@Dizz

[Demiterracotta]

What's the opinion on Kingdom of Amalur: Reckoning? I'm considering it. It looks like a sequel to Neverwinter Nights' date=' which I loved.[/quote']

Amazing. Since I didn't want to de-rail the diablo thread any further.

It takes some of the best elements from both Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls and puts them into one game. The combat is interactive and fun, you have a big sandbox to roam around in and do what you want. There are incentives for exploring. You aren't stuck with just one set of skills, you can hybrid whatever you want. And respeccing to try different playstyles is a simple click.

I honestly don't understand how this game doesn't get more hype, it far and away blows skyrim out of the water IMO.

[Filth]

Not to mention R.A. Salvatore for the win.

[Mindflayer]

Nekky recommended it to me and I love it

[killalou]

After playing the Dark Souls, I found this game way too easy. It's fun and interactive and there are a lot of custominization involved. Fun but only worth 1 playthrough.

[Dizz]

How is it for installation? I have a 4gb ram on a 2 year old laptop. I have dialup. That means I can take it to a wifi site for major downloads, but not for active play.

[Dizz]

As far as easy, I don't mind. I don't have tons of time. I like to replay even easy games. Play through once to check it out, play again to get all the easter eggs. I didn't do that with Icewind Dale. too clunky.

[Pali]

Reckoning's a good game, though it's nothing like Neverwinter Nights - the combat is fast and fun and reminded me a good bit of an action game in the lines of Devil May Cry (though as a rule much easier, as killalou mentioned - it relies on chaining attacks and using combos, whether you're a wizard or warrior). Ditto what Demi said on the sandbox and exploration, and the skill system is fantastic in terms of all the mixed builds you can make and how much experimenting you can do. It's highly encouraged as well - at points you gain sort-of perks for mastery over different types of combat, and I was very often tempted to multiclass just to get the multiclass perks rather than pure sorcery ones.

Hell, the developers emphasized this so much that your ability to do this is written into the storyline. The story wasn't wowing me, but it's not bad at all either, and has interesting twists on the usual fantasy subjects. Edit: I am probably only about a third to half of the way through, however, so there's plenty of story I've not gotten to - it's entirely possible it comes together fantastically.

[Filth]

I run it on a 8 year old gigabyte with a geforce 6800 ultra with 2 gigs of memory and the game runs flawlessly. They did clever work with their graphics. Looks great, runs easy.

But the best thing about the game is that one of the greatest fantasy writers (responsible for creating Drizzt Do'urden) R.A. Salvatore wrote the story for the game. If there is anyone out there that has not read any of his work do so!

[Dizz]

I've read almost all that he's put out. I'm a big fan. Is it possible to get a used copy and have it run or does the registry key prevent that?

[inscribed]

I was tempted to get this game, but after reading further reviews now that it's been out for a while, I think I'm going to skip this one. From what I read, the game had serious bugs/flaws, and instead of addressing those issues, the developers chose to instead focus on releasing $DLC. Plus, the company is now facing financial issues, despite being given $75mil of Rhode Island tax payer money. I'll consider picking it up during a Steam sale when it hits the $5 and under range.

[Pali]

I haven't hit many bugs, but I'd definitely not call it a must-own title. Fun, but forgettable.

[inscribed]

http://kotaku.com/5913102/rumor-38-studios-shutting-down-big-huge-games

38 Studios shut down. Don't expect any bug fixes or updates to this game! It should definitely be hitting the bargain bin now, so if you still want to pick it up, that would be the time.

Its funny that companies that receive government bailouts almost always still manage to go out of business. And here I thought government money and spending solved everything! /derail

[Imoutgoodbye]

. And here I thought government money and spending solved everything! /derail

[Pali]

Its funny that companies that receive government bailouts almost always still manage to go out of business.

Source?

[Celerity]

Hayek, Friedrich (1989). The Collected Works of F.A. Hayek. University of Chicago Press

[Pali]

I don't suppose you have a source that is actually accessible without me hunting a book down and reading the entire thing?

[Celerity]

Just wiki it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics#Criticisms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_school

[Pali]

I was looking for statistics to support the claim that businesses that receive govt aid "almost always" still go out of business, Cel, not broader discussion of economic theories.

