Or you know...add elites to multiplayer.

I don't really think it would fit unless there were playable elites in the campaign, which, given the nature of Locke's associates from the trailer, there very well may be.

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 30, 2015, 10:49:40 AM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 30, 2015, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 30, 2015, 10:35:14 AM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 30, 2015, 10:30:14 AM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 30, 2015, 09:49:56 AM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 30, 2015, 08:42:50 AM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 29, 2015, 10:52:26 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 29, 2015, 09:48:56 PM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 29, 2015, 09:45:31 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 29, 2015, 09:42:18 PM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 29, 2015, 09:40:56 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 29, 2015, 09:27:20 PM

Quote from: Sᴏʟ Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ on June 29, 2015, 09:16:46 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on June 29, 2015, 08:54:01 PM

The North wasn't some crystal clear shining beacon of moral light sure, I agree, but the state rights the South wanted to cling on to was the right to own slaves and traffic humans.

You are a shining fuckin' beacon of swallowing whatever you're told.

Abolition WAS NOT going to happen by the end of the 1860s in the united states.
There was nowhere near enough support for the movement.

The only reason it did is because Lincoln used the war that the Union started and the deaths of people's sons that were his fault as a way to demonise the south, and he wanted to cripple them economically and made the emancipation proclimation. He basically made people put five and three together like they were two and two and people still buy into it to this day.

Is slavery an evil thing that still goes on?
Yes.

Was it the MAJOR FUCKING PROBLEM that was causing our national government not to function AT ALL in the 1850s?

No.

That was an abhorrent and sudden increase in federal power that most states weren't ready for, and Lincoln was literally a dictator, and only made matters worse. The country was always before that, a much looser gathering of states than it is today, and I'm not saying that the current system is a bad one, I'm saying that the country was just not ready for it, and it was going to cause the ultimate failure of the nation.

Read a god damned book.

I want slavery apologists to leave.

Whatever the implications of the Confederate flag are is the by the bye, and is clearly something subjective that we all disagree on.

Slavery however, is demonstrably a lot less divisive.

You have literally just tried to justify the South's "right" to own people simply because it would cause economic ramifications to the nation. I want you to acknowledge this. Whatever the North's intentions were, it's irrelevant. Slavery was abolished, and the South, on aggregate, didn't want it to happen because the economy and political stability was more important than human liberty. That's morally, and objectively wrong. No two ways about it.

>"btu u should jus read a book"
>"muh state rights"

This kind of shit is precisely why people construe Southern pride and Southern culture with racism.

Did I not specifically state that slavery was evil in my post?

And you were right, telling you to read a book was the wrong response, because most of the books you might read are the very sources of your misinformation.

Its classic changing history, and because of it nobody knows why the civil war started.

But no, go on about how I'm a slavery apologist.

What about the South's attempt at secession wasn't to do with slavery? Please, elaborate without referring to state rights.

Well, the aboltion movement, (though much smaller than many are led to believe) certainly didn't help in the retention of southern states, but its ludicrous for you to ask me to tell you why something happened without reffering to the core causes of that event.

It's ludicrous to require you demonstrate your assertions? Are you deliberately attempting to be obtuse?

It's a simple yes or no question. Was the South's attempted secession to do with slavery or not?

Well its yes and no.
It didn't happen because of slavery, but slavery affected the way it happened.

You can't discredit all of someone's problems just because they were wrong about one thing, and then blow up the situation to make it seem like that's the only thing they were upset about, when really it was lesser because it wasn't as big of a problem to them as you're trying to make it out to be.

The question you are trying to ask is: would the southern states have tried to secede if slavery had been abolished?

The answer is yes.

However before the war and propaganda, slavery was nowhere near being abolished, it would have taken a decade or longer after it actually happened without that war.

So the fear of the abolition of slavery was not something to secede over in the year 1860, but it was something they would have seceded over if the final action had ever been taken or neared approval. Which it eventually would have, but at that point, who can say what would have happened?

Even the south would have changed in those fifteen years, and with the political stranglehold they were getting under, they probably would've reach forum adapted. Nobody can really say.

What matters is that they seceded, because they had lost a lot of state power that had been something they enjoyed historically, and while a result of the stranglehold would have been making the abolition of slavery easier when the time came for it, the immediate effect was that state legislators felt useless and the people felt voiceless, which is the reason the US declared independence in the first place.

And the final straw was when they actually elected a dictator president.

So yes then, the South did indeed try to secede because they were afraid they were going to lose their slaves, thank you for clarifying.

I'm not asking for the moral positioning of the North and whether they were a political stranglehold on the South or not, that's irrelevant. If you want to talk about the totalitarian behavior of the Union that's for another discussion.

That's not what I said and it's not true, but I can't stop you from being delusional if you want to be.

I've done everything I can to point out to you that they version of history you're subscribed to is heavily revised, but if you're comfortable with what you're told and don't have any interest in accuracy, then you can go on being sheeple.

You literally just told me the South wanted to secede because they got bootytickled over the fact they weren't going to have slaves anymore. I'm not sure what else to say to you.

The fact that the North was expansionary, or whatever you think the North wanted to accomplish is irrelevant, but I'm willing to entertain a separate discussion on that issue. The fact of the matter is the South wanted to secede to continue owning slaves. End of.

I didn't say any of that.

You're just terrible at paying attention.

Explain how one long winded and apologetic post trying to justify "fuck you, don't take my right to own slaves" translates to me not paying attention.

