N4G - Capcom Reveal

As much has I hate this move, it may actually be a smart move for Microsoft. It's possible they're going to sell alot more X360's in Japan now.

I've got 45 PS3 games and 18 PSN game and one 360 game.

I'm also so compulsive that for this generation I've been plotting each purchase into a table in Excel along with purchase prices, regular prices, dates, store locations and calculated the total cost/savings and average cost/savings.

Wierd... I know:?

Just beat Demons Souls yesterday. I finally found a game to pass Morrowind as my favorite game of all time. Just started my second playthroughApocalypse324

Demon's Souls NG+ is when the REAL game begins. The first playthrough was a warm-up. NG+ is where you take all you've learned and memorized and put it to the test. I wish you the best my friend.

How much would it suck if that thing YLOD, you sent it in and they send you back a refurb 40GB?

EDIT: Scratch that, Lifetime Warrenty.

Why accept it?scorch-62

This is the only response necessary to TC's question. We aren't going to accept something unless there's sound reason to.

The one (and afaik only) thing I like about scientology, is that it has that name. I could see the label "Scientology" being applied by the fundies to scientists and science advocates out there as sort of a religion.

"SEE! Their religion is scientology and they worship SCIENCE and DARWIN!!" - crazed/every-other fundie.

Then again, the title "scientology" is a bit deceiving in that someone who may not be that informed about it might give it a moments thought (which is too long) because of the root word "science" sitting right there.

It's a win/lose of sorts.

I don't know about anyone else, but I found the Metal Gear Rex v. Metal Gear Ray battle pretty ridiculous.

Ridiculously awesome.

[QUOTE="SnakeBite27"]

If I could create my own religion, I'd make myself a mesiah/savior and if people believed that I was a mesiah/savior without solid evidence, they'd go to hell.

Also, if they believed other people were mesiahs/saviors without solid evidence, they'd go to hell.

Also, if people withheld belief until solid evidence was presented, they go to heaven.

Also also, heaven and hell would be an eternal sleep, except hell would be a sleepier sleep (which is bad).

(no, not really)

Snipes_2

That kind of sounds like a Tweaking of Atheism.

It is, except what I've written involves belief by means of a scare tactic. Which I am against in all cases, and not something I would really do if the option was given. I much prefer reasoned logic over scare tactics.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="howlrunner13"]

There is a major difference there. A clone is a genetic identical to the original, but it has its own mind and thoughts. Through teleportation it is the same person that comes out that went in. Not to mention that with clones you are creating a seperate organism while in teleportation the original being itself is broken down and reassambled.

Teleportation would not be murder. Subjects are not unwillingly being teleported, and even if they were, they end up fine on the other end in a few seconds.

howlrunner13

You can't establish that it is the "same person" who emerges in a different location. How could you establish that the two are identical?

However, we CAN establish that the original person died. We know that the person died, because the creator of the teleporter explains how it works "first, my machine ripped him apart atom-by-atom."

I think memories would be a big indicator. Then again that would only show that the person that came out of the teleporter is identical to the original person, not that it is the original person. But no one would know because it would be an exact copy.

Also I think it's presumptuous to assume that we know how teleportation will work.

Agreed. That's what makes this discussion moot. There are plenty of good ideas and possible definitions, but few/none at the moment that would even be plausible. BUT, a fun discussion nonetheless.

[QUOTE="SnakeBite27"]

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

Teleportation DOES kill the "original".

Teleportation on a macroscopic scale is also probably IMPOSSIBLE, so we'll never have to worry about it. But if it were possible, the only way it could be done is by killing the "original" person.

howlrunner13

I agree with this.

If cloning someone and then killing the clone is murder, then teleportation is just creating a clone some distance away while at the same time destroys the original being.

There is a major difference there. A clone is a genetic identical to the original, but it has its own mind and thoughts. Through teleportation it is the same person that comes out that went in. Not to mention that with clones you are creating a seperate organism while in teleportation the original being itself is broken down and reassambled.

Teleportation would not be murder. Subjects are not unwillingly being teleported, and even if they were, they end up fine on the other end in a few seconds.

You make good points and I'm not sure if I can argue this point but, I might make the point that the act of 'breaking down' a person, true while the act is volentary, I think it still may be a form of killing someone and maybe reviving them somewhere else.