James

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B] Also return some powers to the states while moving some to federal level [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Just out of interest...what powers would you return to the states and which would be put into federal hands?[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i] [B]I don't think it would be a two-screened Game Boy, but I'm failing to see what sort of newfound applications they'll suddenly be able to do with this that couldn't have been done in some form elsewhere. My comments were geared towards the idea of making this thing for multiplayer applications and in that case, I don't see how it would make a difference. Obviously it would be a different case for single player games.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]Well, again...if you play games like Pac-Man Vs. or Four Swords for GameCube, you'll notice how the two screen format can work. Connectivity has provided a platform for new types of games, but the concept isn't being supported to any great degree. And that's simply due to cost. Very few people are going to buy three or four GBAs, just to play a couple of connectivity-enabled games. Nintendo are still talking about connectivity. But I don't think they should, at least, not in the terms that they've been using thusfar. The Nintendo DS is a potential solution to the fundamental cost problems of connectivity. If Nintendo can provide unique multi-screen games -- games that [i]require[/i] two screens to be playable -- and if they can do it at a reasonable cost, I think it's an inventive idea that could be a success. So, my belief is that the gameplay generated (or promised) by connectivity is what they're aiming at here.[/color][quote][b] Nintendo has had years to do something interesting with the connectivity aspect on the GCN/GBA and for the most part it has been a failure. As of right now, I have no real reason to think this will suddenly be the saving grace of the "connectivity" idea like some are making it sound -- which up until this point has really acted as little more than a colored VMU.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]I agree. And again, it comes down to the cost factor. I think that while the [i]idea[/i] is sound, it's not feasable in terms of the market. Why would there be any reason to suggest anything [i]other[/i] than this being something that is connectivity-centric? Let's remember that the very few games to truly rely on connectivity are games that actually require two screens in order to be played. It's a great idea. As I mentioned above, Kirby's Tilt 'n' Tumble is a fantastic demonstration of what connectivity can be at its best. But it's not going to happen with the GBA and GameCube. So why not develop a third platform, to take full advantage of this multi-screen gameplay concept? I think it makes sense, provided that Nintendo [i]do[/i] support the technology with the appropriate software. And I have no reason to think that they won't. Obviously, nobody knows what the specific games are going to be at this point. But the concept is sound and we do know that the games which require connectivity (although perhaps not Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles) are actually quite different to regular single-screen games.[/color][quote][b] As for Four Swords GC, last I read in an interview they were also going to work in a PIP for people without a GBA, which makes more sense in the first place. If that were applied to a portable system, why would it need anything than a couple of linked Game Boys anyway? Forcing you to play underground sections on a GBA and the rest on the GCN is hardly my idea of innovative gameplay. That game interests me just because it looks like a blast, not because of the "connectivity".[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]Picture in picture defeats the purpose of what makes the game fun, though. The idea is that you can actually enter buildings and other areas of the map [i]without[/i] your teammates seeing what you're doing. Who wants to have a three picture in picture displays on the same screen? That entirely defeats the purpose. This may not be your idea of innovative gameplay, but don't be in any doubt that Four Swords is providing a direction, rather than a location. In other words, games like this are demonstrating the potential of multi-screen-based games. I'm certainly not implying that they are the be-all and end-all, or that they themselves are some sort of killer application for the technology, because I don't believe that to be true. But they are definitely indicators of where it can go.[/color][quote][b] The only real thing that makes me interested in this is that because of the set up, it would probably be able to pull off far more complex games than the GBA can... especially in terms of the GBA's limited multiplayer scope. Sure, they're going to take advantage of this, but it's not something that has got me all that optimistic so far.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]Well, you don't know enough to be optimistic. The same is true for most people. The same is even true for myself. Right now, we only know that it's a multi-screen unit and that it will play new types of games. But I'm not going into the situation with a pessimistic attitude toward it, because I know what has already been achieved with connectivity...and I know what can potentially be done with a unit like this. I'm sure that after E3, you will definitely have a different perspective, simply because more information is available.[/color][quote][b] This isn't grabbing my attention, especially based on the examples given so far. Unless they magically come up with another game that basically isn't a clone of something else they've tried to do elsewhere, I can't see this taking my money.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]Have you played either Four Swords or Pac-Man Vs.? I think that when you try these games out, you realize the kind of potential that exists. Having said that, it's obvious that these two games are very light demonstrations in and of themselves. I personally feel that Kirby's Tilt 'n' Tumble is a far better demonstration of what can be achieved with this setup. Nobody who played that game had a negative word to say about it, basically. It was very obvious that it was truly a game that went past being reliant on some kind of gimmick. I think you'll find that Nintendo isn't going to be cloning what they've done in the past. And that's simply because there's very little to clone, in regard to something like this. [/color][quote][b] Of course, I have no final opinion on it. I won't until I actually play the thing. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Absolutely. I'm sure the same is true for everyone; the proof will be in the playing. I'm simply pointing out that there is more to this announcement than you may realize initially. I would definitely not compare the Nintendo DS to the Virtual Boy, even at this early stage. So, hopefully Nintendo will provide us with plenty of new software to try out at E3. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what they come up with -- and I hope that they focus on the DS, in terms of these new connectivity games, rather than relying on the cumbersome GBA/GCN approach.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shinji [/i] [B][size=1][color=#3366CC] It doesn't surprise me though, all those supposed terrorists out in Guantanamo Bay still haven't been given due legal process, and there are similar incidents happening in Australia too, where the Tampa asylum seekers have been kept on an island called Nauru without due legal process, something that was promised to them should they agree to go to Nauru. [/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]First of all, you cannot compare Guantanamo Bay with the situation on Nauru. Secondly, you're sitting there saying that illegal immigrants should be "choosing" where they are located [i]while[/i] their claims are being assessed. I think most people would object to that. Nauru is being used as a processing point for illegal immigrants -- those who have their applications approved are obviously allowed into Australia. And those whose applications are denied are deported to their point of origin. While I do feel that the processing system for illegal immigration in Australia takes for too long in some cases, I do also think it's important to maintain a sense of perspective here. These people being sent to Nauru is no different to them being kept at Christmas Island. And I would actually point out that their conditions at Nauru are probably a lot better than they'd be at Woomera or one of the other detention centers. So, again, let's try to keep a sense of perspective here. In regard to the actual story posted...like Drix, I find it hard to form a conclusion. There are too many unknowns to jump to an immediate answer, although I am certain that [i]most[/i] people will nevertheless form a conclusion that falls on one side or the other, regardless of the facts.[/color]