That's uh... The reason they were long winded.

Because I spent the last day explaining and a half explaining exactly why slavery was not the underlying cause of southern secession.

There's explaining something which I asked you specifically to explain (which you haven't at all done) and then trying to tenuously justify something which isn't ethically or objectively justifiable. You have literally just danced round my question this entire discussion and then gave some half assed answer as to why the South was entitled to own slaves.

I think I objectively stated several times that slavery is evil.
So I'm not sure where you're getting any of this, but I guess I'll have to go to school and get a degree in psychology to understand the logical pathways of an autistic child, then I will come back and discuss things with you in a manner you can understand.

I didn't even make it through the first page.

I just don't feel as objectively about these questions as I used to : /

I thought Velox was really Cerulean on b.net too?
Like, wasn't this common knowledge?

Quote from: SecondClass on July 02, 2015, 02:06:58 AM

Quote from: Sandtrap on July 02, 2015, 02:04:13 AM

Not sure. By all rights, I should get some sleep. I'm pushing myself a little much these days.

But. I get strange at night. Silence does me no good on my own. I guess you could say that I'm staying up in some hopefull fashion that perhaps, something will happen.

What do you think is going to happen...?

Does your town have a downtown? You could go hang out there

Oh. No. I don't think anything will happen, frankly. I can hope though. Just, something, anything really. Keep in mind. When I say town, it's actually a hamlet.

800 people. If I went for a walk round town I'd probably be the only soul awake in town. I can't though. There's too much smoke outside. I have to be careful of my lungs.

I never realized 800 people lived in Canada.

That's a lot ore than I thought.

You ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Quote from: 🍄Tryptameme🍄 on July 01, 2015, 10:10:39 AM

Why does there always have to be a race issue with everything when Obama is involved?

Because racism is still a thing in our country, and his race is the most distinguishing thing between he and his predecessors. Again, I'm not saying it IS racism, but damn it sure seems like it.

Wait, isn't it more racist to bring up his race when nobody else has?

If you believe that the color of a person's skin is a distinguishable trait, then aren't you the one with the racially charged mindset?

Sennheiser HD 800s.

The very best money can buy.
I personally use a set of HD 419s, and I wouldn't go with any brand other than Sennheiser if I was looking for audio quality.

I would sexually assault tru anyway, because that boypussy is worth my life.

Other than that, I would ask him for a lot of personal information that would help me stalk him and force him to fall in love with me.

Quote from: kill yourself on July 01, 2015, 11:08:43 AM

Quote from: SuperIrish on July 01, 2015, 10:57:59 AM

Fallout 3

[X] Fallout3.esm
[X] Anchorage.esm
[X] ThePitt.esm
[X] BrokenSteel.esm
[X] PointLookout.esm
[X] Zeta.esm
[X] Unofficial Fallout 3 Patch.esm
[X] Fellout-Full.esp
[X] Fellout-pipboylight.esp
[X] Fellout-BrokenSteel.esp
[X] Fellout-Anchorage.esp
[X] Fellout-Zeta.esp
[X] Fellout-PointLookout.esp
[X] GNR Enhanced.esp

FalloutNV

[X] TribalPack.esm
[X] MercenaryPack.esm
[X] ClassicPack.esm
[X] CaravanPack.esm
[X] FalloutNV.esm
[X] DeadMoney.esm
[X] HonestHearts.esm
[X] OldWorldBlues.esm
[X] LonesomeRoad.esm
[X] GunRunnersArsenal.esm
[X] YUP - Base Game + All DLC.esm
[X] YUP - NPC Fixes (Base Game + All DLC).esp
[X] FNV Realistic Wasteland Lighting - Full.esp
(Also used to have CONELRAD radio in here but it fucked up some things and had to be removed)

Geez, Now I feel bad about mine

What are you gonna do about Fallout 4? Get a more powerful computer or get an Xbone?

Eh, I'm pretty happy with my barebones modding approach for Fallout, but for Fallout 4 I'll be probs getting a PS4 to handle it.

Even though modding will probably not come to ps4 for a long time and the modding community will likely not support it?

It's going to be a lot easier to convert PC mods for Xbox than for PS4, and the entirety of the existeng modding community is pretty much either PC master race circlejerkers, or modded save file conversions for 360.

After reading das' list I just might start using reddit.

Quote from: eggsalad on July 01, 2015, 11:11:09 AM

Quote from: Casper on July 01, 2015, 11:08:13 AM

Quote from: eggsalad on July 01, 2015, 11:07:10 AM

Quote from: Casper on July 01, 2015, 11:04:45 AM

Just.. sit.

Push it down.
Unless it touches the bowl... eugh

but that burns my urethra

Then chop it off!

Just because that works for you...

>tfw daz is lurking this thread hard right now.

Nobody cares. America's 2015th birthday is this Saturday.

Ah yes, the year 2015 America's Da'best

Theodore Roosevelt: All around badass with a strong sense of morality, and who overcame his weaknesses in order to better himself.

What?

Teddy Roosevelt was an idealist who made a rustic public image for himself in order to save face after a series of personal disasters, and was installed as vice president by a select group of powerful men because they needed him to go away and at the time, becoming vice president was usually the end of your pineapple.

I wont refute the badass part but he certainly didn't have overcome any weaknesses, he outright failed at life and abandoned his goals to go in a radically different direction.