This. Contact Customer Support and they'll give you veterancy for every game regardless of whether you own the game or not.
Search
Search results: 195 found, showing up to 50
If she ever has sex I guarantee she screams "Oh God." Hypocrites.
Hope & Change
Agreed. Her voice does stand out amongst the talentless hordes with Autotune but without the clothes, make-up and stage antics her voice is mediocre at best. In pop however things other than vocals can be just as important.steelie34 wrote:
the madonna comparison is a good one, guess you could say she's the best right now of the limited offerings of the pop genre.
Music is subjective just like art. Yes she's talented and catchy but I don't like her music or any other kind of pop music for that matter but that's just my opnion and millions of people would disagree with me. Despite her success and bat shit crazy videos she's not original or inventive though, every ten years or so someone comes along to "shock" their generation. Cher did it, Madonna did it and now Lady Gaga is doing it.
Riots in L.A. happen because people want free shit.eleven bravo wrote:
the L.A. riots happened because the LAPD made a series of really bad decisions that allowed it to escalate.
+1. I've finished rounds at the top with just tossing ammo and medpacks, I wish more people would do it.mtb0minime wrote:
A support player using teamwork and throwing down ammo packs is unprecedented. This game is full of dipshits.
Picked up Total War: Rome & Medieval for $5, oldies but goodies.
Obviously the definition, much like our government, is flawed.Jay wrote:
Funny, because individual rights get trampled every day here.HudsonFalcon wrote:
In a Democracy an individuals rights can be trampled for the greater good, in a Democratic Republic they cannot.Cybargs wrote:
explain the difference between democratic republic and democracy plox
Democracy usually refers to either direct democracy, where everyone votes on everything town hall style, or representative democracy, where we hire people to represent us. Representative Democracy is a term coined by James Madison and is the word used to describe America's Republican form of government.
Representative Democracy = Republic = United States Government
In a Democracy an individuals rights can be trampled for the greater good, in a Democratic Republic they cannot.Cybargs wrote:
explain the difference between democratic republic and democracy ploxHudsonFalcon wrote:
We're a Democratic Republic not a Democracy first off, and second you're confusing Democracy with Communism if you think freedom is a brainwashing schtick. Frankly I feel sorry for you.Shahter wrote:
@feos & g@lt: you are again speaking about stuff you only read about in a book. to hell with usa, i wasn't talking about any nation in particular. this stuff you call "democracy and freedom" is nothing more than a brainwashing schtick, and as long as you try to build your society around that shit you'll be fucked again and again. oh, others will be fucked in your name too.
it's 23:50 here. let me wish you happy new year. i'm off to get myself a nice big bowl of russian salad.
We're a Democratic Republic not a Democracy first off, and second you're confusing Democracy with Communism if you think freedom is a brainwashing schtick. Frankly I feel sorry for you.Shahter wrote:
@feos & g@lt: you are again speaking about stuff you only read about in a book. to hell with usa, i wasn't talking about any nation in particular. this stuff you call "democracy and freedom" is nothing more than a brainwashing schtick, and as long as you try to build your society around that shit you'll be fucked again and again. oh, others will be fucked in your name too.
it's 23:50 here. let me wish you happy new year. i'm off to get myself a nice big bowl of russian salad.
Thanks I'll give it a try.
Thanks for the response. I read an extensive article about about the PhysX benefits for Batman, it seems the developers spent extra time and incorporating as much PhysX effects as they could into the game and the results are spectacular.
I was leaning towards the GTS 250 which can be had for under $100 or my 8800 just to add a little extra kick to my system but I'm still on the fence.
I was leaning towards the GTS 250 which can be had for under $100 or my 8800 just to add a little extra kick to my system but I'm still on the fence.
Why not? I've always had good luck with the FX series. Care to elaborate on why PhysX is useless?
PhysX Question.
I'm currently running a pair of MSI 560 Ti's (2GB) in Sli. Would adding a PhysX card improve performance to the point of being worth the purchase?
I have an 8800 GTS XXX in my older gaming rig/server that I could use or recommend me a card.
System Specs:
Vista Ultimate
MSI 990FXA-GD80 MoBo
16 GB Corsair Vengenece Ram
(2) WD Caviar Blacks in Raid
AMD FX 8150 Bulldozer Stock Clock
(2) MSI 560 Ti's in SLI (2gb)
OCZ Certified Gold 850 PSU
I'm currently running a pair of MSI 560 Ti's (2GB) in Sli. Would adding a PhysX card improve performance to the point of being worth the purchase?