[color=#707875]There is a massive difference between this and linking two GBAs together. Again, I think it's about connectivity. As I said before, the concept of connectivity is great. Look at Kirby's Tilt 'n' Tumble -- the way in which you use two screens to play the game. It's the kind of game that you really can't do on a single screen. The same applies to Pac-Man and Four Swords. I don't believe for a moment that Nintendo intends to simply produce a "two-screened GameBoy". Frankly, they aren't that stupid. lol You may be quite surprised when you see the software and functions that are revealed at E3 this year.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think that everyone is different when it comes to something like this. For the most part, there are very, very few people on the Internet who I would actually list as "friends" (at least in terms of comparing them to "real life" friends). But that's largely because it takes a lot of conversation and a lot of interaction to form a closer bond. Most people I talk to on the Internet are people that I'd simply consider to be acquaintances. They're people I like talking to, but they aren't people who have a great deal of consequence in my everyday life. That's just how it is -- it's part of the limitations of the Internet as a medium for communication. However, I don't doubt that close bonds can exist via the Internet. I know that I've certainly built some very strong friendships based on online contact. But again, the actual number of people who fit in that category is very, very small. But that's me. Everyone is different. I'm sure that some people take the Internet more seriously than others in general. For some, they probably never form any kind of bond via the 'net. For others, I'm sure it's a more serious business. It just comes down to the individual.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think that this is what Nintendo should have done in the beginning. I wrote an article a while ago about connectivity and how it isn't really workable, because of price constraints and things like that. [i]But[/i], the idea of having two screens for one game is a great concept. When it works...it works really well (especially when you look at Four Swords and Pac-Man). I feel that this machine is the natural evolution of that idea. So I'm personally pleased to hear about this announcement. It'll be interesting to see how the whole thing works when E3 comes around.[/color]

