Anund

@g6065: You conveyed the tone very well, it was the other dude who failed to pick up on it. There will always be one of those.

First off, I'm a huge fan of the Uncharted series, but I haven't read the review in question, therefore this will be based on second hand information. I also haven't touched Uncharted 3 yet so any comments on gameplay will be based on the previous two games.

If I understand correctly, Eurogamer criticized the game for trying to be too cinematic, something which doesn't work because it's a game and the "magic" will vanish once you fail a section and have to play through the same, now a lot less, cinematic part several times.

To me, the cinematic parts are what make Uncharted one of the best franchises this generation. Sure, sometimes it breaks down because you have to replay a section, but mostly not: in fact as long as you don't have to replay the same part more than a few times you just spot more cool details making you enjoy the section more. I also find that these parts are generally fairly easy, gameplay wise: they are hard to fail.

In summary, I would much rather have a game like Uncharted with awesome, cinematic set pieces you are actually a part of, rather than another Killzone or Halo with the same, gamey, linear gameplay and scripted set pieces.

Besides, why defend Eurogamer all of a sudden? Wasn't there a podcast just recently where the guys said European gaming press was kind of shitty?

One last thing... It's definitely bögarnas fel!

Easily Uncharted. It's a choice between my favourite franchise and the sequel to the game which had me bored two hours in.

Simple. Shortening the QLs and Bombcast means everyone gets shorter QLs and Bombcast. Leaving them as they are means everyone can choose for themselves. Now do you see why you are being selfish? Please note I don't have time to watch everything myself but I'm not demanding the content is adjusted to fit my schedule, that seems very self centered.

@RsistncE said:

I remember the day as if it were yesterday. There I was on the Giantbomb forums, looking for topics to post in, hopefully stumbling upon something more than a spam post when I saw it: a great, dark, brooding thread, with the title, "Being gay isn't a choice". It would have been magnificent if it hadn't been for that title, those ominous words, swinging madly in the air. That thread went down though; went off topic. It sunk into the deepest depths of the general forums, taking with it whatever vile posts it may have carried.

Four days later I was back on the forums, finding much pleasure in most of the topics. This pleasure soon turned to dread as I saw the popular threads on the front page churn and swirl; from those black hellish depths rose that thread. When that thread went under, she was carrying less than 100 posts...she came back with over 400. Then I saw them, those putrid posts, those agents of the devil himself. That thread was haunted and to this day they say that anyone caught on board that ship in that thread was lost forever, never to be seen again.

Hahah, brilliant!

@awe_stuck said:

@Anund said:

@awe_stuck said:

@Anund said:

@Still_I_Cry:

Sure, the main complaint that I've seen by quite a few people here with Christianity is that the religion preaches intolerance towards homosexuals. In the process of stating this, some of the posts also showed that they were intolerant of Christianity.

Kind of sly, and a nice twist. The problem comes into play when you consider that my "intolerance" (which is really more a lack of patience) with religion stretches as far as me, whereas your intolerance against gays is legislation. There is a difference of scope here.

We listen to claims of homosexuality in the Bible because thus far it is viewed as neither a human right nor is it something that agrees with the Christian teachings regarding "togetherness" when discussing relationships between males and females. The teachings revolve around both love of one another as well as the act of procreation, which homosexual relationships do not produce. Christians state that Natural Law dictates that a man and a woman and ONLY a man and a woman are meant to be together. It is an innate desire of a man to be with a woman sexually and being with another man sexually is a perversion of the Natural Law. Also, they do not consider homosexuality as something that you are innately, rather, they suggest that if one decides he is a homosexual that he remain chaste. Lastly, they believe that psychologically homosexuals convince themselves that homosexual behavior is fine. It also violates the Christian views of marriage.

Two things bother me with this section. The first is that you still don't really explain why we take what the Bible says so literally in this case when we discard it so easily in other cases. You are just stating what the Bible says and I know that. The question really was why do you care about this when you don't care about so many other things the Bible says. The second part is where my lack of patience comes into play. See, I think you are very much within your rights to hold these views. What I strongly disagree with though, is your perceived right to enforce these views on people who don't agree with you. Personal beliefs are fine, but in this particular case your beliefs are directly influencing people who don't agree with you. If homosexuality is a sin then I guess gays will have to deal with that after death, but why does it concern you?

"2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

This part is great! I couldn't agree more. When the Church itself says it's so, why are Christians arguing that homosexuality is a choice? Why are Christians arguing against gay rights? It makes no sense whatsoever! I can completely understand the church not wanting to marry gay couples, that is well within its rights and in fact I would oppose any law that forced priests to marry gays. But they should be allowed a state wedding and be afforded the same rights as straight couples.

