JB0

I'd rather another game for the PS2. I'm happy with my PS2 and I really don't want to have to buy a PS3. I've go too many consoles already. Graham 382422[/snapback] LIES! You can NEVER have too many! 382457[/snapback] Yeah! Blasphemer! Now that the Dreamcast is fairly cheap, I'm actually thinking of getting one so I can play a few games again like Gundam Side Story and, of course, M3. 382484[/snapback] Good plan. DC has a lot of awesome software.

I'd rather another game for the PS2. I'm happy with my PS2 and I really don't want to have to buy a PS3. I've go too many consoles already. Graham 382422[/snapback] LIES! You can NEVER have too many!

WENDY'S CHILI IS MADE OF PEOPLE!

I thought he just inherited Roy's after he, I mean you, kicked the bucket.

Luigi was the red lion pilot in Golion. That's what's really important.

Hey, spoiler warning next time!

Especially since some characters were massively diffrent in Robotech. ... WTF? How was Max a suckup? Is humility really that bad in american society?

I'm noticing a common theme here... The VF-1 FAST packs don't add armor. That's a RawBootEck-ism. They're full of fuel and explosive weaponry. A hit on a loaded FAST pack is probably going to blow off whatever it's attached to. 381935[/snapback] Considering how easily Cannon Fodders tend to blow up in the series its fair to say that the best defense in Macross is avoiding being hit in the first place rather than trying to soak up the impact with armour. So the extra re-mass and ammunition are probably better than toting around the mass of armour in any case. At least the extra reaction mass reserves allows you to burn harder and the extra firepower might allow you to put down your attackers before they do the same to you. Karl 381941[/snapback] Yeah. I was just pointing out that they aren't actually adding any durability. The GBP does, but it's built for a diffrent purpose than the FAST packs.

That's what I imagine. See it was the episode in the tv series when milia first kicks ass in her powered armor and does all kinds of crazy manuevers with ease that I get the feeling UN spacy might have thought they needed the extra armor, weapons, nozzles and speed. When you see the amount of missiles inside the qrau, it is essentially like a destroid but with the boost to make it fast and manueverable enough to not have to float there and take damage. (destroids with the exception of the monster are like cannon fodder in the series) The gbp, although well armed, just looks like a chunky brick. When it walks it looks sorta slow and bulky and heavy, and when it uses up all the missiles you can't but help want to eject the armor because it restricts the mode you can fight in. This is where Super armor comes into play: combining speed with more powerful weapons but without restriction on variable fighting methods. (ie changing from fighter to robot and back again for different ranges and situations as shown in macross zero) I'm noticing a common theme here... The VF-1 FAST packs don't add armor. That's a RawBootEck-ism. They're full of fuel and explosive weaponry. A hit on a loaded FAST pack is probably going to blow off whatever it's attached to.

Well, the 17, 19, and 21/22 aren't using FAST packs for engines. Just armor and ammo. But it actually makes sense. The VFs are all designed as atmospheric as well as space combat Making the extra verniers and reaction mass externally mounted saves them a LOT of un-needed gear for atmospheric combat(as well as the drag that accompanies vernier nozzles), without sacrificing space combat ability.

There's no additional surprise. The ONLY way to kill a copied disk is to kill ALL DISKS using a given encryption scheme. Encryption doesn't stop copying. Never has. Actually, it does. The MPAA has admitted IN COURT that CSS was never a piracy deterrent. I REALLY don't see a diffrence in BluRay. And the movie portion of a DVD is 99.9% of the disk. If you can't extract the MPEG, there's no real reason to not just spread the entire image. I'm not arguing that almost no one makes backup copies. But CSS WAS NEVER INTENDED TO STOP COPYING. And I DO argue the point that the people that talk about fair use are all pirates. MMC still restricts what the disk owner can do. The copy you get is still locked, encrypted, and restrictive. Okay, I see what you're saying now. CSS SHOULD interfere with that form of copying, as there's no way to re-encode the video if you can't decrypt it first. Stripping the menus and extras is easy enough, and I THINK all the audio tracks are in independent files, but there's no way to re-encode the video without decrypting it. Unfortunately, no consideration is made for the legitimate reasons to decrypt the files. The BD "ROM mark" is along the lines of a "copy-protect bit." I don't see how that's really relevant to anything. They're claiming that drives won't "let" you copy a disk with the watermark, but it'll be hard to actually stop it without impacting the function of the drive. BD+ DOESN'T prevent copying. All it means is that if BluRay's encryption schemes are cracked(which don't affect straight copying) that they can release disks with a new encryption scheme that has to be cracked again. The only way it would stop copying is if when it was updated it disabled all disks using the old encryption scheme, which is comercially unfeasable for obvious reasons. Well, I'm mainly just pointing out the studio BS. Explaining why it won't work for the stated task is just a side-effect.