[color=#707875]I agree 100% with Charles on this issue. For me, I can never understand it when someone says "I don't believe in voting". How can you not believe in it? If you cherish your freedom and your democracy...don't you see it as your duty to vote? I've never understood how only 20% or 30% of people in a state could vote and the rest don't. In Australia, voting is compulsory. Obviously, you can go in there and do a "donkey vote", where you simply check the boxes in order. But by the same token, you are being encouraged to think about the issues and to consider what each party is offering. I would never pass up the chance to vote, were it optional. I think that to some degree, you get the Government that you deserve -- if you're unhappy with your Government...then you should go out there and vote to replace it.[/color]

[color=#707875]I guess that it comes down to what you are used to, Chibi. If you've always been using phpBB, then you're more likely to be used to that than the vB setup. However, I think that there are reasons why vB is generally considered to be the industry leader as far as forum technology goes. Although it may take some time to get used to, if you aren't familiar with it, vB has a lot of powerful features that other boards don't have. When we update to OB7, you're definitely going to see another big change. And that may be a bit confusing at first. But I think it's fair to say that those who have seen vB3 are aware that it's a lot better than what is out there at the moment -- it just takes a little time to adjust. ^_^[/color]

[color=#707875]I agree and disagree with you. On the one hand, I think that Final Fantasy can be [i]incredibly[/i] stale. With Final Fantasy IX and X in particular, I just felt like it was a case of "been there, done that". For me, this is a problem not because of the story itself -- but because some other aspects of the game might be really great. For example, I adore the Sphere Grid system in FFX. And I love the way that you can pull characters in and out of battle. It's wonderful -- but I felt like I was sitting through the most boring story on Earth, just so that I can get to another awesome boss fight. You know? FFIX is similar. In IX, I enjoyed the characters a lot more. I felt that they had more character and depth in IX, compared to X. It just felt more "fun". And I preferred the artistic design. However, the story was incredibly bland. Bland and boring. It started out relatively well, but became horribly predictable. And for me, this hurt the game. I liked the battle system enough and I enjoyed the characters themselves. But the story hurt it. Final Fantasy VIII is another story. I liked the story okay...even though some aspects were cliche. But I hated the battle system. It was clumsy, awkward and awful. For me, that hurts the game a great deal -- moreso than a lack of good story. This is why I look at FFVII as being probably my favourite in the modern series. It had story, it had pretty strong characterizations, it had good translation (PAL/AU anyway) and it had a relatively strong battle system. All of those elements combined made it more memorable for me. I mean, I preferred the FFX battle system by far...but FFVII has an atmosphere that I really adore. So, yes, on one level you are right. But on another, I think we have to ask ourselves how important story really is. For example, the story in most of the Zelda games is pretty average. It's mostly very predictable and the dialogue is mostly pretty boring and cliche. But why is Zelda such a great franchise? Because it's [i]fun[/i] to play. Play is the operative word -- gameplay takes a front seat, story takes a back seat. If I had to choose between the two, I'd always take gameplay. Afterall, I'm not watching a movie, I'm playing a video game. If the game is at least fun to play, then I think you're more inclined to forget or dismiss a boring or pointless story. In terms of story alone, there are a lot of subtleties. Even games with better stories may still have a traditional "good versus evil" approach, or even a traditional "boy meets girl" approach. However, some developers (and specifically, some directors) will approach this situation better than others. In Final Fantasy VIII for instance, one thing annoyed me above else; Squall. I didn't want to play as him. I didn't want him in the story. Why? Because he is the most angsty teen I've ever come across in a game. lol And to me, that just felt annoying and stupid. Here they are, trying to save the world -- trying to deal with a very serious situation. And what does Squall do? He sulks and gets upset. I found that incredibly annoying. How could Rinoa fall in love with Squall? Look at Rinoa's personality. She's fun loving, intelligent and she takes responsibility. And here she is, dealing with this bratty little teenager. To me, it seemed annoying and ridiculous that she'd fall in love with him. But because of the "laws of traditional RPG plots", she sort of [i]had[/i] to fall in love. Squall was undeserving, to say the very least. At least FFX was refreshing in this regard. Tidus wasn't a moody brat. Instead, he was more of a ditz who had a somewhat ignorant view of the world. And he was immature, but not in an angsty teen way -- in a more optimistic, fresh way. If that makes sense. So, the fact that we started our journey like that...and developed into someone who was more knowledgable -- but just as comedic and fun loving -- was refreshing. It was really the only aspect of FFX's story that I actually found worthwhile. So yeah. That's my two cents I guess.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think that what Mitch mentioned about slaves is very appropriate here. Now, we'd probably be inclined to label slavery as an evil practice. But at a certain point in history, it was acceptable to many people. I think that's a very clear-cut example of how perceptions of evil/morality/social codes/etc change over generations. [/color]

