Disqus - Latest Comments for Talos

Re: Mass Effect Trilogy Remaster New Updates Leaked By EA Boss Patrick Soderlund

Talos — Mon, 22 Aug 2016 16:29:36 -0000

Have any (ANY) of the trailers shown anything other than human players? Has there been any indication of the original ME races? I rather wonder if the shutdown of the bioware forums was to pre-empt howls of anger from the diehard fans when/if ME:A comes out as a humans only crew/game. A semi-full reboot of the series with no mention at all of Reapers, Asari, the Citadel, Krogans, etc.

Re: Deus Ex: Mankind Divided review

Talos — Mon, 22 Aug 2016 08:42:26 -0000

OK, I see your point. I would suggest at least finishing the final combat/fight and skipping the choice portion.

I never finished Mass Effect 3 to avoid the awful ending (non)choices, myself though I completed it up to the point where you meet the chubby magic brat (and then installed MEHEM mod so the ending disappeared altogether).

In any case, I cannot see any way to avoid issues with choicy endings where the outcome flows into a new game, particularly one whereby the story line is already set, with regards to the FINAL ending (original Deus Ex) ...though I would like to see that entire series rebooted with modern graphics, voice acting, etc. Sacrilege, I know, but I just cannot play the old original Deus Ex any longer. I've tried multiple times over the last 5 or so years but I cannot tolerate the ancient graphics. I'm spoiled by the now).

Re: Deus Ex: Mankind Divided review

Talos — Sun, 21 Aug 2016 16:49:53 -0000

From what I've seen, all endings to DEHR are compatible with this game. If you chose the stupid option of (apparent) suicide, it still works because you (Jensen) just happened to survive (Jason Bourne style). Nothing wrong with that.

From there, I cannot see any way they COULD go on with an Adam Jensen story without doing some "hand waving away" of the 4 possible choices of DEHR. I LIKE Jensen and really want/ed to keep playing him so I'm glad they did it but, realistically, it would be impossible to provide different stories for this game that fully integrate with the different choices you could make from DEHR...unless they were willing to spend MUCH more money making this game (far beyond ANY game EVER - getting into major motion picture cost territory) and a LOT more time to get it out for users. I don't want to wait 5+/- years for the next game, which is what it would have taken to fully write 4 independent stories to go with this game to work seamlessly with DEHR.

Re: Deus Ex: Mankind Divided review

Talos — Sun, 21 Aug 2016 16:43:55 -0000

How, pray tell, do you tell a story without some structure to it? This isn't supposed to be Warcraft where there is no story, just you wandering around doing "stuff".

An open sandbox = Secondlife which is no life at all.

Re: Why You Should Wait to Buy a Silencer, Even if You Have an NFA Trust. An All Outdoor Post

Talos — Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:28:23 -0000

Well, I'm not in the market for another rifle so a ban wouldn't negatively affect me right now. What it would do for me and ALL owners of assault rifles is triple their value if not quadruple. Have a $600 rifle? A ban instantly turns it into an $1800+ rifle. Your 20 or 30 Rd mags go from $5 to $25 or higher (assuming a mag size restriction with a ban).

Think of a ban as an investment opportunity. In any case, it won't get past a GOP filibuster in the Senate assuming a Dem takeover in the Fall. It will never get through the House which had no chance of flipping in the Fall. Even if all the stars align in 2016 and Dems took both House and Senate AND beat a GOP filibuster in the Senate and passed a ban, 2018 would see a big flip in both House and Senate back to GOP and the ban would come to an end then.

Re: BREAKING: Academy Sports Pulling Modern Sporting Rifles From Shelves

Talos — Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:07:01 -0000

Why buy ammo from them when you can get it from Cabelas or Midway online for less? Why buy firearms from them when you can get excellent guns online from GunsAmerica.com, etc?

Finally, take up loading your own ammo. Buy boxes of hundreds of bullets and brass online, sent straight to your door.

