Nappi

:tup:

I think that is enough for me. Sounds like Generations is a good place to start, and it's not that expensive (considering that I haven't spent a fortune on this sale yet).

So.. Sonic. I have played none. Should I get Generations for 10 euros?

I have only gotten 4 so far. Most of them seem to require playing video games.

I somehow got The Longest Journey/Dreamfall bundle as a gift. I already own The Longest Journey (good game, in my opinion) and I'm not that interested in Dreamfall, so if anyone is interested, I'm willing to trade. Another game would be optimal but if nothing comes up, I can settle for coal as well.

Finished William Gibson's Count Zero. Not as good as Neuromancer but very entertaining. I still like the fact that I don't have to wait until the last quarter of the book for things to start happening. Following the three seemingly unconnected plotlines was pretty annoying at first, but at least they were tied together quite nicely in the end. How does Mona Lisa Overdrive compare to the first two books? I find it very interesting that the premise of one of the branches of Count Zero is almost exactly like that of Pattern Recognition.

Very nice indeed! I'd guess it's cactuar from final fantasy.

Oh yes. Proper glögg (glögi In Finnish) is excellent!

24.99€.

Explains why they suddenly got tighter.

Agreed. I paid about 3.60€ for Mass Effect 1 and was very happy that I did, because otherwise I would probably never have touched the sequel.

I'd think that telling kids that Santa is real could actually do wonders for their imagination. It also allows them to share with the other kids the experience of waiting each Christmas for this benevolent, all-knowing being, and later the realization of being lied to by your parents for years. I haven't heard anyone being seriously traumatized upon finding out that Santa is not real, either. Last but not least, lying to kids is super-fun! Those poor bastards will believe practically anything you tell them.

iPhone version of Broken Sword: The Smoking Mirror (Remastered) is free on App Store right now. You should probably get it, even if you are not planning to play it now.

I'd say very. Although, I have only played Tropico 3.

My secondary monitor (one at my parents' house) broke down a while ago. First, it became increasingly hard to turn on the power, and then after a couple of days the power LED just flickered for a while and the thing stopped working permanently. It was quite good 3+ year old 24" LG with MVA-panel that I didn't want to give up on just yet. So I fixed it! Poor thing had simply fell victim of the notorious capacitor plague and after a bit of soldering, it was good as new. Looking forward to barely surviving a house fire tonight! The lesson: There might be hope for your broken monitor yet.

You probably have one "ticket" for each lump of coal or something. Basically the chances of winning are so slim, especially since I can't be bothered to read the rules, that I can't be bothered to read the rules. Anyone played Tropico 4. Is it actually Tropico 3?

Based on the trailer, the new Batman seems about as bland as the first part of the trilogy. I still hope it will surprise me pleasantly. I read The Hobbit a long time ago so I may have forgotten something, but I think the level of dark foreboding about the journey was a lot lower than in this trailer. Makes sense, I guess, since the ring did not carry that much significance in the book. I can see why they chose this approach, though. Somehow I have a feeling that the film won't be much lighter than Lord of the Rings. Nothing I have seen or heard so far seems to indicate a change of direction (except for their own words apparently).

What you are saying is that Valve is a company that is making profit and not charity? Outrageous! Why is this not common knowledge? Anyway.. the first prize seems to be all the games on Steam. I can imagine how devastating the 'All Games' library would be after that.

Happy birthday! Dumb move to be born this close to Christmas, though.

Good! Let us know what you find out.

Yes. I was not commenting on the contents based on the style it was represented in. That was perhaps a bit poor wording on my part, sorry about the confusion. However, I'd argue that the way the sources are handled in the infographic is close to not backing them up at all, since roughly 99% of the readers* will probably not type in all the links manually to find a single tidbit they want to know more about. Some of the information may be poorly interpreted or simply not backed up at all and practically no-one will notice, let alone prove it is the case. I guess that is part of the "beauty" of this style of representation. Note: I do not think all infographics are inherently bad. In fact, some of them are very successful. *Based on nothing at all.

You did not link to the Wired article in your first post. If you had already read it and your main point was for us to read it as well, why not post a direct link? While Infographics are easy to link on Twitter or Forums or whatever, they are very poor at encouraging you to look further because of the abysmal way the sources are handled. This is the Internet after all, the home of the hyperlinks. Furthermore, as you too pointed out, this is a Comical Picture Thread. I feel like I can comment on things such as the quality of this infographic or how infographics in general treat information, without commenting on the contents. You asked why people are not finding fault on the Wired article instead, and I think the reason is that it is a different discussion altogether. And I'm sorry that I'm not going to contribute to that discussion, but I'm simply not that interested in the subject. For "poorly backed up information", see citation practices. There is no reason not to include the [1] marks next to the information that is not general knowledge, even if you are just making a flashy infographic. I may be wrong but it seems to me that you have taken the criticism on the infographic somewhat personally - going so far as to assure as that you are not going to marry it (and I had already bought you two a gift) - even though it has nothing to do with you. If you really want people to discuss the phenomena itself, and only that, maybe you could post the article in the Science thread.

I like how the effects of social media are represented in the ultimate style over substance way with extremely low data density, disconnected bursts of poorly backed up information and illustrations that do not convey any relevant meaning. I hope the makers acknowledged the irony. Oh well, at least it is not one of those kinetic typography videos.