[color=#707875]I tend to agree with Charles here. Let's look at how the dictionary defines "evil". First, as an adjective: [list] [*]Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant. [*]Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet. [*]Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens. [*]Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation. [*]Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper. [/list] And as a noun: [list] [*]The quality of being morally bad or wrong; wickedness. [*]That which causes harm, misfortune, or destruction: a leader's power to do both good and evil. [*]An evil force, power, or personification. [*]Something that is a cause or source of suffering, injury, or destruction: the social evils of poverty and injustice. [/list] As you can see, "evil" can be used in many ways. However, primarily, it is known as being something that relates to one's morals. And this is largely why I find that the term can be used wrongly, because it [i]can[/i] be used in this black and white sense. And life just isn't that simplistic. All too often, people can simply use the word to define someone as being "morally wrong", when a person's morals are largely a subjective thing. Having said that, the meaning of the world itself is quite varied, as you can see here. And the application of the word is also varied. I think the problem that people have with the word being used, is that it's often used to project a moral superiority between two groups or individuals. In some cases, I'm sure that's also probably valid (ie: comparing a murderer to a regular person or something). But nonetheless, I can see why there's a hesitation to simply jump to the word "evil". I think that talking about evil as being "perceived evil" isn't a cop out -- using the word "evil" in and of itself is actually the bigger cop out. As I said earlier, it's easy to say that someone is an apologist because they don't want to simply label someone as evil. But I think that fails to understand the point -- and the point is that when one understands the motivation behind an "evil person" or an "evil act", one is better prepared to counter that and to deal with it. It can be difficult to deal with something when you simply slap a label on it, without any attempt to gain knowledge about that said evil.[/color]

[color=#707875]Advertising in sigs doesn't cut it? Let me remind you that OtakuBoards isn't a webring or an advertisement service. You don't come here to advertise, you come here to post. Obviously, we allow you to use your signature to advertise non-OB sites. I think that's reasonable enough. Part of the reason that I don't want an advertising forum is also because I can't personally guarantee the quality of sites being advertised -- to do that, we'd have to have staff checking through each site to ensure that it doesn't contain anything like pornography or excessive violence, etc. And again, I think that takes too much time away from the task of moderating forums themselves. So, I think that for the moment, advertising in signatures is enough. I tend to look at signatures instinctively anyway...but sometimes I do notice something interesting that I click or look at. So I don't think that signature-only advertising is such a bad thing. Afterall, we could simply ban all forms of advertising. I'm sure you'd rather have signature-based ads than nothing at all.[/color]

[color=#707875]I don't really like this idea, because I think that the forums are too large to support it. Moderators are already very busy; I don't think that they have time to check up on parents/newbies. But more importantly, this plan assumes that newbies don't understand the rules and procedures of the site. I'd take issue with that; yes, people can be confused at first. But generally speaking, a little reminder or two from staff is enough to get 'em on track. In addition, a lot of newbies are posting with greater quality than those with Member status. So status wouldn't be a deciding factor in any case.[/color]