Re: Why You Should Wait to Buy a Silencer, Even if You Have an NFA Trust. An All Outdoor Post

Talos — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:32:27 -0000

He is alienating women and Hispanics in a big way. The leadership of the GOP is attacking him for his attack on Hispanic judge, etc. The press covers his most outrageous statements (while completely ignoring his more reasoned and calm statements). Both Temp and $Hillary have big negatives polls but, at least at the moment Hillary had slightly smaller negatives than Trump. It's a race to see how low your piling can go and still get elected at this point. In fact, I'd virtually ANY other GOP candidate were the nominee (except Cruz) Hillary would not have as much chance of winning given how untrustworthy voters consider her.

That corrupt cow gets $400 focus-grouped haircuts and wears $600 focus-group pantsuits. Nothing about her is genuine but she still is favored to win because Trump polls lower. I'm hoping for an FBI indictment but am not holding my breath. Hillary moved her campaign offices into the same building as AG Lynch, just a couple floors beneath. Bill Clinton is the one who gave Lynch a govt job in Justice in first place. The corruption is thick as molasses around the Clintons.

Re: Why You Should Wait to Buy a Silencer, Even if You Have an NFA Trust. An All Outdoor Post

Talos — Tue, 14 Jun 2016 05:51:48 -0000

They are NOT going to get less expensive and, now, the Hearing Protection Act is certainly not going to come up. Orlando and the fact that Trump appears to be almost trying to lose by some of the things he says means that $Hillary is a shoe-in. The game is fixed by Obama too. The FBI investigation may have real red meat to indict Hillary on concerning her email server and corruption at the Clinton Foundation but Obama's recent meet with the AG before giving his endorsement to Hillary means he is thwarting justice and will not permit prosecution regardless. Otherwise he wouldn't have risked his rep by endorsing a (likely) felon.

Orlando + Hillary = assault weapon ban, harder to get guns, and no reduction in price on silencers. The only hope for stasis is the House staying GOP. If so then no restrictions Hillary wants will pass but that also means no Hearing Protection Act.

Re: Can You Shoot MOA All Day Long?

Talos — Sat, 11 Jun 2016 08:40:44 -0000

Those, my friends, are hole-punch holes. Perfectly round, clean edges, no depression of the edges.

You have a 1/2 "MOA hole punch. Mine is a 0" MOA hole punch. All day.

Re: Firearms Food for Thought: OC or CC?

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 11:19:06 -0000

Unless you live in an actively dangerous area, MOST people are not attacked or mugged, etc. All cops ate armed but a solid majority never actually need to use their weapons. Simply saying you OC and have never had it taken or been attacked doesn't mean much. The same would be trite if you didn't carry at all.

I have a CCW permit. I have rarely actually used it and when I have it is mainly so I can test a new holster or stay acquainted with the feel of the weapon on my person through a day. The odds of me not carrying on any given day but desperately wishing I was are vanishingly small. Now, the day they approve CCW on my campus (unlikely, and I'm staff) I will then start carrying regularly. I wouldn't feel safe with a bunch of kids packing: getting drunk at parties, getting pissed off at a flunking grade, all bent because their girlfriend cheated on them or dumped them, losing financial aid and having to leave, etc.

Re: A Father and His 5 Year Old Son Wyatt: Firearm Training For The Future

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 09:14:25 -0000

I hardly think that dad would expect our use his son to ACTUALLY clear their house or any other if it came to it. It's fun and games with a useful bit of learning on top.

Re: A Father and His 5 Year Old Son Wyatt: Firearm Training For The Future

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 09:11:14 -0000

Do Germans play airsoft or paintball? The techniques of the training carry over depending on game arena or scenario.

Re: A Father and His 5 Year Old Son Wyatt: Firearm Training For The Future

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 09:09:06 -0000

At least they're white ankle socks and not black dress socks. That's gotta count for something, right?

Re: Firearms Food for Thought: OC or CC?

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 08:48:41 -0000

I wouldn't OC for one additional reason besides avoiding scaring people unnecessarily, or getting questioned by cops all the time: it announces to government and law enforcement that you own a gun and sticks a name, face, gait on it (for facial recognition, gait recognition, etc, with cameras everywhere). You oppose a government database listing all gun owners but then do the job of basically putting your details into a database by OCing everywhere? Call it paranoid but OC basically does the job of a database by other means.

Re: Firearms Food for Thought: OC or CC?

