his armies, they do not enter now because they are afraid of us. We leave and they have no reason to stay out.

If  we have a leader that  is totally against war, other countries will view us as weak , because they will know that we will not attack, as long as they know that we could they will be forced to think greatly about their actions before proceeding with them. It is niave to think that we can have world peace without wars. World peace is something that cannot happen without wars simply because not everyone shares the same beliefs and desires and many of those beliefs include "dying for  their gods" They view killing us as a good thing not bad and do not want peace they want a way to destroy us any way they can.

There are times that words are of no use, and that we must go to war.  As ugly as it is , it is a fact of the cruel world we live in.  No we cannot change the fact that we went into iraq, what has been done cannot be undone. We must tread that ground now very carefully, and not make rash decsions on whether or not to withdraw troops based upon emotion. We do have to think ahead very carefully in taking these steps because taking a wrong one could be devestating to the entire world, not just Iraq.

It has been proven attacks can and will take place here on american soil.  If we appear weak in the least there are plenty of  people out there that would gladly take any opportunity to attack us. These are things that need to be greatly considered in our presidential elections at this time.

Bottom line, Bush was angry, sadened, etc. when this happened.  Anyone with any degree of managerial knowledge knows that it is never wise to make decisions when you are emotional.  The fault does not totally lie with Bush (Congress and Americal in general shoulder their fair share), but when he pressures the intelligence community to find (read: make up) something as a means for him to "bring justice to America," then I have to pose the question - who is really making rash decisions here?  Time passes and now the country, with a more clear prospective, sees that the emotional decision after 911 was perhaps not the best one.  What's done is done but I felt back then as I do now - we were in no position, as a country, to even ponder the thought of war so soon after 911. 

Attacks will take place, of that you may be assured.  If not from without then certainly from within.  So are we to be ready to throw down the card of WAR at the first sign of terror?  Statistically speaking it's literally impossible to police and consider all the possible ways a terrorist attack could happen.  Even at my job which deals with railroad freight I can think of no less that half a dozen ways a terrorist could "easily" do "something" that would result in catastrophic death rates.   I'll jump off this tangent and back to the point.  There will always be war.  There will always be the fear of war.  There will also always be the severe consequences present when a country decides to go to war - why then should war not be used as a last resort when every other possible avenue is exhausted?

1) The Badass: Think Dante' from Devil May Cry.  A character that seamlessly flows from melee to long range combat with the added bonus of magic for defense and improved offensive bursts.  I know there have been classes that "can" use both a ranged and melee weapon, but usually there is a lack of strength and style when switching between the two.

2) Gentle Fist arts:  Inspiration taken from Neji of the Naruto anime.  To be able to kick someone's @ss with minimal physical excursion.   It'd be a character that does little to nothing to actually take health away; instead, if allowed to  build up X bar, the character would be able to seal X ability, Y regen rate, and Z defensive capabilities.  The drawback would of course be that it's an extremely squishy but also quick melee character.

3) Gun-kata arts: While a character theme that closely resembled the movie Equilibrium would be nice, I just mean a generalized version of the concept.  Take a character that relies solely on a ranged weapon but make him/her at their most effective when in close range.  In melee the weapon doubles as a defensive and offensive tool.

4) An "all in" class: Nothing excites me more in fighting games than that rare moment where you know the last blow, the last clash, the final dance will end the battle.  In marvel vs. capcom my friend and I would often run into this standoff if I had Hibuki and he was using Akuma.  The moment would be so intense that when the circumstances lined up right we'd have to take a 5 minute breather to calm down before continuing.  I want that in an MMORPG.  I know in WoW I'd often be the dumb gnome rogue running into a mob of horde yelling at my computer "show me what you got xxxxxxx!"  I want a class that does pretty terrible damage on a consistent basis to work up towards something.  Let's suppose the character has to build up "will power" or "complete apathy."  As this bar builds the characters overall stats slowly increase and do not deteriorate for X amount of time.  Once the meter builds the character can activate (within in a very small window of opportunity)  an attack that if successful (assuming a, b, and c conditions are met) will instantly kill an opposing character.  This attack would drop the user to 10% health upon activation, exhaust the full bar required to build up the attack; however, if the attack was successful then you'd be given back 40% health for a grand total of 50% health when all is said and done, assuming you didn't take damage while retreating.

5) A true cannibal class:  In some games you can steal health from team mates.  Borrow health etc.  How about a class that is so team dependent that it literally can not survive without killing a member of its own faction (or enemy faction) every X amount of time.  In killing the enemy or friend he'd gain some attribute of that class while boosting his base attributes 2 fold.  The general idea here is that you suck until you kill someone.  If you already suck to start with how are you ever going to kill someone?  Well that's where you team mate steps in.  A friend dies to make you twice as strong as other players.  The trick of it all is that while friendly units make you twice as strong as you were, killing enemy units make you 2.5 times stronger with the draw back of the boosted effects lasting for a shorter period of time.  It's a pretty twisted concept but you get the drift.

Call me crazy but if we as a country can decide to elect George Dubuya Bush, for two consecutive terms and still praise him for his actions as it draws to a close then, I have to believe anything is possible.  Just as sure as I don't believe Obama will win, for an obvious reason I dare not state; I also believe with things as screwed up as they are right now, maybe he has an ice cube's chance in hell of winning at the end.  He won't lose because he isn't the better candidate.

As to the question of not knowing where a candidate stands - well call me crazy but it always "seems" we know where a candidate stands up until about 3-6 months after the election.  I just don't think using the "flip-flopper" defense is justifiable anymore.  Crazy as it may seem I want a candidate that doesn't see everything in black in and white.  Maybe a candidate that can appreciate both sides of an argument and "change," his stance is what is needed.  Not calling Obama a flip-flopper, just making a sly attempt at saying that maybe Kerry would have been a better choice as opposed to Bush, but I suppose that's the beauty of unprovable hindsight.  People act like a person changing their stance is a sin that guarantees you a spot in the 7th circle of hell.  Granted you may vote for a candidate based on his current stance, but I like to think that I'm voting for a total package, i.e. the rationale of a candidate; his or her ability to be formless, adaptable, and intelligent.

If a candidate changed his stance on something as cut n' dry as abortion and came on t.v. and explained his rationale behind his stance change I could honestly still support the candidate if I felt it was a logical/moral conclusion.  The problem nowadays is that when a candidate chances something, they do their damnest to make it seem as if they didn't.  Anyway, enough of my babbling.

No I don't think Obama will win but not because he isn't the best candidate.  This country has a legacy of electing a certain type of candidate and I don't see that trend breaking anytime soon.  No, I'm not playing the "race" card so much as the," this country is composed of lemming-like idiots" card.