[color=#707875]I don't really like the word evil, for two reasons. Firstly, it tends to add some kind of spiritual weight to a classification of a person. And secondly, "evil" can be used to describe anything -- but it's too simplistic. Something isn't just "evil", as in, born completely evil. I don't think things work like that. I think that if you're a person like, say, Saddam Hussein, then you are obviously a person with severe psychological problems. I'd certainly say that Saddam is a completely psychotic killer who I personally find revolting. However, when you go around saying "this person is evil" or "that person is evil"...it's pointless. I think you have to examine the underlying motivations and reasoning behind "evil" in different circumstances. That doesn't mean that you're being an apologist -- because I'm certainly not an apologist for people who do bad things -- it just means that you're trying to understand why something happens, so that you can prevent it from happening again. And I think that's pretty reasonable. If someone murders someone else, I can say "Oh, they're evil, throw them away". But that's foolish. As we know, in any situation, there are shades of grey. That person may have committed murder because they're a complete psychopath, or they may have done it in self defense. There are just too many situations and variations to use the one word to describe anyone who does something horribly wrong. *shrug*[/color]

[color=#707875]As far as I know, Final Fantasy XIII is in development. Or at least, "preliminary development". I imagine that Square Enix has plans for games several editions ahead of what is currently available (so they are already well into their planning on XIII and they're probably thinking about the game after that). It's interesting that Final Fantasy has spread its wings and become more than a singular line of games. Of course, we've seen spin-off titles appearing on the shelves for years. But we are now seeing some very serious efforts -- Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, Final Fantasy XI and Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles. All three games are essentially spin-offs of the main series. But all three are quite different -- and quite legitimate -- takes on the central themes and gameplay concepts of the series. So, I think it's a great thing. It's great that Square Enix is involving other creators in the franchise (like Matsuno) and it's great that they are willing to open the franchise up and inject some new ideas in there. I think that the future beyond Final Fantasy XII is very bright, [i]especially[/i] if XII is a truly great game.[/color]

[color=#707875]The problem has been repaired. ^_^[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dragonballzman [/i] [B]It's happened a couple of times before, although simply blowing inside the cartridge had fixed it [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Just a note; never blow inside cartridges. It will only damage them. If you want to clean your cartridge, it's best to use a small brush to remove dust. But blowing on them is definitely not advised.[/color]

[color=#707875]I can see how this can be a somewhat annoying practice, however, I also feel that Recruitment threads are useful for people to ask/answer questions. For example, someone may want to change their sign up, but they're not sure if their new idea will gel with what the creator has intended. If the person asks publicly, then every other participant will see the question and the answer. That may help to solve some confusion amongst other players. The only main problem I have with Recruitment threads is definitely when people post totally inane stuff like "Thanks for joining!" But obviously, that stuff falls under our rules anyway -- posts that have no real content or merit are spam. I think it's pretty clear that many of these posts probably fall under that classification. But if people want to actually discuss the RPG before it starts, to sort certain things out...I think that's fine. So, this is really something that I tend to leave up to the discretion of the individual Moderators who are responsible for that area. Some of these things only barely fall inside/outside the specific rules...so at that point, it's up to a staff member to decide what to do about it.[/color]