Talos — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 08:42:52 -0000

It is much more than just an antigun tactic. SWATing started as a prank, a very dangerous prank, that assholes can use to "get back" at someone that angers them online (though it isn't reserved to online). You piss of some jerk online, they dox you or otherwise find out where you live, they call in a report of a dangerous armed suspect, you see SWAT come barging in all armed to the teeth, you all unsuspecting. Can EASILY get innocents shot.

Re: Cenk Uygur Says Hillary Clinton is Better Than Bernie Sanders on These Two Issues - by Tommy Christopher

Talos — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 17:13:01 -0000

They cannot be easily changed AND if you are so stupid to actually go through with it, the penalty is SEVERE. You do NOT want to do that.

On this I assume you refer to assault-style weapons. Funny thing, they are actually RARELY used in crimes or mass shootings. Sure, they do get used some but the VAST majority (by far) of all gun homocides are via handgun. But because they look menacing (not to me but to those who are anti-gun) they are always the first thing people want to ban or restrict after any shooting.

Know what an assault weapon ban would do? It would instantaneously turn my own $1500 rifle into one easily worth $4000 or more. An investment with a high return! It wouldn't take mine from me, nor would it take them from the thousands and thousands of others that own them. In fact, just talk about passing such restrictions drives up sales like crazy because anyone wanting one but who was saving up immediately goes to get one before they can't. They get to keep them because all such laws require grandfather clauses so anyone with one BEFORE the law goes into effect gets to keep them.

I guarantee you, as November roll around and it looks like Hillary (or Bernie!) is going to win, the sale of guns will skyrocket. It's silly though because neither Hillary nor Bernie has the power to ban or restrict anything. Even if the Dems barely retake the Senate, no bans or restrictions are possible. The House is solidly GOP territory and they will never permit ANY restrictions through so a lot of people will rush to gun stores, pay increasing prices for weapons as demand drives up prices, making the sellers happy as hell. Then time will pass, no restriction or ban will be forthcoming, and a lot of late buyers will have paid a high price for a weapon worth 20-30% less. It will happen, guaranteed.

Re: Cenk Uygur Says Hillary Clinton is Better Than Bernie Sanders on These Two Issues - by Tommy Christopher

Talos — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 16:41:12 -0000

Not unreasonable if restricted to only that, however, it STILL strikes me as an issue for the point of sale. The gun store owner should not be selling loads of weapons to an individual. THAT is suspicious. The manufacturer shouldn't be the one on the hook but perhaps should have to report general order sizes for regions that would then direct law enforcement to take a look at unusually large area sales to find bad actor sellers AND buyers.

Pharmaceutical companies aren't sued because pseudophedrine can be used to make meth. They don't get in trouble if certain stores are selling unusual volumes. The point of sale has rules restricting how much pseudophedrine can be sold to any individual at any one time. If someone were to be sued due to a local meth manufacturing explosion, it would be an individual pharmacy, not Glaxo..

Re: Cenk Uygur Says Hillary Clinton is Better Than Bernie Sanders on These Two Issues - by Tommy Christopher

Talos — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 16:28:16 -0000

I, for one, would never buy a smart gun. Why? Because they must contain a microchip. Microchips fail like all electronics fail. A microchip could also be remotely disabled via EMP whether by nearby lightening strike or by intentional emp. No, I do not want a gun that ANYONE can remotely disable by EMP pulse (or via secret built-in remote kill switch). I don't care if the person disabling it is a cop or a bad guy or just some hacker. No way I buy, or trust, a gun that can be remotely deactivated. Chips are also subject to getting fried via static discharge. You walk across carpet, pick up your gun and ZAP! Fried chip and useless gun.

The IDEA sounds good but in practice, I wouldn't trust it and would stick with my dumb, undeactivatable gun, thanks just the same. Unless...if they were made so they fail ON, it would be OK. Alternatively, the gun would have to be solidly shielded and proven to be immune to EMP, static, and shown to NOT have any type of remote kill capability.

