Otanku

**** you Denver. **** you for having a good game the one time that I decide to start my backup defense against you in terms of trying to manufacture points because my roster sucks so bad. **** you mcgahee for actually performing when you were a. questionable and b. projected to do bupkis. **** you brandon lloyd for sucking so much ass this season.that is all.

Oh. hai guyz! Sorry I've been incognito, my October w/ EA was the most brutal month I think I've ever worked in my entire life, but the BF3 launch was so badass. Anyway, sorry for my absence I still love this league and am still technically on pace for my projected wins

well I drafted him so I'm good there. Ok, so I won't start him all year and then he's a development rookie keeper then?

ok so two questions.

1. I have someone on IR. What does that allow me?

2. I have never started Andy Dalton. He's a rookie. Can he be my rookie developer keeper or whatever (never start him all year)?

BWAHAHAHA

so long as my 3-5 wins include ass whoopins over Irish, Dexter and Rock, I"M GOOD BABY!

so is free agency up and running now? I still have a slot left.

today's game I came in last

I'm still planning on playing when the PS3 version comes out! Hopefully there'll still be a nightly group to play with!

Hope y'all have fun! I'll be joining this fun adventure when the PS3 version comes out...

I think I noticed why my test was unusually low based on that specs page:

* On a 64-bit OS, the software will run via WOW64 ( Windows 32-bit On Windows 64-bit ).

My OS is Vista 64-bit, and if they are activating a 32-bit service layer process in order to run the game, that's going to impact how the hardware can run it. I think that's kind of dumb since the 64 bit OS utilizes the true power of the dual core CPU and the 32-bit processes don't.

Looks like I'm gonna have to wait for the PS3 release!

So I guess the only other question I have int hat scenario is: does that mean one set of actual 'gear' is fine, and changing the weapon is what affects job change? I know it was cool seeing different armor vs different mage gear in XI, but the one thing taht was a huge PIA was the storage problems with all that gear.

If you don't have any gear changes, that's a plus in some ways, but then does that mean we'll have a bunch of clones wearing the same "level 30" gear? Oh look, there's the level 30 elves! Oh look, there's the level 50 elves?

I know we could say that about, say a level 30 warrior vs a level 50 warrior, but that was much different than ALL the level 30's in one set of armor.

oh, are they going to re-release the benchmark? Also, they had 2 download areas (nvidia and squenix). I did the squenix one, I'm assuming it didn't matter?

I didn't mind going to the house moogle to chain jobs so much. My prior concern was the game's inability to truly self-level aside from Beast Master (and even then it was a chore due to needing to always enchant a pet), and that hampered interest for me in the end, since playing catch up meant I had to go find random parties just to go play with peeps I really wanted to party with.

I understand the MMO experience is dependent on party play since the point of MMO is to play with others, I just feel there should be a better balance as well, so that certain features or abilities that are experienced at certain level marks can be attained by solo players as well so they don't discourage people from exiting the game prematurely that don't have the patience to see the cooler features with forced party play (e.g. people who didn't want to endure the Valkurn Dunes level grind which couldn't be done without parties just to get to level 30 in order to try out Summoner which is all they would have wanted to play in the first place).

I had to run mine on "low" because my LCD is 1330x738, so 1280x720 is the only one that will fit.

I might try closing every other background app, except wifi and see what happens. I played XI on a laptop and it ran just fine, so I was rather miffed that my score was so low, considering I have a pretty awesome notebook.

I would definitely be up for another NN linkshell. If I end up having to wait until the PS3 version, then hopefully some of you earl adopters will be willing to have a new job to level for the PS3 folks so that way I don't have to worry that I'm 50 levels behind in order to start partying

I'm assuming they will still have job switching capabilities? I always thought the ability to just switch job titles was a great MMO feature vs some others that made you have to create another character to try a different job class.

WOW! This game is so pretty. I'd love to play when this game launches for the PC but I just ran the benchmark and apparently I can't!

I honestly don't understand because I have an XPS notebook and it's only a year old.

My specs:

Intel Core Duo 2.53GHz

4GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 3670 512MB

My score:

863

17000 millisec load time

I guess I have to wait for the PS3 version...

Again, Federer's dominance is something to be appreciated, I haven't said it's not a notable accomplishment, it is. He's the Jim Brown of Tennis as far as comparing how dominant he is in relation to his peers. But what I'm saying is that when you have a significant drop off in your competitors it makes you wonder if maybe part of that reason is because there's not enough talent to provide stiff competition. Pete rose above his peers in a decade where it's indisputed the overall field had proven winners and thus good matchups and so his skins on the wall just carry more weight, IMO.

Federer is just so dominant that tennis holds no interest because I just chalk up another W for him since I don't believe anybody is capable of making him have to think "I could lose to this guy". Only Nadal does that but even then most of that had been confined to one surface for the most part.

One thing I will say in counter response, though, is while it's true that Andre was a great rival for Sampras, Andre didn't really play his best tennis until after Sampras had has most of his success. Around '99 Andre really matured and gained a new focus and actually won the majority of his slams during/after 1999.