OOC: Flash...Dr. Karman no longer works at MHHQ. Remember, she runs a terrorist organization. ~_^ [color=#707875]Proteus stepped out into the sunlight. The rain had ended and all that remained were puddles lining the roadway. Everything looked different now. The vehicle across the road, which had seen the full impact of a powerful explosion only moments earlier, was now almost entirely gone. Scavengers had stolen most of the useable parts; only a few small, charred remains lay in the street. The middle of the road -- where Massacre had lay -- was also completely clear. Various thieves were not doubt all too happy to sell his parts on the black market in the city. Havoc and Iota were already inside the HAPC, which was sitting just around the corner where it'd been parked. Proteus could hear its plasma engines whirring softly, as it hovered several centimetres above the road. There was no doubt that it was a military vehicle; it had very few windows. It didn't even have a windscreen of any kind. Instead, it had several small portholes running around its edges. They were thick and impenetrable. The vehicle was navigated via holographic video screens in the cockpit, which relied on sensors stationed all around the hull. It was a marvellous machine and it was certainly capable of protecting them on their journey, however, Proteus knew that they wouldn't be able to leave the mainland with it. Border security, either in Novus Concordia or in Japan, would definitely notice an enormous Maverick Hunter vehicle. "How's it going?" asked a husky voice from behind Proteus. He turned around and saw Warlock standing there, smiling. He had removed his visor and was gripping it in a gloved hand. Warlock looked calm, as though nothing had happened. Proteus wondered if he was [i]really[/i] calm, or if he was simply trying to make the best of a bad situation. "All things considered, it's fine," said Proteus, entirely predictably. Warlock nodded and put his hand on Proteus's shoulder. "You know, I'm glad that you guys are here. Despite all the bad things happening around us, we've come through it." Proteus smiled slightly. "Yeah, but the hardest part is yet to come," he said softly. Then he turned around and looked at Warlock's home. It seemed to be more damaged than he'd remembered. Its front walls were blackened and charred, the garage door was still peeled open like a piece of fruit and several windows had been shattered. "What are you going to do about this damage?" asked Proteus, as a piece of plaster cracked and tumbled down the sloping rooftop, eventually landing at their feet. "Heh, don't worry about it," Warlock replied, "it won't be too hard to fix. This old girl has seen bigger gunfights before." The pair turned, to see the HAPC's bulky figure rounding the corner slowly, trundling towards them. Warlock and Proteus gave the house one final look and stepped into the open hatch on the side of the hull. [center]|| - - - ||[/center] A large, translucent map hovered above them. A worn, gloved hand reached across it, pausing now and again. "So," murmured Havoc, "we have to cross the city and meet this guy in the Underground?" Warlock nodded vigorously. "Yes. He has a home above ground, but there's no way we could take this thing there without being noticed." "Where is the other entrance?" asked Iota, leaning forward in her leather chair. Warlock moved his finger across the map slowly and stopped upon what looked like an enormous drain. Proteus raised an eyebrow. "The Aquaduct?" Warlock nodded. "Yeah, you see...his storage rooms are located underground, but we can't go through the regular Underground system. The only way to enter is via the mouth of the Aquaduct." Havoc ran a hand through his hair. "Do you realize how dangerous that is? The Aquaduct unleashes massive amounts of pressure every time the water runs through it...it services the entire city. We'll be crushed." Warlock smiled. "Being crushed is the least of our worries. The Aquaduct is the area where a lot of garbage piles up. And because of that, a lot of bandits hang around the area, hoping to scavenge any leftover titanium. They use it for their weapons." "What are you saying?" asked Iota. "Are you saying that we're going to have to fight our way in there [i]and[/i] overcome the high pressure?" Warlock nodded again. "Precisely. This thing can go underwater, can't it?" The reploids glanced at each other, as if they weren't entirely sure about the answer. "Yes," said Proteus, breaking the silence. "Yes, it can. I'm sure that we've taken this model underwater before. I assume that it can tolerate the pressure too." "How can it tolerate that kinda water pressure if the hull is damaged from being shot at?" asked Havoc, as he paced back and forth through the cockpit. Iota rubbed her chin thoughtfully. "Is there any way to avoid those scavengers, Warlock?" Warlock closed the map and sat down. "I'm not sure. The Aquaduct isn't often breached by anyone, because these aren't normal scavengers." Everybody looked up at Warlock. "That is," he continued, "they aren't just random thieves. They are actually part of a gang, run by a guy called Prime." "So now we have to fight our way through a gang?" asked Iota, sounding a little more worried with each question. "Well, not necessarily," said Warlock slowly, "I mean, we could try and negotiate a deal with Prime..." Havoc thumped the arms of his chair impatiently. "Negotiate? Screw that. We are [b]Maverick Hunters[/b] damn it! We should just go in there and if we face resistance...we'll deal with it." Warlock looked at Proteus. "Do we have any weapons left?" Proteus paused and took a second to scan the HAPC's weapon stocks -- he was able to do it remotely from where he was sitting. "Yes, we do. In fact, the cargo bay is full of them...this HAPC is brand new and we haven't used anything from it so far." Warlock rubbed his hands together. "There you go, Havoc. It looks like you probably will get things your way afterall." Havoc grinned and stood up. "If you'll excuse me, I will take a closer look to see what we have." "How do you know Prime?" asked Iota. Warlock hadn't expected that question. "We've had some run-ins now and then. Prime is kinda at odds with a lot of the other gang leaders in Xen. He controls the Aquaduct...and he's got some nasty Mavericks working for him." Proteus smiled. "Luckily we're Maverick [b]Hunters[/b] then, eh?" Warlock rolled his eyes. He was glad that the crew were loosening up; it was something he'd learned to do due to his several years on the run. And he felt glad that his friends were now starting to understand what it was like to live outside the rules and regulations of MHHQ. It was a good feeling.[/color]