Who cares about the rest? You can do the HYPER ROCK AND ROLL! attack!

CSS never prevented disk copying. A complete disk image contained all the CSS data, and when you burned the disk image, the decryption keys were intact. It's sort of like password-protecting your computer, then writing the password on the monitor so you don't forget it. The closest DVD had to an actual copy-protection mechanism was dual-layer(unless we count the short-lived, ill-concieved Divx market). Once dual-layer writers came down in price, that was dead. But it doesn't matter. If you copy the disk, you copy all of it. Your copies are identical to the original source disk. As I said, that doesn't matter. The only people it affects are the ones doing something BESIDES just copying the disk.

The FamiCom game made me like Shao Pai Lon. Sidenote: I think it's a TV series game, not a movie game. Not that it matters. I have it for emulator, I like it. IIRC I haven't played that many levels yet. Oh, I have no idea what they're trying to say with that Engrish. Propably it's just damn "cool". I think that they got a new machine for the fighting, and it's time to scramble the valkyrie. Well "cheap" is relative. I mean more like a good compromise. If I played a lot an arcade controller would be best. No need for that. Actually, I'm getting used to keyboad controls on Dyrl. At first I played mostly M+... Heh.Just saying, when/if you get a gamepad, don't get the 5-10$ one. You're better off staying on the keyboard at that point. That's a Sega-supplied CD-R for developers. It's not a 3rd-party product(while it WAS a 3rd-party manufacturer, it was released under the Sega name, placing it in the same category as a lot of other stuff that's counted as 1st-party), or a released one. As the page says, the only diffrence between it and any other CD-R is the label. It won't work on an un-modded Saturn.

Yah. I don't mind obscene difficulties, if they feel "fair" about it. But it's hard to get devastatingly hostile without lsoing that sense of fairness. Yah, original music would've elevated it several points higher. Same for free transformations. Played the SNES Scrambled Valkyrie game? *chuckles* I do recommend springing for something above the bottom end. You get what you pay for, and the bottom-end pads tend to be pretty poor performers. MAME sticks are awesome. I want one. ... Actually, I want to go all-out and make an absurd modular panel with every imaginable configuration possibility. Spinners, joysticks, joysticks with spinners in them, buttons-only, etc. Ultimate goal being the ability to assemble something very close to the "native" control panel for any game I really like. But for now... P880 and a trackball is good.

To bring a StarTrekisum ( im not sure thats actually a word) The klingon way to being a captain is to kill your predessor. Yeah. Well, the Transformers were also a kickass idea. I mean, really... toy cars and planes that turn into toy robots. It was like taking the 2 best toy concepts ever and mixing them together. I think that's waht carried them over HeMan, GIJoe, and everything else. ... It's kind of sad, really. I was thinking about it, and my childhood's claim to fame is the commercialization of childern's entertainment. They were just edging into it when I was little. There were lots of toys without cartoons, and lots of cartoons without toys. Now it seems most children's shows are selling something, and good luck getting on a toy shelf without a cartoon.

You missed the obvious. Or if Will Smith is in it. I believe I. Robot did okay as well, and it was at least based on a hard sci-fi premise. But apparently "Oh, hell no." makes such a thing watchable. 381532[/snapback] I, Robot was also a better movie. And they got the action hook in fast and sustained it. The violent robots promised by the ad team showed up early and sustained their presence through to the end. The Island had no promises of action in the ads(that I recall) and the first ... third, I believe, of the movie had none. For a nation of explision addicts and adrenaline junkies, it was doomed from the start.