 

Essentially, while Sampras' career was starting to wind down, Andre was taking his to another level. One could speculate as to whether or not Sampras would have had quite as much success had Andre approached the game in his earlier years the same way he did in his later years.

 

That's not really true at all. Andre and Sampras are relatively the same age, and Andre won his first major in '92. followed by a US Open in '94. It was Andre's personal problems (drugs, a hated marriage, depression) why he fell off the map and then had a rebirth when Sampras was starting to slide from his peak level of dominance. Had Andre maintained a fiery competitiveness, they would have battled it out the entire decade, IMO, as Andre's resurgance later in his career showed he had a rare talent to be able to win majors at an age when tennis players are usually past their prime.

Besides, my point is that Sampras played when there were other top 10 players who were also champions. Andre, Courier, Becker, Edgerg, Rafter, Kafelnikov and he was consistently better than all of them.

Federer has been playing against... ?? Roddick? Hewett? Ya he beat Sampras in 01 when Sampras was already pretty much getting beat up by players for over a year in majors. His best competition is Nadal, but Nadal can't stay healthy. Had Nadal not been injured in the French last year (?) I'm convinced Federer would not have gotten his Career Grand Slam.

I may be in the minority, but I'm not as impressed with Federer simply because of his dominating record. While his dominance at the top of his sport is noteworthy and worthy of plenty of accolades, my problem is that I think Federer was fortunate to be a dominating player without truly stiff competition to challenge him. It's not that I believe he is truly this much better than everyone else, I more believe that the field is just weaker than it has been historically.

Sampras was more impressive to me because he beat competition that had several players who had Slam titles. He had a true rival in Agassi, and his ability to have a significantly better W-L record than his toughest competitor served as a better measuring stick that he was playing in a strong field where other folks are capable of winning majors.

There has been no challenger to Federer, all of the field is missing guys who can prove they can win a major. The only exception is Nadal, and just as it was looking like Nadal may actually become a legitimate rival and threat to Roger, he is plagued by the injury bug. So that only further validates for me that he played in an era that lacked true challengers for him and why is tournament wins total will probably never be broken.

so what scene(s) are you on now?

True Blood

Mental

So You Think You Can Dance

and a pretty cool new show on USA called Royal Pains

Too bad Nadal didn't get to the Finals, because another Federer v Nadal matchup would have probably been epic here. I gotta say I used to be a huge tennis fan but for me there hasn't been a flamboyant personality to hold my interest consistently. While Federer is a tennis god, I'm just not a fan. I think Nadal holds more potential as a superstar despite Federer having an unbelievable career record.

Also, it's too bad there isn't an American capable of dominating, or at least challenging. My boy from Austin, Andy Roddick, just can't display the consistency needed to win a Grand Slam.

I love the first two movies too, but they're not without their flaws and just because I loved them but that doesn't mean a new generation should be cheated out of getting a brand new vision for their own and only get movies they can barely relate to because its a sequel to a movie that was made before their parents were even born.

jason, I took this comment because I think it strikes to the core of any "reboot". Personally, I'm not a big fan of reboots in general. I think that is typical hollywood not being creative and just rehashing old stuff that worked before. It's part of the big reason I won't see TDK, because that matchup has already been done and I loved Nicholson as Joker. The Ledger "mystique" just wasn't an appeal for me personally. Why does everything have to be remade?

As for the topic of Supes, I think it will always be a challenge to make a really strong movie with a villian who can be embraced as a true challenge. Luthor is great because he's a genius and uses his mind to fight, and in the 2 accepted movie versions where he was the primary baddie, it was of course kryptonite as the ultimate equalizer. Since that's already been done, not sure how many more times Luthor can even BE the primary villian (other than Tank's idea of a Bizarro which I think would be kickass if done right).

But as most of us already know, it is the uniqueness of Superman basically being invincible why a truly formidable baddie is extremely challenging, especially for a big screen effort. Spidey, Batman, and anyone else for that matter are very defeatable characters, but not Supes... Part of the reason I loved Superman II is because he had true rivals that matched his powers. It doesn't matter if it actually came from any actual comic mythos, it was believable for the big screen audience. I would absolutely NOT welcome any superman reboot, and would prefer if someone created an "original" baddie than try to dig into the comic mythos and risk introducing a character that the general public doesn't know. I think it's because Superman is basically a god why the creativity of the villian is truly what will determine the success of the movie.

It's the main reason why I think Superman Returns was somewhat luke-warm: at the end it was Luthor giving him an iceberg sized kryptonite to try to defeat him, and well, frankly the audience just wants more badabing than that when it comes to a comic action story.

basil you trip me out... didn't you just get done in another thread claiming we were past being "just monkies" and could now be "human" and actually be able to "vote" for this financial equality shtick you believe in? But now we're just confused monkies again?

He said no formal charges had been filed, and he declined to identify either the man in custody or the victim, who were among 34 passengers.

ummm, say what?

My online handle for PS3 gaming: Otanku

heh.

Didn't I wager the max when I played Rock? That's how I got to zero.