I have an 8800 GTS XXX in my older gaming rig/server that I could use or recommend me a card.
System Specs:
Vista Ultimate
MSI 990FXA-GD80 MoBo
16 GB Corsair Vengenece Ram
(2) WD Caviar Blacks in Raid
AMD FX 8150 Bulldozer Stock Clock
(2) MSI 560 Ti's in SLI (2gb)
OCZ Certified Gold 850 PSU
The article fails to mention she was nursing a 27 year old.
I didn't know the cast of The Jersey Shore made game controllers.......................bro.
He's a DJ because he bought a Mac Book.
Got cities XL 2012 for $20 and got my buddy Total War: Shogun 2 for $15.
Nice they got Norris too and to a lesser extent Van Damme.
Douche Jockey
X1,000,000. Unless you're into unruly crowds, horrible traffic and zero parking on-line shopping is where it's at.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
More cultural than racial. One of the reasons I prefer catalog systems like on-line shopping.
...and buying early for Christmas if I'm going to. Seriously, who wants to deal with that last-minute shit?
....and yes cultural or racial those people sure do love sneakers. They can be homeless & penniless but they'll still have sneakers so gleaming white that it's like staring into the sun.
Welfare checks hard at work.
^It's not just companies avoiding the high tax brackets it's wealthy individuals as well. If there are two things wealthy people are good at it's creating more wealth and protecting it. That is the problem with this liberal idea of using tax dollars to pay for universal healthcare, the rich will find a loophole and the very poor can't afford to pay a dime. That leaves the middle class yet again to foot the bill and as a middle class American living in New York I can honestly say that I'm tapped.
That's the problem with talking about universal health care for 360 million people, in order to pay for it you need to adjust the tax code among other things. A flat tax rate across the brackets would help with our expenses but it's impossible to implement anything in this government because "politics happen."
People just have to pay. Whether you're making $4,000 a year or $400,000 you need to pay something if we're going to continue to offer government funded programs. "Paying their fair share" is Obama rhetoric for crucifying the rich.FEOS wrote:
Let's not forget the 9 (or is it 19)% who "pay" a negative tax rate every year...in addition to the 47% who pay no taxes.HudsonFalcon wrote:
The point is with only half the population paying for 100% of the people, that would be on yet another government run program, how can it be sustainable?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
i know. what's your point?
"People have to pay their fair share, now..."
The point is with only half the population paying for 100% of the people, that would be on yet another government run program, how can it be sustainable?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
i know. what's your point?Jay wrote:
47% of the population pays zero federal income tax.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
well i pay more in tax then i 'draw out' so shouldn't I be getting a fat rebate at the end of every year? That statement is an overgeneralization at best, ill-formed at worst.
I wouldn't say our current government provides social services "just fine." Anytime you have a system where more people draw out than put in then you have a system that's unsustainable, nothing more. With about 50% of our population paying no income tax yet collecting benefits how are we to add universal health care to the tab?
Besides the whopping population difference each country has its own unique set of challenges in terms of health care so what works for the British people won't necessarily work for the United States. I agree that the U.S. system needs an overhaul but taking private business, which equates to 16% of our economy, out of the loop and placing the entire system under the umbrella of a government who currently can best be described as inept would be a disaster.
Since British Healthcare isn't the topic of this discussion I will use stereotypes and I will mock you. Besides comparing the two systems is like apples and pears.
Judging from the British smiles I see I would say again not even close.Uzique wrote:
how so? the NHS doesn't turn a profit and it provides care to the entire population of britain, regardless.
so how "not even close"?
In theory yes but in actuality not even close.AussieReaper wrote:
Government run health care doesn't need to run a profit. That isn't the goal. The goal is to provide the best service possible and to as many people as possible.
Tower Heist
5/10
It was nice to see Eddie Murphy acting with other people and not just several version of himself and the part he played was reminiscent of his role is Trading Places.
The movie was merely OK. There were few funny parts and even then the laughter was forced.
5/10
It was nice to see Eddie Murphy acting with other people and not just several version of himself and the part he played was reminiscent of his role is Trading Places.
The movie was merely OK. There were few funny parts and even then the laughter was forced.
Sarcasm ITT.HudsonFalcon wrote:
We like both actually.Uzique wrote:
private ownership of them, fine (although lets not get into that debate).
massive government spending of tax money, no thank you.
We like both actually.Uzique wrote:
private ownership of them, fine (although lets not get into that debate).
massive government spending of tax money, no thank you.