The Bible is a piece of theology, not even Christian scholars take it literally. The parts that are taken literally are the historical accounts. To say 100% true is like saying you believe the Koran 100%, but never read it. Thats half the Middle East (50% are illiterate).

You dont approach philosophy literally, I could explain parts of the Bible you would never understand because I dont take it literally. No one does. Homosexuality isnt a choice if your born that way, however they have lots of guys who choose to be bisexual or gay. Why? BECAUSE GAY SEX IS ENJOYABLE. God, get a life. You dont know anything about anything. Your just ranting about nothing. Try gay sex with your gf, I do all the time and she loves it. Dont believe me look up lesbian sex, look up anal. How old are you 5? I learned about this stuff thoroughly in sunday school when I was 6 years old. These topics are sooo old and simple pretty much anyone whos baptized could talk about it. You cant. Cus you have issues, angry ones. You cant objectively argue opinions. Because they arent objective. There are no facts, stop trying to create some. What are you histrionic? If so get therapy. Do me a favour and read 50 books on Christian history. And, get back to me. The Crusades were about robbing the Muslims of the wealth they stole from the Jews. Protestants used the Templars to secure and protect these knights of God and helped them destroy corrupt Catholics. Cementing Lutheranism and Protestanism across Europe. We killed our cousins and families because they couldnt accept they needed to love their wives equally. It had nothing to do with religion it had to do with the fact we didnt want to sell our daughters into slavery either as servants, prostitutes, or house wives.

Try gay sex with my girlfriend? That is your suggestion?

And you're still not quite understanding the question regarding the Bible, even though I have asked it three times now. The point is not why you don't literally interpret the Bible, what I am asking is who makes the call what to discard and what not to and why? Why is homosexuality still a sin when so many other things listed as sins in the Bible are not. It seems very arbitrary and I would like an explanation.

However, some more shouting about how you enjoy gay sex works too.

Because the bible has 2 bibles. The 2nd one abandons the 1st. Why would I take the first one literally if I am Christian and accept Jesus. I will accept the 2nd literally and the 1st I will abandon. Which is what I do.

It is against nature to have sex with a man, that does not mean its wrong, nor that I care. Ya, well watch lesbian sex videos. I'm sure if you have a gf shed appreciate it. LOL With a girl. Never said I take anal, cus I dont.

I'm protestant.

See, that conveniently gets rid of the ten commandments and a lot of other old superstition. However, even from the new testament not everything is kept. On numerous occasions Jesus explicitly supports the rules as laid out in the old testament, for example, Mark 7:10 "For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death." So, disobedient children should be killed, according to Jesus and the new testament. This is just one example. Even the rules as found in the new testament have been "filtered", so that still leaves the question "what makes homosexuality so bad"? Why hasn't Protestantism (apparently Catholicism is already there) reached the point where it can say maybe gays deserve equal rights as straights? Maybe this is an ancient remnant of bigotry and intolerance which has no place in modern society?

As an aside, in Sweden protestant priests are marrying gay couples. In church. Maybe you're all alone on your crusade.

@awe_stuck said:

@Anund said:

@Still_I_Cry:

Sure, the main complaint that I've seen by quite a few people here with Christianity is that the religion preaches intolerance towards homosexuals. In the process of stating this, some of the posts also showed that they were intolerant of Christianity.

Kind of sly, and a nice twist. The problem comes into play when you consider that my "intolerance" (which is really more a lack of patience) with religion stretches as far as me, whereas your intolerance against gays is legislation. There is a difference of scope here.

We listen to claims of homosexuality in the Bible because thus far it is viewed as neither a human right nor is it something that agrees with the Christian teachings regarding "togetherness" when discussing relationships between males and females. The teachings revolve around both love of one another as well as the act of procreation, which homosexual relationships do not produce. Christians state that Natural Law dictates that a man and a woman and ONLY a man and a woman are meant to be together. It is an innate desire of a man to be with a woman sexually and being with another man sexually is a perversion of the Natural Law. Also, they do not consider homosexuality as something that you are innately, rather, they suggest that if one decides he is a homosexual that he remain chaste. Lastly, they believe that psychologically homosexuals convince themselves that homosexual behavior is fine. It also violates the Christian views of marriage.

Two things bother me with this section. The first is that you still don't really explain why we take what the Bible says so literally in this case when we discard it so easily in other cases. You are just stating what the Bible says and I know that. The question really was why do you care about this when you don't care about so many other things the Bible says. The second part is where my lack of patience comes into play. See, I think you are very much within your rights to hold these views. What I strongly disagree with though, is your perceived right to enforce these views on people who don't agree with you. Personal beliefs are fine, but in this particular case your beliefs are directly influencing people who don't agree with you. If homosexuality is a sin then I guess gays will have to deal with that after death, but why does it concern you?

