Garcia

So do you consider Vietnam and Katrina to be punishment from god? Problem is that everyone belives that.

*cough* Sieg Heil! Sent him/her to the Gulags! *cough* I never said that without religion you wouldn't have nutjobs managing to brainwash others. Religion can, however, make the job much easier.

What do you mean? I really do not understand why people think that the United States is some sort of a uber religious state. Oh, I'm sure that the tsunami victims are not angry about receiving 1.875 billion from the American public. Very large parts of europe are atheists, and many people share his view. And honestly Billybob, if you don't understand why people view USA as a uberreligious nation, you should just see what kind of americans that speak on the news...the sane part of USA should really speak up a bit. Finland got shitloads of guns, but I don't think neither Sweden nor Denmark has many, and I know for sure that Norway don't. Sure, but at least here in Norway, if I were to break in to a house, I would expect there to not be any firearm whatsoever in that house. Guns aren't usual here. I barely know anybody who owns one. Don't know really. Yes, the real reason is usually something else than religion. But, the problem is, religion is sometimes the reason for a conflict, religion is being used as an excuse to do bad things, but mainly, religion is being used to brainwash people into doing bad things. I belive that many people performing terrorist attacks actually do belive they are doing it in the name of their religion, because they've been brainwashed by some religious nutjob. This way religion is the excuse, but indirectly the cause too. Without religion, nutjobs would have a harder time fooling others into dying for a silly cause... I was just using his words, and seeing that people over here usually don't even own a handgun, while in USA there is much more usual to have guns, and it's easier to get a gun, the chances that there are assault rifles in a random US home is larger than the chance of a random scandinavian (not including finland ) home having one. Also, since there are much more crimes commited in USA, the chance of someone committing a crime in a home with an assault rifle is larger than the chances that it would happen here. Wether or not it has happened is another question, but I would guess it's happened both in USA and in Scandinavia...

It's not really kicking somebody who is already on the ground as the person probably won't ever know about the reply

Another fun fact: We finns have one of the highest gun ownership rates in europe and some of our gun laws are even looser than US ones. Silencers for example are obtainable without a license. Yeah I remembered that while sitting on the toilet an hour ago But still, Norway don't got much of a gun-culture. Don't think Denmark got it either I think. Same goes for Sweden. Finland however, got like 4 guns per citizen (I think...at least that's what I heard last). But anyway, Denoir, and therefor Sophion-Black was mostly comparing Sweden and USA. And even besides that, USA still got shitloads of guns and shitloads of murders. Using Sophion-Blacks logic with lots of guns means less murders, that should mean that either USA barely got guns, cause how else could they obtain such a large murderstatistic, or the murderstatistic must be quite wrong...

Richard Nixon - "I'm not a crook" There is a big difference between lying about having done something bad and lying about your religion...honestly, that example was rather crap... Why would anyone try to do any violent crime when they know the house they are going to attack has an assault riffle hiding inside. Umm, actually, this argument was crappier than the first one. Why? USA got by far most murders in the western world (ok, the statistic I've seen for this is rather old, but I doubt it has changed that much the last few years...). Also, USA got by far many many many many many many more weapons per citizens than Scandinavian countries...soo, that question is more relevant for USA than Scandinavia, and seeing that Americans tend to kill each other quite much, I guess you should know the answer to that one. You are a citizen in the country where people do commint violent crimes in a house where there is an assaut rifle... No, war is. Religion just helped identify sides of who fights who. Look, I can also list out countries who has lost in war and countries who are majority atheist. The countries match. But does that mean atheists loose every war? Does it mean they lost because they were atheists? What do you have to say about that? Can it be coincidence? Could that be an answer to the violent religion argument? Wether or not people lose a war and what their religious belifs are is totally irrelevant. Nobody said atheists are worse than christians/muslims/jews/etc in fighting a war. The question you seemed to miss is, do people fight a war because of religion? Do people use religion as an excuse to fight a war when the real reason is something else? Answer to the last is yes, answer to the first is that probably some wars are because of religion, but most are not.

The opposite is the case. You hardly ever post solid sources other than just citing blogs, quoting pro-jew sites and getting lost in your deathcult visions. You forgot that, when his sources are proven to be total bull, he likes to claim that this only makes his point stronger...like the Hizbollah flag next to the UN outpost

This was posted shortly after the release in the ArmA Photograhy thread.

