Forbin_Project

Forum Cartel
  • Posts

    11059
  • Joined

  1. Lot of good looking bugs showed up. I was surprised and pleased I made it as far as I did. Didn't think I stood a chance against the competition.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolarSentai View Post
    I hope you took a recipe for roasted chicken and just replaced "chicken" with "child." Otherwise... remind me never let you babysit. LOL
    Kids meals at my house take on a whole new meaning.
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolarSentai View Post
    Awww, come on - even villains can have a soft spot for children...
    Especially if ya cook them properly.

    Roast Child

    1 whole child
    1/2 cup unsalted butter, softened
    salt and freshly ground black pepper to taste
    1 1/2 quarts turkey stock
    8 cups prepared stuffing


    Directions

    1. Preheat oven to 325 degrees F (165 degrees C). Place rack in the lowest position of the oven.

    2. Remove the childs neck and giblets, rinse the child, and pat dry with paper towels. Place the child, chest side up, on a rack in the roasting pan. Loosely fill the body cavity with stuffing. Rub the skin with the softened butter, and season with salt and pepper. Position an aluminum foil tent over the child.

    3. Place child in the oven, and pour 2 cups beef stock into the bottom of the roasting pan. Baste all over every 30 minutes with the juices on the bottom of the pan. Whenever the drippings evaporate, add stock to moisten them, about 1 to 2 cups at a time. Remove aluminum foil after 2 1/2 hours. Roast until a meat thermometer inserted in the meaty part of the thigh reads 180 degrees F (80 degrees C), about 4 hours.

    4. Transfer the child to a large serving platter, and let it stand for at least 20 to 30 minutes before carving.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quinch View Post
    Actually, the olives in question would have had been put aside from a customer that was in the shop about three years ago and you put them aside in case he comes back sometime, anytime.
    In that case they shouldn't be olives. It should be Twinkies cuz you know they last forever.
  5. Damn. I hate to admit this but I'm on the fence on this one. On one hand I'm all in favor of encouraging charity but I also agree with Bill.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by DarkSideLeague View Post
    For something that's been broken 7 weeks and makes playing a mastermind a single player cat herder? I think not.
    I'm betting if you bothered to ask around on the forums you'd find there's a lot more bugs that are more important than that little Mastermind bug that have been broken for a lot longer than a measley 7 weeks.

    As Xzero45 has advised, patience.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by tanstaafl View Post
    Its happened to me. (A character offline longer than the game itself has been around).
    I've also seen a small handful of 'gosh look at this' threads on it in forums.
    I've also seen a few where the time offline wasn't longer than the game has been around, but supposedly offline before the power sets the character uses were added to the game.
  8. Forbin_Project

    merch please

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blue Rabbit View Post
    Yes... good luck with that.
    /This.
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    That is why the suggestion included an activity check.

    You honestly can't tell me that there isn't a record of when the character or account has been last logged into. Especially since I can simply look at a SG roster and see characters that have 1,500+ days since their last on date. After 3+ years (approximately 1,100 days), it shouldn't be an issue if the usage rights expires so that another player can use it.
    Just like to point out that the way the system records the dates since last logged in has always been a little wonky. On more than one occasion I've seen it claim characters have been offline longer than the game existed. So before I'd put any trust in it I'd want the devs to make damn sure it's working correctly.
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by memphis_bill View Post
    post-freedom, there are no "trial" accounts.

    /qfe


    what the heck? why are my capital letters changing to lowercase?
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    Only problem here is that I didn't start the 100k level 50s comment, Forbin did:

    I was being generous in using peak subscription numbers in 2006, around 200k subscribers (info source here: http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/Charts/Subs-2.png ). If I were to use 2008-2009 numbers, the subscriber numbers at the time were 100k-150k, bringing the average number of 50s per account to 1 per subscriber - just under 1 per subscriber instead of 1 per two subscribers.

    Thanks for improving my point.


    Hey, I was only wrong in being more generous than I should have.

    Edit:
    And the last time NCsoft published CoH subscription numbers (Q3 2008 Report), the monthly access for September 2008 was 124,939.

    If your point was that the more players there were that had multiple level 50's on their accounts then there were even more players without any level 50's on their accounts. Then glad to help.

