Thursday Next

What's with all the hate for Chocobo music? Don't get me wrong, that metal remix was useless, but I like the Chocobo hook.

Maybe you are the same person, but just didn't know it till now?

I am Legend the book? Cos that Will Smith film got it very wrong.

There's always Hitman for your stealth action. Or Assassin's Creed if you prefer hiding in plain sight. I'm pretty excited for Rising. It's a spin off so I don't mind that it's a different genre. I enjoyed Dirge of Cerberus and that's about as far from an FF title as you can get.

A bear there was, A bear, A BEAR! All black and brown, And covered with hair!

Sort of Infamous 2 spoiler.... Not sure if I need to spoiler it or not... but I hate getting bleated at for this stuff, so there ya go. EDIT: Also, mushroom zombies made me think "Firewalker".

I got it. I just wasn't sure exactly what you were asking. It also was not your best work. @Ethan I expected that to be the case. Though it has happened in the UK recently.

And I totally agree (and was pretty unequivocal about my opinion earlier) that this carpet bomb emailing is a deplorable practice. However there's an old saying that goes: If someone does something that is perceived as unjust, you doing something else that is generally regarded as bad behaviour neither repairs their wrongdoing nor absolves you of your own misdeeds.

Do you mean are they allowed to change parties?

Exactly. I can get behind pirating a game for demoing purposes, but playing the game, deciding to buy it and then changing your mind after a scare-tactic? People are supposed to believe your self-righteous reasons after that? You're implying that he's fibbing to get games for free. While I do not like it when someone decides to play through a game to completion and then not pay the creator, Johnny's hardly the kind of person that would lie to make his actions appear to be justified. He may do something that I don't like, but he's not going to be dishonest about it. Not accusing Johnny of dishonesty (beyond dishonestly acquiring a copy of the game of course...). It's you who is inferring that. I'm just that his argument that it is a stand against tyranny appears somewhat undermined by the fact that he benefits from his protest. Going for a somewhat clumsy analogy, if you turn up to an anti-fur protest wearing a mink coat you aren't going to get away with telling people that it is ok cos it's freezing out and you stole it from the local mink coat shop because you hate how evil they are... It's also a bit odd to get up in arms about a company who made a game that you pirated sending out letters to people who they suspect of pirating the game. I mean you can't exactly say that they are way off the mark in thinking that some people may have pirated the game can you?

True enough. Though I did find it a little more intuitive than the DS3.

I suppose it is a somewhat different take given that we are post outbreak and into the last survivors bit of the zom-pocalypse. Maybe that will give it a fresher feel? Dead Rising 2 is in a similar post Zombie state, but they have the Zombies under control to an extent. I'm still waiting for someone to do a Zombie game with an I am Legend twist. Where you start off defending humanity against the infected hordes and end up (Spoilered in case someone has not read the I am Legend and wants to without it being spoiled. Even if it is totally in Rosebud / Aeris territory by now.)

Resident Evil 5 is Move compatible and a great fit (Resi 4 Wii being the daddy of that one). Heavy Rain is super with it too. I've not tried Resistance 3 yet, but I intend to have a go with Infamous this week.

@Johnny: The reason people are taking issue with you is because you say that you disagree with the practices that the company engage in, but you still use their products. If you're going to make a moral stand against a company's practices then you ought to carry that through and boycott their products altogether. Personally, I simply do not get this concept that you have a right (or as it seems sometimes a duty) to consume everything that every developer puts out there. Would it have been so difficult to say "These guys suck, they and their products can all go to hell."? It would make your argument seem more like righteous indignation and less like jumping on the first flimsy reason you find to get an already reasonably priced title for free.

Jesus.. Is Alton Brown related to Emmett L?

Combine one of these... http://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/hasselback-potato-slicer/ With one of these... http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B001CDLL7K/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_3?pf_rd_p=103612307&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000TAPCEA&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=1JQXPG3VYN5XY8MGCCD2 And I will make Hasselhoff potatoes all day long.

Really? The general rule in the UK is that the loser pays.

Forget that. There is more to life than cutting almost all the way through a potato. Unless there is a "hasselbacker" machine, these things can piss off to the same place as cutting radishes to look like flowers.

I don't see how asking for €911 ($1219) for a single game is reasonable at all. Just because they won't get everyone doesn't suddenly make the remaining people responsible for extra damages. That's probably to cover damages and legal fees. Corrupt lawyers who like to make a living by scamming innocent people don't exactly come cheap.

It should of course be known as, "The Primary Gifting Period" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2hBZcQiQek#t=6m20s

You rang? I am in fact, totally against this crap. If you can prove that the person has an illegal copy of your game (which is not a back up), then fine, take them to court and get your money. Scumbags like ACS:Law http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12253746 are no different to the parasites that call you up about "your recent accident" and "your mis-sold ppi". They are easily as bad, if not worse than the pirates they claim to be chasing.

Can a candidate disagree with a personal belief and still uphold others' rights to hold those beliefs? I like to think an ideal champion of human rights would campaign his/her heart out to defend the people's liberty to live their own lives, regardless of his/her own personal opinion on those choices. Ok, I think I wasn't clear in what I meant there. No candidate would campaign for a policy that they don't think is right. If Obama campaigns to remove the restrictions on gay marriage and so forth, it's because he disagrees with restricting the right to choose who we marry, not because he thinks that gay marriages are fricking awesome. It seems from his campaigning in support of removing the restrictions that his personal belief is that people should have the right to choose who they marry, even if they don't choose what he would, Bachman (based on the video) believes that you do not have the right to choose who you marry, you just have a choice of marry the opposite sex, or don't get married.

The problem is they're already regulating. You need an Obama to de-regulate them. If Obama were too "butt out" then nothing would change. Which is not what the LGBT community wants. Besides which all policies centre around the personal belief of whoever is in power. No leader would ever campaign for a cause that they fundamentally disagree with. It's not so much that Obama is LGBT friendly, rather that he is not LGBT unfriendly.

At least no one will need to ask what her husband does.