Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Warp wrote:
We can "express" all natural numbers. We have a system for that. As I said, for example with decimal digits. We can also "express" all rational numbers likewise. We cannot express all real numbers.
What do you mean that we cant express all real numbers?
Do you mean that there is a difference between the idea that we could write down two (possibly preposterously large, but finite) natural numbers to express any given rational, but "most" reals do not have a finite number of digits?
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Warp wrote:
Twelvepack wrote:
Problems with the schools? Increase funding!
Too many people homeless? More government subsidized housing!
Too many drug addicts? More cops and more government sponsored treatment facilities!
There are some problems that money doesn't solve, but that doesn't stop some politicians from trying it anyway.
And what would be, in your opinion, a better solution to those problems that a government can implement?
I don't think that the government can solve these problems, and I think that by infantilizing the people that suffer from these problems, they might even make the problems worse.
So what it comes down to is that there are people who might need more government help than they currently receive, but there are also people who receive government help, but might be better off standing on their own two feet. Throwing more money at the problem shrinks the first group but enlarges the second, and does so at great expense.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Warp wrote:
Twelvepack wrote:
who thinks throwing money at poor people is good policy
Care to elaborate on that?
Because it sounds like "let poor people die, who cares?"
That is ridiculous hyperbole.
There is a wide difference between letting people die in the street and throwing money at problems that arn't even financial in nature.
Problems with the schools? Increase funding!
Too many people homeless? More government subsidized housing!
Too many drug addicts? More cops and more government sponsored treatment facilities!
There are some problems that money doesn't solve, but that doesn't stop some politicians from trying it anyway.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I just pray for the day we can get a real third party and we aren't forced to pick between someone who thinks throwing money at poor people is good policy, and a man who seems to be terrified of gay marriage.
I actually kind of envy those of you who live in a country where there are a handful of viable parties instead of exactly two.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
One this that does annoy me a bit is that right around the start of hell, you start to have little choice but to stack vit and choose defensive skills in order to not die constantly. I realize that this is the consequence of having difficult mobs in the game, but I do kind of wish you were forced to balance it out a bit more than you are.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I think you are right that they will patch to make the named bosses harder. Even in hell, the purple (quest related, named) bosses tend to be quite a bit easier than the randomly generated ones, but it just seems strange to get into full on rant mode about it. The fact remains that actually playing inferno is every bit as hard as promised, even if beating it is not.
(also, are you sure about affect? it just looks wrong that way)
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Inferno: beaten by hardcore players not hardcore enough to try it on hardcore.
Are you really that pissed off that people managed to beat inferno by corpse hopping? Its not like the loot they got made the effort worthwhile.
And why do you care about what some crazies did anyway? It doesn't effect your game.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Derakon wrote:
In short, mid-frame resets are not a controversial concept. If you mash reset while saving your game in Chronotrigger, you're going to corrupt your savefile due to interrupted instructions, even though saving only takes a single frame.
My question is at what point does disrupting power to the console become a physical modification to the hardware?
would it be valid if we had some way of emulating a power surge, or a voltage drop that disrupts the processor without turning it off entirely?
I would be all for disallowing resets and power switch use except when the timing of it need not be frame precise. (like in cases when resetting is done to return to the game's initial spawn point). This would make sure that any resets would work in a way we can be sure are valid.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
The more I play it, the more it just feels like d2 without all of the parts I found obnoxious. Most importantly, the gameplay itself is far less monotonous, given that you have 6 skills you actually use instead of 1 or two. The skill choices you make feel like they matter more as well. D2 got trapped in the mindset where you could put points in whatever you wanted, but some skills sucked so hard you were an idiot if you didn't spec a certain way. In D3, the choices you make matter, and you give up good skills to have other good skills. I just feels like it was better thought out.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I really liked d2, but I feel like d3 is just a better made game. the main thing that bothered me about d2 was that every serious player really needed a sorc with good mf. I never liked playing sorc, but there was no other practical way to find gear, so you were stuck with it.
D3 evens the playing field so any class has to give up stat gain to get good mf. I really would have liked to see MF removed as a stat, but if they had to keep it, this is probably the best way to have done it.
I really feel like they did a good job dealing with damage and life leech as well. You could get enough life leech in d2 that you would only really die to insta kill, so the only way the game had challenge was if there were mobs that could kill you instantly. D3 is far better about giving a challenge without sudden death.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
who destroyed bnet in d2? are you referring to people who duped items? or farmers who sold for profit?
the real money AH is a dumb idea, but if you dont like it, its easy enough to just never buy or sell on it. The only reason I kinda hate it is because it gives a bigger incentives to hack accounts, which can be a pain in the ass for the unprepared.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I played through a few of them, and I especially liked the four score one.
Would have liked the back parts to be a little more involved, but understandable because of the limit you mentioned.
Nice maps overall.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
deuxhero wrote:
If it were allowed I would love to see a TAS completion of Brawl's OoT demo if it was possible to complete it in the time limit with the new glitch+Brawl's starting save game.
This.
That might be the single coolest idea for a run I have heard in years.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
This run was almost 50 minutes faster than the one it obsoleted, and you would call someone insane for thinking that it might be better than the one that came before it?
You are just upset that he rated a run that you like poorly. No amount of motive questioning will change the fact that he watched it and did not enjoy it. Not everyone likes every run. Move on.