"2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

This part is great! I couldn't agree more. When the Church itself says it's so, why are Christians arguing that homosexuality is a choice? Why are Christians arguing against gay rights? It makes no sense whatsoever! I can completely understand the church not wanting to marry gay couples, that is well within its rights and in fact I would oppose any law that forced priests to marry gays. But they should be allowed a state wedding and be afforded the same rights as straight couples.

The Bible is a piece of theology, not even Christian scholars take it literally. The parts that are taken literally are the historical accounts. To say 100% true is like saying you believe the Koran 100%, but never read it. Thats half the Middle East (50% are illiterate).

You dont approach philosophy literally, I could explain parts of the Bible you would never understand because I dont take it literally. No one does. Homosexuality isnt a choice if your born that way, however they have lots of guys who choose to be bisexual or gay. Why? BECAUSE GAY SEX IS ENJOYABLE. God, get a life. You dont know anything about anything. Your just ranting about nothing. Try gay sex with your gf, I do all the time and she loves it. Dont believe me look up lesbian sex, look up anal. How old are you 5? I learned about this stuff thoroughly in sunday school when I was 6 years old. These topics are sooo old and simple pretty much anyone whos baptized could talk about it. You cant. Cus you have issues, angry ones. You cant objectively argue opinions. Because they arent objective. There are no facts, stop trying to create some. What are you histrionic? If so get therapy. Do me a favour and read 50 books on Christian history. And, get back to me. The Crusades were about robbing the Muslims of the wealth they stole from the Jews. Protestants used the Templars to secure and protect these knights of God and helped them destroy corrupt Catholics. Cementing Lutheranism and Protestanism across Europe. We killed our cousins and families because they couldnt accept they needed to love their wives equally. It had nothing to do with religion it had to do with the fact we didnt want to sell our daughters into slavery either as servants, prostitutes, or house wives.

Try gay sex with my girlfriend? That is your suggestion?

And you're still not quite understanding the question regarding the Bible, even though I have asked it three times now. The point is not why you don't literally interpret the Bible, what I am asking is who makes the call what to discard and what not to and why? Why is homosexuality still a sin when so many other things listed as sins in the Bible are not. It seems very arbitrary and I would like an explanation.

However, some more shouting about how you enjoy gay sex works too.

@awe_stuck: Great show of tolerance, my faithful brother. You haven't once answered how a man has sex with another man without being sexually aroused by them, but I can understand your reluctance in continuing this losing line of argument and taking to attacking me personally instead.

As your christian compatriot just showed, your own church clearly agrees being homosexual is not a choice. Maybe you should continue this argument with the pope instead.

@Still_I_Cry:

Sure, the main complaint that I've seen by quite a few people here with Christianity is that the religion preaches intolerance towards homosexuals. In the process of stating this, some of the posts also showed that they were intolerant of Christianity.

Kind of sly, and a nice twist. The problem comes into play when you consider that my "intolerance" (which is really more a lack of patience) with religion stretches as far as me, whereas your intolerance against gays is legislation. There is a difference of scope here.

We listen to claims of homosexuality in the Bible because thus far it is viewed as neither a human right nor is it something that agrees with the Christian teachings regarding "togetherness" when discussing relationships between males and females. The teachings revolve around both love of one another as well as the act of procreation, which homosexual relationships do not produce. Christians state that Natural Law dictates that a man and a woman and ONLY a man and a woman are meant to be together. It is an innate desire of a man to be with a woman sexually and being with another man sexually is a perversion of the Natural Law. Also, they do not consider homosexuality as something that you are innately, rather, they suggest that if one decides he is a homosexual that he remain chaste. Lastly, they believe that psychologically homosexuals convince themselves that homosexual behavior is fine. It also violates the Christian views of marriage.

Two things bother me with this section. The first is that you still don't really explain why we take what the Bible says so literally in this case when we discard it so easily in other cases. You are just stating what the Bible says and I know that. The question really was why do you care about this when you don't care about so many other things the Bible says. The second part is where my lack of patience comes into play. See, I think you are very much within your rights to hold these views. What I strongly disagree with though, is your perceived right to enforce these views on people who don't agree with you. Personal beliefs are fine, but in this particular case your beliefs are directly influencing people who don't agree with you. If homosexuality is a sin then I guess gays will have to deal with that after death, but why does it concern you?

"2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

This part is great! I couldn't agree more. When the Church itself says it's so, why are Christians arguing that homosexuality is a choice? Why are Christians arguing against gay rights? It makes no sense whatsoever! I can completely understand the church not wanting to marry gay couples, that is well within its rights and in fact I would oppose any law that forced priests to marry gays. But they should be allowed a state wedding and be afforded the same rights as straight couples.