    And at no time did the company ever say that the level 50's were only on active accounts, so we couldn't rely on active subscriptions as being an
    accurate variable.

    I don't recall the company ever stating the actual number of accounts (active and inactive) that have been created over the years.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by MisterMagpie View Post
    Actually, shouldn't it be Heracles? Hercules was a hearth god, I think.

    disclaimer: Just being a pedant. It's a very nice character.

    Oh man I seem to recall reading a paperback book on Greek mythology way back in high school that spelled it Herakles.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Agent White View Post
    Yeah I'm hoping I23. I've been getting antsy for the new shinies.
    <looks at avatar>

    Those aren't ants your feeling they are fleas. It's time for your monthly flea bath.
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Texas Justice View Post
    My signature that Wendy was referencing is a paraphrase of something a game developer used to say around the office. Yes, there are more situations than just the two in the signature, but he didn't need to mention all of those other things to make his point.

    Since I never could find the chat logs where I was told this line (it was said in a global channel by someone that worked with the game developer), I don't put it in quotes or attribute it to that game developer.

    Also, if I were doing it as a quote I'd have asked his permission first. It's the polite thing to do since it wasn't a statement made in an interview, on a forum discussion or similar.

    Without his permission, I won't even give his name. Similarly, without the permission of the person that told me I won't give their name either.

    EDIT: I've been asked a few times about the signature but have never told where it came from in full. This is the closest I've come and likely the closest I'll ever come to telling the entire story.
    It's a variation of another quote (or vice versa) that was going around a while back that went, If the devs gave the players their weight in gold there'd be people complaining they weren't given a wheelbarrow.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wicked_Wendy View Post
    If the Devs handed out stacks of 20 dollar bills to players half would complain because the serial numbers were non sequencial and the other half would complain they were not random enough.
    You are forgetting the other factions of players Wendy.

    There will be some complaining that they want the new style twenties, and the ones that want the old style twenties.

    Some will be mad they got brand new bills that tend to stick together, while others won't want used bills.

    Then there will be the ones that are mad they didn't get any twenties with 5 nine's in the serial number.

    And the ones that wanted fifties or hundreds cuz stacks of twenties are too bulky/heavy to carry around.

    Others will be complaining they didn't give out smaller denominations.

    And we can't forget the ones that will be mad they didn't give out Pesos, Pounds, Yen, Francs, Deutchmarks, Rubles, Euros.

    Someone will threaten to sue, and another will make a bizarre analogy how being given free currency is like giving a starving man moldy, rotten insect infested food.


    And you and I will sit and laugh at the bizarre complaints.
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
    Frankly, he's guessing and going by "I think I remember."

    So's the mention of the article, unless it can be found, as I don't remember that number being that low... then again, I don't remember that number, period.

    Go forth and search for said article, that's my suggestion.
    It used to be linked in a thread discussing it, but it was long lost in the forum switchover.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazey View Post
    Communication isn't only on the shoulders of the person making the statement, it's also on the shoulders of the people interpreting the statement.

    If you read a statement and find it to be absurd, rather than just take it based on your original interpretation, it's a good idea to see if it's possible to reinterpret the statement in a way that makes more sense.
    And if you read my post where I quoted PRAF68 I did ask and he responded.

    Then the johnny-come-lately's popped in with their own misinterpretations of what I was talking to PRAF68 about, to which I explained my interpretation of the original post in question.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    Doesn't solve the issue of there was 100,000 level 50s vs 200,000 accounts. I did not say 100,000 accounts had 100,000 level 50s, only that there was a level 50 for every 2 accounts. Obviously the distribution wasn't every other account having a level 50, and it would take a elementary student to figure that out.

    I'll point out that it is a very common way of discussing statistical distribution.

    Edit:
    Or do you really believe that there were 2.67 persons per household in 1994 (http://www.census.gov/population/www...ile/hhfam.html)? My saying 1 in 2 accounts is a statistical observation, not me claiming that every other account had a level 50. To think that what I said was that every 2nd account had a level 50 is an epic failure to read.
    We all know you were wrong, but that's okay Snow, we still love you.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Electric-Knight View Post
    Hehe, Forbin, you're suffering a bit of reading comprehension there. No worries, we all make mistakes... even drunken squirrels.

