Originally posted by Locklain

Originally posted by murphys123

[ . . . ]

Mythic and Bioware remain independent EA studios within a larger MMO/RPG group. " 

Hmm, all this sounds like to me is a sugar coated form of assimilation.   If all they are doing is making a new "division" for MMOs and RPGs, why even announce it as it is pretty menial to the common customer.

I imagine that this is just the first step in future reorganization.

On the Warhammer Alliance forums

From Community Coordinator Andy Belford:

"For clarity:

Mythic is not "merging" with Bioware.

Mythic and Bioware remain independent EA studios within a larger MMO/RPG group. "

Originally posted by Waterlily

I really don't get the attraction some people have with Aion, I guess it's a fab and it's "cool" to like Aion. That's how it is in Asia at least. The game itself is terrible imo.

But Waterlily...waterlily...Aion has wings111.

I don't get why some people don't like it when others like something.

Hey, if the game is fun I will play it for sure. But, I have to say that it does look completely horrible even for Beta.

It most have taken you one serious brainstorming session to come up with that snappy little diddy; very creative! I do agree with the sentiment, however.

I can't honestly say that my expectations are very high for the game (despite being a big SG 1 fan), but ranting about a game that is pre-beta with very few details available seems a bit over dramatic. Oh wait, I forgot this is MMORPG.com.

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by jy88902

First of all, what happened in that screenshot wasn't really a soft flirt and some light jokes.
 

Secondly, if the student is under 18 years old (you never mentioned age in your original post), then yes, the teacher will go to prison. If the student is over 18 years old, the teacher/professor will be fired on the spot no questions asked with his/her career on serious jeopardy.

 

I didnt said the student would be a minor too, right?

Anyway, it is pretty normal even a 16 years old students flirt a bit (or at least try) with a  teacher.

And yes, I know if a teacher flirt with a student he/she can have some serious career issues, but what I said is, lets not be hypocrites, this kind of thing happens and it is a human thing as everything related to sexuality.

But please, lets not compare a silly GM and a manipulative player with a teacher and a kid.

 

...

Tell Chris Hansen we said hello when you run into him, Umbral.
 

I am still trying to figure out the whole "it is hard to solo in EQ 2" comment. You are talking about Everquest 2, right?

One can only hope.

He added a great deal to a great show.

Originally posted by demren

People expecting that this will be anything close to Daoc is gonna be even more pissed. :P

Not exactly true. People who get pissed about video games technically don't count because they aren't real people.

Fantastical

The SWG "vets" who post on this site are an amazing bunch. First, they credit their relentless campaigning against SOE with the dismal state of SWG without acknowledging the simple fact that the NGE sucked so people quit playing. The overwhelming majority of those who currently play and who use to play have no idea about their little crusade. Then they proclaim it was their activism that inspired Bioware to create a Star Wars MMO and without them the development would have never begun, and now this. I played SWG pre cu and enjoyed it very much, the sand-box design was amazing, but the game itself was an unbalanced and broken turd that only gained a base due to the communtiy and the freedom the game allowed. So forgive me when I say that I hope Bioware makes a game in which over half of the stuff actually works.  

Originally posted by oblivionate

I would in no way mind CoH 2.

If they can pull off everything they promised for CoH during it's development phase, plus more, and more diversity of missions at launch, I'm all for it.

I agree

Coh developed by Cryptic--CO developed by Cryptic and yet somehow they are similar..hmm

I can't figure it out, but apparently you have broken the code.

Can't wait

Hmm, I really have no idea what to make of this.

Originally posted by Mahni

Originally posted by murphys123

Yes, by voluntary I am implying that the people who participated "chose" to do so. May have been too broad a term and self-selecting may be a better term for it, but I wasn't expecting someone so well-versed to read my point. I have done a fair bit of research in the world of academia and cringe to think what would happen if I ever used data from an internet poll. I guess that is what motivated me to post in the first place.

We are completely on the same page - sorry for nit-picking and sorry for the derail.

No worries, cheers.

Originally posted by Mahni

 

Originally posted by murphys123

Originally posted by Mahni

 

Originally posted by murphys123

Funny, I just commented on this type of polling in another thread. This poll is comprised of a voluntary sample which makes it null and void in the realm of statistics. The numbers are meaningless no matter what they suggest.

Sorry murphys123, but a small nit-picky point: The fact that the sample was "voluntary" has no bearing on the validity of the poll (when was the last time you saw a compulsory poll?).  You may have mean to say that the poll may not be valid because the sample may not be representative.

 

Have you ever taken any form of statistics course in college? This is one of the most basic concepts taught in the subject. The fact that it is voluntary makes it not representitive of the population from which it was sampled. You cannot have a voluntary sample that is representative, so I am not sure what your disagreement is.

It's the word "voluntary" that I'm having an issue with.  If you meant to say that the sample may not be representative because of selection bias because the sample was self-selecting, then I whole-heartedly agree - it's not a *random* sample and is likely to be biased.  It really is a nit-picky point, and largely a semantic one.  There aren't many compulsory samples (U.S. Census gets close), but plenty of ones where participants are randomly sampled *and* voluntarily participate in, with or without compensation.  Replace voluntary with self-selecting, and there is no issue.

 

I've taken a few statistics courses in college, yes.  From basic stats and analytical demography through analysis of variance, regression, bayesian stats, and structural equation modeling.  Though my focus is on factorial designs such as analysis of variance and related models (MANOVA, ANCOVA).  Ph.D. from NYU in Cognitive Psychology with a specialization in Quantitative Psychology.  That means specialization in statistics.  I've taught statistics to undergrads and masters students.  Latest job was statistical analyst and researcher.

I wasn't trying to humble you in any way with my post to you, and I apologize if you took any offense - it was not meant.  I read these forums because I'm an avid gamer, though if you go and look at the first post I ever made to these forums, you might see that it is posts related to statistics that motivate me to chime in.  It's because of my background that I sometimes feel compelled to correct what are often minor issues that are more semantic than anything else.  I agree with your primary concern that the sample may not be representative.

 

Yes, by voluntary I am implying that the people who participated "chose" to do so. May have been too broad a term and self-selecting may be a better term for it, but I wasn't expecting someone so well-versed to read my point. I have done a fair bit of research in the world of academia and cringe to think what would happen if I ever used data from an internet poll. I guess that is what motivated me to post in the first place.

Originally posted by Mahni

 

Originally posted by murphys123

Funny, I just commented on this type of polling in another thread. This poll is comprised of a voluntary sample which makes it null and void in the realm of statistics. The numbers are meaningless no matter what they suggest.

Sorry murphys123, but a small nit-picky point: The fact that the sample was "voluntary" has no bearing on the validity of the poll (when was the last time you saw a compulsory poll?).  You may have mean to say that the poll may not be valid because the sample may not be representative.

 

Have you ever taken any form of statistics course in college? This is one of the most basic concepts taught in the subject. The fact that it is voluntary makes it not representitive of the population from which it was sampled. You cannot have a voluntary sample that is representative, so I am not sure what your disagreement is.