[Celerity]

It really depends how deep you want to take it. At the most superficial, petty level, you need to define what government aid really is. Does a tax refund count as government aid, or does it need to be a large-scale bailout? How about a grant? Does a tariff count as (albeit indirect) government aid to domestic companies?

I hope you don't want to argue on that level, but if you do, you'll lose to the simple argument that nearly all businesses go out of business over time, including those that receive government aid. That is petty for you.

Now, if you want to get into what inscribed was talking about, namely the application of keynesian economics in the government 'picking and choosing' what companies the government will support in the US context, then we have to talk about bailouts*.

*If you'd prefer to talk about government investment in new companies, do some basic reading on centrally-planned or statist economics, and how such policies have worked in a modern mixed economies, for example, how well MITI did in Japan before it was abolished.

If you want the track record of the US bailouts, check this site:

http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

You can see how many tax dollars each company got, how much they've paid back (not to the taxpayers, silly!), and how much they've wealth they've generated (as a derivation of their revenue tax to the gov). I think the numbers are pretty clear.

It is important to remember that bailouts are often intended to phase out companies, not to generate wealth. On those grounds, inscribed is right again.

Inscribed was implying that centrally-planned economies (for example, keynesian or statist) do not work. Businesses that rely on government aid are not profitable by their very definition, and the slope slips all the way down to state-owned enterprises. The evidence of the keynesian failure is apparent throughout Europe and I hope I don't need to remind you that statist (Stalin-Soviet or Mao-PRC) are even worse failures.

So yes, it is a discussion of broader economic theory. Without that, random stats are about as worthwhile as a US treasury bond. So no need for that pretentious wink!

[Pali]

I was working off the assumption he was referring to bailouts, so yes, that is what I was talking about. Believe it or not, I was not looking to argue any point here - I was hoping there was some place keeping track of what companies that had received bailout funds had gone out of business since then, because I'm curious as to how that's worked out in that regard. The propublica site I found on my own before my first post, though I simply didn't have time for a thorough reading and a cursory look didn't reveal if it had that information - hence I asked for a source.

My last two posts were made very quickly at work, so I apologize for the lack of clarity. I had no intention of being disrespectful, and I'm sorry it came across that way.

[Celerity]

Sorry, I tend to wage wars before realizing the battle hasn't been fought yet.

[Pali]

Can't say I'm innocent of it myself.

[inscribed]

I was alluding to the big name recent failures of government bailout, i.e. Solyndra, Lightsquared, GE, and GM, but there are plenty of other examples of failure while success stories are nonexistent. Otherwise, that's all you would hear about on CNN and the like! But Celerity made my point a lot better than I would have.

http://blog.gregnews.com/2011/09/epic-fail-ge-solyndra-and-lightsquared-prove-governmen/

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/lets-divest-of-gm-yesterday/

[Demiterracotta]

On a side note Celerity needs to marry me.

And Inscribed you confuse me. Are you a libertarian or a republican? Because lately I've found myself agreeing with more of your points than usual. You sound less blind conservative and more realistically sensible. Usually Pali sways me more.

[Pali]

I was alluding to the big name recent failures of government bailout' date=' i.e. Solyndra, Lightsquared, GE, and GM, but there are plenty of other examples of failure while success stories are nonexistent. Otherwise, that's all you would hear about on CNN and the like![/quote']

[nitpicking]Only GM was part of the bailout.[/nitpicking] I know what you meant, though... except regarding GE. From what I can tell, they're still quite profitable, partly because they're great at not paying taxes.

As for CNN... *shrugs* frankly, I'd say a success story just isn't sensational enough for modern news networks to bother covering it even if they do exist. Stories of failure are provocative, stories that boil down to "company continues doing what it was doing" are boring. For clarity - this is NOT me claiming that such stories must exist but are being ignored, simply me posing a possible alternate explanation for media silence.

There are plenty of entirely non-partisan bits of news that such judgment calls seem to apply to as well... when CERN thought they'd detected FTL neutrinos and everyone was claiming "Einstein was wrong!", it was front page news. I wonder how many people here have even heard that since then they have found errors in the experiment and new experiments have found that no, neutrinos do not go faster than light.