ThunderPeel2001

No Country For Old Men :tup:

Definitely. Problem is that I'll sit there for an hour clicking "remind me in 10 minutes", when it would probably be better just to restart when it suggests

Unlike the typical non-friendly 'Thumbs response you've gotten from everyone else here, I see your points and agree with you... or at least your reasons for not wanting Obama in power. He's obviously thinking he'll get the black votes in America, which could really be a good thing for him, but he's also staying away from black issues to keep the white voters interested (ie. he's not all about race). It's a tricky balance if you're really serious about wanting to get into power, I suppose. I do hope he's thinking he will do something about racism and ignorance in America if he gets in to power, but he'd have to be very clever if he was to succeed, I think. Like you say, the end of racism is not likely to happen any time soon (that was your point, I believe), but hopefully a good President could increase understanding and eliminate some of that dreadful "whites have it worse in America" attitude that has grown from ignorance. It was a horrible thing to witness from white people when I lived there; the honest belief that minorities have it better in the US. (Yeah, because the all of the black and Latino areas are paradise compared to everywhere else?!) But you've got to approach it without emotion or judgement and honestly ask what has made some white people feel that that in the first place, and then learn and deal with those issues rather than just saying "you're wrong". I have no idea what type of President Obama would make in the long run, but let's hope he makes some good decisions if he does get into power. Bush has pretty much ruined America's reputation and the world's economy, after all.

I really disliked Riven, which is odd, because I really liked Myst. Hmph!

Mainly that Heath died, but any knock-on effects are bad, too.

Lol! L. Ron Hubbard isn't evil for making people pay $19,000 to hear the Xenu story. It all makes sense now!

Lol! I love this weird pseudo language: "A Scientologist can be defined by a single question, 'would you want others to achieve the knowledge you now have?'. In answering that question Tom Cruise has introduced LRH technology to over one billion people of Earth." Or 1,037,361,227 people, to be precise (according to the video). Tom Cruise and Scientology must truly be incredible if they've managed to keep an exact tally. Amazing! It makes McDonald's just seem totally lazy. I mean, why don't they have an exact tally for how many people they've served?! Also, that's one sixth on the entire planet's population introduced to L. Ron Hubbard technology by Tom Cruise on his own. (Incredible!) It's also incredible that despite him explaining that it's every Scientologist's job to help people, that the 'Church' of Scientology® doesn't itself offer anything for free. Surely that's the way to improve everyone's lives?

Hmmm. Very odd. Why did they change it so that the XBox 360, and only the XBox 360, is affected? Apple have been a pain lately, what with all that bricking of iPhone business and forcing people to buy their own special video cables (even though there's no reason standard ones wouldn't work if they let them), I do wonder if they're the ones to blame. Of course I don't have this problem with my Zune!

I've noticed that I'm having the same difficulty I had with Psychonauts, trying to get my friends to understand how cool and original Brutal Legend is. What's the best way to sum it up in a sentence or two? The best I've come up with so far is: "You play a roadie who gets transported to Rock N' Roll Hell by his cursed belt-buckle. Jack Black, Lemmy and Dio all play characters, too!" It's not even, strictly speaking, accurate... Eddie Riggs is actually sent back in TIME. Anyone do any better? It seems that, like Psychonauts, it refuses to fit into a genre.

Has anyone experienced this yet? I have no idea how popular HD TVs are, so everyone might already be old hands at this. I just moved into a new flat with a nice 42" HD TV. Last night we hooked up the XBox to see what it looked like. With a SCART lead it was pretty damned ugly... no HD signal, but using a VGA we got it running looking beautiful at 1366x768... Except for one thing: The slow down. What's going on? Even XBox animated logo suffered from slow down! ? The "blades" look crystal clear, but they're a little less smooth than before. Running Mass Effect was surprising: There was considerable slowdown... playable, sure, but definitely jerkier with lots of tearing. What's the point in touting "HD" if the machine itself can't handle it properly? I feel pretty disappointed with my first experience of it. We weren't even running 1080! Does anyone have any experience of this? Can you offer any tips or tricks you might know? How do you feel about it? Is my XBox broken? What's a good "trade off" resolution? Is that the solution... even though it won't be native? Confused

This is nothing to do with Crysis but it's the same people doing more damned impressive stuff! http://digitalurban.blogspot.com/2008/01/video-trace-3d-models-from-video.html

There was Myst V in 2005. I know it's not super-recent, but wasn't that pre-rendered? (I don't know; I never completed Riven and only messed around for a few minutes in IV!)