Decided not to release the demo? The demo we're actively working on? We're spending time working on a demo we're not going to release? You're talking a smidge nonsense aren't you? Admit it go on Hmm...I wonder...is it just a coincidence that you sound a tad bit like Stewie from Family Guy (when he asks Brian how his novel is coming along)?

Just because the bible says so, doesn't mean that USAs wouldn't have a law against killing...implying that USA was founded on Christian values are simply bullshit. Without Christianity saying "It's bad to kill", countries would still have laws to try to prevent killing. That it is bad to kill, lie and steal are not only christian values. I'm not christian, neither is my mom, my dad, my brothers or my sister...but hey, here's a shocker, I've never killed anyone...neither have anyone else in my family... Or are you totally misunderstanding the point? Did you actually try to misunderstand his point? What he said was that fanatics in muslim countries are poor, don't got education and got a corrupt political system. While in USA they're not as poor and their political system isn't as corrupt...but no matter where you are you got people with lack of education... And it would be so fun ifthe Almighty actually was a reasonble god (if he exists) and burnt people for being bad, not for being good but not beliving...if he would actually burn people just because they didn't belive in him, then he's an utter arse.

Uh...so that's how FBI work nowdays when they're "checking out" "suspicious" organizations etc? They go there and hold a speech?

Zero chance is taking it a bit far, but I wouldn't be suprised if Iran & Syria won't help too much...

I wonder what they consider "legal" then...

I'm confused too... I wonder, how come Israel never have used a nuke if that is their only defence? Strange that they have survived 5 wars without using their only defence

And another thing about R6: Vegas is...I mean...do anybody actually expect realism when the god damn game is set to Vegas? Last time I checked, Vegas wasn't such a big terrorist target that you can actually base a whole anti-terror game on it...first time I read the title "R6: Vegas" back when it was announced I thought it had to be a joke... And SWAT 4 is...ok. Not really a great game. Ok tactical shooter, but R6 still was much better. And actually I enjoyed SWAT3 much more than SWAT4.

Another problem with Raven Shield is that I don't got it anymore And I don't feel like getting it...got enough to spend my time at

All this R6 talk makes me wana dig up my old R6 copy and play the game. I don't really feel R6: Raven Shield was as good as R6. Dunno why really, I just liked the first game best

As Pierrot said, it might be important if it's a human vs human mission or something. And if you play on a public server people may not listen to you when you tell them to STFU. Though I would have liked this to be a option for the server. I usually play with mates, and if some people die, it's always good to be able to talk with the ones still alive. As the people I usually play with do respect others wishes to not reveal enemies and such if it's requested, I wouldn't liked this too much, but for people playing clanwars and such, it would probably be very nice...

Actually you have also missed a great point. I've never denied that R6: Vegas will be a good game, what I say is that R6: Vegas will not be as good as previous R6 games, and not even close to being as good as it could have been if they stuck to what made the R6 series great, and not try making it a arcade game. The point isn't that you shouldn't play (and like) R6: Vegas, if you like that kind of games, the point is that R6 was one of it's kind and very man of it's fans won't like the changes done to it. And here's a tip for you; I can't be good at everything, and one of the things I'm not good at is developing a computer game all on my own, and neither would I have been good at it with a team. That's why I don't like that someone comes in and changes a sucssesfull game-series to the worse. I'm grateful towards Redstorm for developing some great games, but I'm not very happy at Ubi for fucking up the R6 series. They they've got the right to do whatever they want with the game, but I then I got the right to express my opinion that I don't like their changes to the game and that I feel the new games are a big letdown compared to the previous games. I've never said you're a fool for playing (and liking) the game, I've never said that the game won't be good, I've said that I simply don't feel the changes to the R6 series are good, that I feel the game are a letdown and that I feel the developers have taken a very bad decision when making these changes, and therefor I won't buy them as a result of this. I'm sad to see that a game that was one of it's kind is being, IMO, ruined and changed to something there's enough of on the marked. And I honestly mean the first game was the best one.