[color=#707875]I agree with wrist cutter on that point. That's why teenage sex can be such a loaded issue; you're talking about people who may only be a few years apart, but who have massively different physical and mental maturities. So that's largely why I think it comes down to a person's own choice, in terms of how they feel themselves. Obviously, it's probably safer to wait until you're at least a little bit older...if only because then you're probably more inclined to deal with things in a mature way. But again, there's no black and white standard. Everyone is different. So I don't think that I could apply a particular age limit to sex.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think this is kinda a redundant question, myself. Everyone has a different idea of when sex is appropriate, or when they themselves are ready for sex. If I say to you "You shouldn't be having sex if you're under 16", what's the point? What do I know about your personal habits? Or your maturity? *shrug* I think you should have sex when you're old enough to deal with the consequences, as has been said. [/color]

[color=#707875]The main concern I have is that right now, we have too many sticky threads across all of our forums. In some ways, I think that becomes a little confusing and members are more inclined to ignore it. The next version of the boards won't require us to have an OB Information Center at the top of the page; we won't actually need to build a read-only forum to display this information. All of the information that members require (including rules, FAQ, etc) will be viewable on every single page they visit, no matter where they are on the boards. So, I think you'll find that your concerns will be taken care of with our currently existing plans. ^_^[/color]

[color=#707875]Sunyippee, I don't know exactly what your situation is, but I don't think it would be fair to say that the Chinese system of government is necessarily appropriate for the population. Bear in mind that there is no freedom of religion in China and that there are still significant limits on self-expression. If you are currently living in China, though, you may not realize the difference (if you haven't lived under a democracy, for example). However, limiting social freedoms isn't the same as Communism, at least in terms of freedom of expression and so on. It's too easy to mix the two up, in my view. I think China is an example of a "successful" Communist nation -- but at the same time, China is recognizing that it needs to open up in order to grow. China had to liberalize its industry regulations in order to enter the WTO for example. The thing is, China can't and won't succeed without a level of transparency and democracy. I know that there are already democratic activities going on at the local level around China. So I think it's more a matter of when, rather than "if". And if you look at the protests related to the proposed anti-subversion laws in Hong Kong...you can see that Hong Kong is enjoying a level of democracy that the rest of China isn't (but will, at some stage). But having said all of that, Communism doesn't automatically equate to a dictatorship. You can still be a democracy and maintain a communist system of economics -- provided that it's what the people actually want. If you look at the experience of Hong Kong, though...I think it's pretty fair to say that HK is a model of what the rest of China is moving towards.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CB Shin [/i] [B]I won't back down now, looking like a coward, even if the site director has assaulted me down :laugh: [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Assaulted you down? You may want to re-read your own comments to DeathBug. And my comments to you as well. I believe that if you're going to have a debate on OtakuBoards, it's important to at least [i]try[/i] to be respectful of others -- it's not fair to so flatly accuse DeathBug of being single-minded, when he's taking great effort to respond to your points, each point at a time. So, please, let's all remain as civil as possible. [/color]

[color=#707875]Frankly, I was amazed by RE on GameCube. I haven't played in a long time, but it's an absolutely amazing game. Resident Evil was always my favourite (in other words, the first game in the series was always my favourite) and RE on GameCube really pushes it in some fantastic directions. In particular, I think it's [i]better[/i] if you've played the original PlayStation version. The game deliberately plays around with your memory of the previous version of the game...and that's a really cool aspect to the remake. That's not to mention the absolutely insane graphics; still one of the most beautiful games in existence, in my view. The atmosphere is generally a lot better and everything feels very dark and moody, much moreso than the original on PlayStation. So I'd definitely recommend it for any RE fan. I haven't played RE Zero...so I can't comment on that. I'm definitely looking forward to RE4 though. ~_^[/color]