More like a slow news month. I can only pull so many contradictory HG quotes for a while until it gets old. 381093[/snapback] Have you made a hard-hitting documentary about the tuna abduction? People need to know about the plight of the fish head!

It's the same reason why when the Transformers movie came out, people who don't know who all the robots are can see that it was obviously aimed at an audience who were already familiar/attached to/knew who all the characters were, so it is hard for a fan of the franchise to see it from a non-fan perspective as a critic of the movie on it's own merits. They are too busy going: "That looks so cool who cares about details" there are many good points brought up here about why the transformers movie sucks for someone who doesn't know or is not attached to any of the characers in the show: http://members.tripod.com/~repowers/manic/s-movie.html A non fan can see the flaws in a movie that a fan might not be able to. And fans can see flaws that a non-fan can't. Like "THEY KILLED PRIME WTF?!?!?!" Of course, the Transformers TV series wasn't exactly a glorious symbol of all that is good in script-writing either. The series existed to sell toys. The movie existed to sell new toys by "killing" the old ones.

Caught this one as it was leaving theaters(yay cheap tickets). Was an interesting idea, but poorly executed. As you pointed out, it just snaps at the half-way point and becomes a totally diffrent movie. AND CLONES DON'T HAVE MEMORIES! STOP IT, HOLLYWOOD! ... Actually, that point wasn't really dealt with. The only real alternative was clones with a psychic link to their genetic donor, though. And that's not really an improvement. As for why it didn't do well... The fact that it "started slow" undoubtedly drove audiences away. The average moviegoer doesn't want to think. They want an explosion or gunfight in the first 15 minutes, and at regularly-scheduled intervals through the rest of the film. Yes, I have a dim view of the average. So yeah. Good for a rental. But don't buy it.

Because its a challenge getting them out of it? XD 381299[/snapback] Depends how good you are with a blowtorch.

A completely undestandable viewpoint. Honestly, the only one of the Macross arcade games I give any playtime to is the DYRL one.

Wgoops, double-post.

Not as I understand it. What I've heard is it works JUST like modern CSS does. There's X number of decryption keys defined. All manufacturers are issued one. The key has to be on the disk AND player to work. If a device is found to not comply with the Blu-Ray Disk... group-thingie's rules, they can revoke that company's decryption key. Future disks won't contain that key on them, and thus those disks won't work on offending hardware. That's acutally how CSS was cracked. They shipped ... I believe it was a player with both sets of keys in the ROM. Once they had keys, it was easier for the hackers to work out the algorythm. More relvantly, no one's CSS keys were ever revoked. They were THREATENED, but never actualyl revoked. 380852[/snapback] For AACS schemes and HD DVD yes, what you mentioned. BD+ adds more security for Blu Ray which was what Fox really pushed for and got. And BD+ is implemented in Blu Ray movies in which it adds dynamic encryption to prevent what happened with CSS. Blu-ray also adds a ROM mark on production ROM discs to prevent mass piracy. Yes, no one had revocation during the DVD era...this time around, the stakes are a little higher. 380855[/snapback] Ah. Not to put too fine a point on it, but NONE of the things being done are going to actually slow down piracy. Encrypting the data doesn't do jack squat if someone just does a 1:1 copy of the disk. The copy protection on the PS1, Saturn, PS2, GC, and XBox worked because it was a non-standard use of the format(and in some cases a whole new format, sharing only the media layer with conventional DVD-ROMs). So they did things that most copier software wasn't equipped to recognize and most burners weren't equipped to reproduce. The same thing goes for copy-protected audioCDs(which also breaks them in some actual CD players). When you make it part of a comprehensive standard like BluRay and DVD, it ceases to affect piracy, regardless of whether the disk image is stamped onto another disk and sold or passed around "teh intarweb" via BitTorrent. The MPAA isn't actually TRYING to stop piracy. They're trying to place limits on what law-abiding consumers can use their movies for. Cracking CSS didn't matter to pirates. They could, and did, pirate DVDs before the encryption was cracked. It mattered to people that wanted to use the content of their own DVDs. Watching the movies in Linux, editing the video for AMVs, fast-forwarding through the corporate logos before the actual program, stuff like that. Things that were, and still are, legal under US copyright law. Of course, the DMCA adds kinks into things as it makes it illegal to break encryption, even for "fair use."