Howdy!

Ah. Maybe not then. My friend is on his second. Thankfully they were at least apologetic and gave him two free games of his choice, though. I'll avoid that route, methinks.

I do find that you get used to the covers quite quickly (if that's what you're unhappy about TG?). The master-tracks didn't really add that much fun to GH3 (in some cases it was great, but I still get more enjoyment from the cover-driven GH2).

Hmmm! I've been told that the AI in Crysis is very good... but you need to be playing it at the right difficulty level to see it. Apparently I played the demo in "easy" Oops. (I just assumed it meant their health would be less.) Can anyone confirm that the baddies are more intelligent than those I experienced?

Oh no! Yet another argument on Idle Thumbs I'm responsible for... I have to stress to anyone considering buying a HDTV that although I'm still getting to grips with the entire thing myself, it is vitally important to check out the reviews of what you're buying because... and this is totally fucked up... although Thrik is right in saying that the real resolution of 1080p is 1920×1080 there is no standard set anywhere saying that a "Full HD" TV set has to have all these pixels, apparently. Although there is a standard that says a Full HD TV has to have 1080 horizontal pixels, yes, there is nothing to say how many vertical pixels it should have. Same goes for "HD Ready" (720p) TV sets which should be 1280 x 720. That's what I've read, so it pays to be aware of these potential pitfalls I think that sort of explains my flatmate's TV: It runs at 1366x768, which means it's never really running in nice clean native resolution when watching a movie PS: Is it a bad idea to try and get one these new HDMI equipped 360s from inducing a "ring of death" by wrapping my 360 in a blanket and leaving it running overnight?

Actually that's something that boggles my mind: It must take a fair amount of effort to animate all that stuff. It must be tempting just to write a review and record it and then not bother about the animations, but I respect him for taking the effort to do them every time.

I'm guessing the image will be even better if your TV is natively 720 instead of 768 (like mine). Hmmm! Thanks for the link, it's interesting that displaying an image Progressively outweighs the potential benefits of more detail via Interlacing. It would be fine for a static image, the article suggests, but for anything moving you're generally better off with 720p. Now I need to figure out what's going wrong when I ask it to display 720p I'd buy a Kuro in a heart beat if I had the cash. They're quite simply supposed to be the best TV ever created... Of course they're not totally cheap, but I'd stretch if I was going to buy a new TV.

Why is that? Do most games only run at 720p anyway?

I do wonder if he'll burn himself out, or if it will just become samey? I can't imagine it will be around for long... but I could be wrong.

I'm sure I saw a 42" Kuro for £1480 online. The 50" is £3000 I think? I just explained this to my housemate last night On old fashioned CRT TVs, the image was interlaced. This means that all the odd numbered horizontal lines were drawn, the screen was wiped and then all the even numbered horizontal lines were drawn. It created a slight flicker, but at 50 or 60 times a second (depending if you live in a PAL or NTSC area) it certainly wasn't too bad. 1080i uses this same interlaced technology. Its 1,080 horizontal lines are drawn in two passes of 540 lines. With 1080p it draws all 1,080 lines in one go (making the image more "film like" and less flickery). To to view 1080i, all you need is a TV with a resolution of 540 lines or more. Those 540 lines are then upscaled by your TV to 720 (or 768, I guess) for each pass.

Hurrah! I'm pleased to announce that changing the output resolution from x768 to x1080 fixed all the problems. No more slow down! Although it is a bit blurrier than it was before, it still looks nice. Thanks for the attempts at dianosing the problem... something along the line didn't like the output resolution. No idea why. Oddly enough I tried outputting x720 and the TV flat out refused to take it. Very strange. Mass Effect still has some tearing that I don't recall seeing in SD, but it felt much smoother... I think! Mine is an older 360 so no HDMI port According to Wikipedia all 360s made after August 2007 come with it as standard now. Ah well. You can tell by the line number or something, which is visible without opening the box, I believe. If you're going to buy a new TV set, listen to Toblix: Don't judge in the store, do some research and calibrate it when you get it home! It makes a HUGE difference. If I were buy a TV there's only one way I'd go: Pioneer Kuro. Leaves all others in its wake. Black levels are *amazing* apparently. Thrik: I see what you mean, but I meant an in picture detail... 1080i is just another way of showing 1080p, right? In terms of bandwidth per milisecond or whatever, 1080p is double 1080i, but there's no extra picture detail?

Wow, that's great! I can't believe you knew that off the top of your head! Did you experience the same bug where your medals didn't appear inthe photo album even though you'd completed every challenge?