Actually, I just realized it is impossible to make a smart gun immune to remote deactivation. There MUST be an RFID chip in it to communicate with a partner chip on the bearer. This is automatically unsafe as any EMP or static discharge can get in and fry either or both the gun chip and the owner's chip. The gun must also contain a power source (battery) to operate a mechanism to allow the firing pin to strike or not depending on existence of the bearer's chip. That means the gun has two fatal flaws. A dead battery means an inert gun, so that's a third fatal flaw. A damaged RFID chip means an inert gun. They cannot be shielded. I now see this as a possible attempt by govt and anti-gun groups to render guns inoperable remotely and on command.

So I really would never buy one after all.

Re: Cenk Uygur Says Hillary Clinton is Better Than Bernie Sanders on These Two Issues - by Tommy Christopher

Talos — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 16:20:10 -0000

Irrelevant. Or actually, it is more sensible to sue auto manufacturers for crimes using their products because they are NOT intended for those purposes. If I point a gun at someone or something and pull the trigger, it BETTER go boom and shoot or it is defective and could get me killed. You NEVER sue because a product is functioning as intended, only if it malfunctions or fails to do what it was supposed to do.

Re: Cenk Uygur Says Hillary Clinton is Better Than Bernie Sanders on These Two Issues - by Tommy Christopher

Talos — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 12:19:42 -0000

I get so tired of the nonsense about gun manufacturer immunity. If it is OK to sue a gun manufacturer (not the person doing the selling in a store, but the ones making the gun) when a gun is used in a crime, then it MUST be ok to sue Ford, Toyota, etc, any others when their cars are used in a crime, to kill a pedestrian, to commit suicide. Clearly this is NONSENSE so no, you should not be able to sue the designer and manufacturer of a gun UNLESS it fails to function as designed and gets the operator killed or injured due to poor design or substandard materials.

No, you CANNOT sue gun manufacturers out of existence, the true goal, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SUPPLIER TO POLICE AND MILITARY TOO. And, like it or not we DO have a repeatedly confirmed constitutional right to own them. Want to change that then pass another amendment as required.

Re: What Right-Wing Media Wont Tell You About Assault Weapons

Talos — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 19:21:13 -0000

Uh...the pyjama wearing, ak47 toting Taliban and insurgents in Iraq defeated the full might of US military. You think the military would perform better in their own country against their own people? Ha! In fact is I'd wager you'd see a LOT of desertion...unless we're talking a small group of clowns trying to take over my public land.

Re: What Right-Wing Media Wont Tell You About Assault Weapons

Talos — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 19:16:31 -0000

I don't mind background checks at all. All my weapons came with a background check that took no more than 10 minutes tops.

On the other hand, currently (as of 2016) a majority of Americans do NOT want an "assault weapon" ban.

So I'll give you the background checks but will not give ground on the rifles or pistols.

Re: What Right-Wing Media Wont Tell You About Assault Weapons

Talos — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 19:09:59 -0000

Just as no one NEEDS bucket seats in a car, am/fm radio, heated seats, etc. I don't NEED a semiautomatic rifle all tricked out with rails, light, etc (currently, at any rate). I WANT them and that's all that's necessary.

Re: What Right-Wing Media Wont Tell You About Assault Weapons

Talos — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 17:04:54 -0000

I'm a liberal but I'm a gun-owning liberal. I have, and enjoy, my "assault weapon" AND my semiautomatic handgun. Damndest thing, my guns have never committed a single murder nor been used in a single robbery. I bought the rifle from a cop. Great weapon.

Here's the thing, even if Feinstein passed her latest ban I would STILL have both my rifle and my handgun AND their STANDARD 20rd magazines for the rifle, 16 for the pistol, plus the two 30 round mags for my rifle! The only change a ban would bring is it would instantly convert my rifle from a $1500 rifle into a $3000-4000 rifle. It wouldalso convert my $5 magazines into $30 mags. Woot!

Re: What Right-Wing Media Wont Tell You About Assault Weapons

Talos — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 06:11:36 -0000

One thing I don't grasp: why the hangup about pistol grips? They do NOT make the rifle more deadly, AND there are outstanding military rifles without a pistol grip (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/... and its derivatives). It is clearly just a political thing rather than rational or otherwise defensible position.

If you cannot back an argument with data and facts, you shouldn't be allowed to make laws affecting that thing.