I agree. I popped into a hardcore serve by chance and it was quite fun. I think the health is set at 60% for hardcore servers iirc?Finray wrote:
hardcore is actually pretty good, they haven't made it so one bullet kills you like in CoD, you still need to put a good whack of damage down on the target. Not having crosshairs, well you don't miss them if you're a good player (ie, can aim down sights and control recoil), 3d spotting is a bit gay imo, makes things too easy, but is a good counter to irnv. I still prefer the normal gamemode, feels like it flows better, but hardcore isn't as bad in this game as in CoD or BC2.
The bottom line is we're America and we like guns.
.......but it is defense. Just because the fighting takes place on foreign shores doesn't mean we're defending our interests any less. Having a large army keeps the balance of power in check and if that means spending huge dollars to keep things that way then so be it.
I think our military is the adequate size for the role we have taken upon ourselves. The way your posts read you'd think we have a military large enough to liberate mainland Europe again.Uzique wrote:
hang on, i said we don't need a military because it's expensive and its traditional roles - that of defense and acquiring power - are both outmoded. we use the market to wield influence and power nowadays, and the threat of ground invasion is nil. your 'refutation' involves us using "coercive diplomacy" to solve other people's problems, which i am not interested in at all.
It sounds like you have all the answers and you're loved by millions of people from many different faiths and cultures so in that case you have nothing to worry about riding on your mass transit system and flying from your airports. You should have no worries about backpacking into Iran or enjoying the lovely beaches of Somolia. Cheers!Uzique wrote:
i'm sorry but please clarify for me where the enemy is that wants to kill us so badly on multiple fronts. cause i'm sat here in london and i'm not seeing any enemies on any fronts trying to kill me, or hating what i stand for. i'm a bit confused here. and i'm not saying we stockpile nukes - far from it - i'm just saying that missiles and technology, more generally, are a better strategic investment when it comes to defense than keeping all these hundreds of thousands of full-salaried men on 'ready' status indefinitely. any large-scale defensive effort nowadays (which will never even be called upon, but nevermind) will be resolved through technology, not massive land armies. no major power will even invade another using a land army, let alone will the other have to defend themselves using huge ground deployments (which is what we are talking about here - defense, as i must stress to feos). your post really confuses me because it seems to be full of this uniquely american paranoia that there are people out there carving your name into ak-47 bullets. these threats to your homeland security DO NOT EXIST.
So we should get rid of our large military because the age of the "land-grabbing" nations are over? Fair enough but how do we defend ourselves on mulitple fronts from any enemy that wants to kill us for what we stand for? Do we put all our resources into a weapon (nukes) as you suggest? A weapon that we use a deterrent that our current enemy disregards because they don't have a defined territory.
Just because Nazi's and Communists are no longer a threat doesn't mean there isn't a need for a large standing army. History has taught us that even during peaceful times there's always the threat of danger and I for one would rather be prepared than caught with our pants down.Uzique wrote:
i would rather axe the entire military budget, save for the necessary nuke/missile infrastructure, and put all the money into policing. and i hate police. but at least they have some direct, tangible benefit. the military? oh yeah, great, nice to know we have this HUGELY EXPENSIVE army sitting there in case ze germans get any funny ideas about the fourteenth reich.
Oh yeah but the 5K service isn't too bad it's just a routine check-up basically. Oil changes every 3K and service intervals at 10K, 15K, 30K and 60K. The 30K & 60K are the ones that hurt your wallet as they "require" your 3 different types of diff. fluid to be changed.FatherTed wrote:
finlay you been hazed
is the evo still a 5k mile service?
Yes the 8 & 9's are a bit too ricey for my taste but the X is a good mix of looks and performance, for me anyway. The service is a bit much but the all-weather fun you can have makes up for it.FatherTed wrote:
nah evo's have always been good cars. services are a bit lol, but 4/5 seats, good power+handling. maybe they play a bit too much on the NFS generation but still nice cars.
I'm sure you're an expert at finding out the likes and dislikes of 14 year olds after you lure them into your '99 Corsa.Finray wrote:
if you're 14 years old
I have an '08 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X currently and for around $30K I think it's a great bang-for-your-buck car performance wise.
People who are consistently living off the system yet are healthy enough to work should be involved in a program like this.
Don't knock 'till you tried it.RTHKI wrote:
banunnamednewbie13 wrote:
Ham, cheese and pineapple.HudsonFalcon wrote:
Pepperoni & black olives.