    As you quoted, he said,

    "it was a very obscure alternative name for an ogre before Tolkien revived it"
    That "before" that you are so confused about is not about Blizzard and WoW being before Tolkien... It is about the word being obscure before Tolkien brought it into the somewhat common vernacular.

    All this said... I don't find the inclusion of WoW to really have been worth any of this as I don't think there was any question about the validity of using the word "orc"... but they didn't say what you thought they said.

    I hope that made sense!
    I respectfully disagree. The only way I can see drawing your conclusion from what the person I quoted posted would be to ignore the first part of his sentence which you edited out to make it sound as if he said something else. I'll quote it again in it's complete format.

    Quote:
    The only reason WoW can have orcs is because it was a very obscure alternative name for an ogre before Tolkien revived it.
    Since the topic of this thread is copyright violations, that sentence looks likes it's implying Blizzard got to use the term "orcs" because they used it before Tolkien got the copyright on it.

    If the person I quoted didn't mean to imply that then he should have worded his post more carefully.
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by seebs View Post
    I feel obliged to point out:

    Names are not copyrightable, let alone copyrighted. Characters can enjoy copyright protection in some circumstances, though the exact boundaries vary widely from one court to another. Names can in some cases be trademarked.
    Doesn't matter because NCSofts genericing policy covers both copyright and trademark violations.

    Quote:
    8. PROHIBITED AND IRREPARABLY HARMFUL ACTIVITIES CONCERNING NCSOFT

    You acknowledge that You may not, without signed written consent from a legally authorized representative of NCsoft, do any of the following:


    (a) Misappropriate, violate or infringe any third-party IP right;

    It doesn't specify one or the other.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Traska View Post
    And none of them invented the term Orc. It's Old English (originally orke), and it means ogre or giant. Which is why, yes, Tolkien revived it.
    Way to not pay attention. That whistling sound you are hearing was the point going over your head.

    Tolkien did not revive the usage of the term Orcs after Blizzard used it in it's games as the person I quoted implied.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU View Post
    As already pointed out, a name from mythology is not copywrited. The only reason WoW can have orcs is because it was a very obscure alternative name for an ogre before Tolkien revived it.
    Tolkiens "revival" of the word predates the very existence of Blizzard Entertainment who created the Warcraft games in question by 40 years.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    Even back in 2005 there were a lot of people with 10+ level 50s.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    So 100,000 characters for approximately 200,000 accounts (at the time). Are you really saying that one 50 for every 2 accounts is a "very small portion"?
    Anyone else notice how Snow went from arguing lot's of players had 10+ level 50's to one level 50 for every 2 accounts?

    What suddenly happened to the players that had 10+ 50's? There's no argument that they existed back then.

    See here' the thing. The devs told us the number of characters that made it to level 50 at that time. So the more 50's on a single account means it's mathmatically impossible for there to have been a single 50 for every two accounts.



    So let's say for example if 5,000 players had 10 level 50's at that time then that group would have possessed 50,000 of the 100,000 level 50's that existed.



    So if there were 200,000 accounts created at that time, that would mean half the level 50's created, were "owned" by approimately 2.5% of the playerbase. (Where's Arcanaville to do math when we need her?)



    But again that's just an example. We'd need to see the devs datamining to determine the exact amounts.
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blue Rabbit View Post
    I had my Perky Nipples genericed. And yes, I'm still mad about it. It was an Ice/Kin corruptor which is now named Mercury Tundra.
    They weren't just genericed, they were remved from the costume creator as well.
  24. Quote:
    Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU View Post
    I mentioned WoW because it's the most well known current use of Orcs.
    Orcs have been well known fantasy staple by the general public long before WoW existed, from their being used in LOTR, D&D, Games Workshop, an god knows how many other works.
  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    It took me around 500 hours to get to 50 back in Issue 5-7. Not exactly hard. Time consuming, yes, but not hard. Even back in 2005 there were a lot of people with 10+ level 50s. Kheldians weren't exactly hard to find. Even in the first month of Issue 7 VEATs were around.
    It took me until I8 to get 1 character to level 50. Most players back then weren't metagamers with stables of level 50 characters. The dev themselves said sometime around 2008-2009 in an article that only 100,000 or so characters reached level 50 since the game had launched. So at the time the name script had first been run the number of players with 50's was a very small portion of the playerbase.