Nope it is not wrong. But why don't you just stick to those 3 games. What would you want of a new game besides a gfx update? would you be prepared to accept the new 'cover' system found in RS:Vegas? If not, play it safe, stick to 2001 or something and the 3 RS games you like (i don't take them away from you) ... and as someone said, those games now play 'maxed out' on even the most modest hw (i even might try them myself hahaha, with the 360 away for repair) You are TOTALLY missing the point. Why do you care about ArmA? Why don't you stick to OFP? You care about ArmA because it's (hopefully and probably) a step further towards realism and even better than OFP on the things that made OFP special. There is always something to improve, not only GFX, even for R6. None of the 3 first R6 games were perfect, and even though we had 1000 R6 games after them, and every new game was better the the one before, none of the would still be perfect. And since there is no other game out there that can take R6s spot, fans of the R6 series simply don't like that some fools come in and make it one of many arcade, straight forward FPS games...we want R6 to be what it was, we want the game to be something special. If I want a arcade shooter, I already got loads to choose from, many of the as good or better than R6: Vegas. I don't support fools who ruin a good game...

So? ArmA has 'Restart mission'. It is a game you know, you do not really really die. Not in RS:V not in ArmA. So using that logic, you mean that restarting missions is the same as auto-healing? So if a game doesn't want the player to be able to magically heal his wounds, then the player should neither be allowed to play the mission more than once? There is a veeeeeeeeery big difference in letting the player start the mission over again, and letting the player have some fancy unlogical healing system. The difference is, if you restart the mission, you start at the begining. You have to do everything all over again. With auto-healing you can just chill a bit and then you're as good as you were at the start of the mission...except you don't have to do anything again... You don't auto-heal in real life, neither do you in ArmA...but you do in R6: Vegas...actually that comment is like comparing godmode cheat to save/load...

A gamer is someone who plays a lot of computer games, he doesn't have to play loads of different games. Besides, the reason why people don't fancy RS anymore is because they've made it another game in the "FPS crowd". Rainbow Six was one of it's kind, just like OFP was (until ArmA ). Rainbow Six was realistic, it didn't blend with all the other FPS games, it was something special. Now RS is becoming more and more "just one of the FPS games". Sure, I could probably have fun playing RS, but I'd much rather have much more fun playing RS as it used to be. And since RS once was good, I prefer not playing the newer games so I don't have to ruin my good memories from previous RS games that actually was good. And besides, playing some newer crappy RS game will just be a letdown compared to the good ones, and therefor less fun than playing a game that have been the same arcadish game always...I mean, what would disappoint you most, if Game2 was 100% arcade, or if Medal Of Honor: Something something was 100% arcade? For me, Game2 would be such a big disappointment that I wouldn't play it, because I would have bought it to get a OFP/ArmA like game, not a arcade game, while if I bought a MoH game I would expect a arcade game, and therefor not be disappointed. Just like I would expect a realistic FPS game when I hear Rainbow Six...

And? The thing is written BY a german (I think) and it is FOR the german special edition. I don't see how it is even close to being strange that the guide won't be translated...If 505 wants to add a editing guide to their special edition, they'll have to fix it themself, not expect the german publisher to do all the work with getting the guide and then hand it over to them...

I don't think RS: Vegas will be even close to as good as the earlier RS games. IMO the RS games have moved further and further away from realism. And from what I've seen from RS: Vegas it looks very arcadish with loads of nice colors and lights etc. IIRC many other fans of the RS series share my opinion...

Chances are, if you've got a system capable of running ArmA in the first place, either you or Mum and Dad have one WTH are you talking about. "I can afford it - therefore i have a credit card"...Not everyone is that fortunate. If you can afford >1000e gaming rigs you probably can get a basic visa or a regular-ass debit card. lets see, i used to get about $320 pocket money from my farther each month when i was in from 4,5(which should be high school in other places), after cutting down all needed expands(taking buses, getting lunch, spend some for mags and other stuffs) there is about 200 left, which means if i want to get enought money for a $1500 gaming rig i would need to save it for 8 mouths incase you dont want to have parttime job, and games usually cause around $50, and shits may happens And if your father got money to give you $320 each month, I would say it's a fair guess he would be willing and able to somehow help you order ArmA over the net