Harwood Butcher
-
Posts
3910 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Harwood Butcher
-
-
That isn't karma, buddy..... Fate and destiny are not directly related to karma.
Check the dictionary CHIEF.
-
These are pretty nice screen shots. I especially like this one.
-
Well I sort of forgot about this topic, but I'm going to re-start it. So if anyone wants a GTAIV signature, just let me know.
Here's a very basic sig that someone might enjoy.
PS: Sorry for missing your request bossman.
-
Sorry if this already came up before...hell I've probably brought this up before, but does anyone think there will be another Vice City and San Andreas game under the new GTAIV series? Or do you think this Liberty City revisit is just a one time thing this time around?
You could also give ideas of where you think the next GTA will be...might be a bit to early since GTAIV isn't even out yet, but hell, why not.
If there is a topic already like this...just delete this one (not close...DELETE)
-
Do any of you with 360s think I should get a 360 just for the downloadable content for GTAIV? I'll eventually get other games for the 360, but I initially just want it so I could get that downloadable content. Along with this, if I do get one, which one should I get?
-
I used to just free roam and don't bother with main story until about a year later, but I just go right into the missions. I never use Taxi missions cause you're always rushed with it.
Taxi missions are usually easy for me, just tedious. I can't wait to find out what kind of side missions they'll have this time. I'm hoping for main missions type side missions. That'd be cool.
-
New game smell pwns new car smell.
Meh, probably the first few missions, then go check something out that i noticed in a mission, snap some necks, kick some asses... Push some bodies off high ledges... then, test out just how good the physics are with a good old fashioned round of shin ramming. (Speeding car + pedestrians shins = hours of fun)
Oh, and beat someone off their bike and do a burnout on top of them
But that sort of ruins the fun of seeing all of that for the first time in missions. It seems more fun when you see new stuff happen for the first time in missions, when they're usually at their best.
But hell, do whatever you want.
-
If it's possible I'd like 2 avatars, the 2nd I'll come to after this paragraph, made of pics from the official GTA 4 boxart, an animated one - GIF, sort of like the one OGTAM has, and a sig from the boxart, with the same font from my current sig in one of the bottom corners.
If you wanted one like mine...why didn't you just ask?
-
I'm probably going to do all the main missions first. They always seem to be more fun when I'm in same boat as the main character, not knowing where anything really is. I do free roam afterwards so I have something to do after the main missions.
Is anyone going to go straight to online multiplayer, if there is any, before you beat the main missions?
-
I won't know what missions are for awhile.
I don't follow. Are you talking about how we could do multiple missions at one time?
-
I like the black and orange one...school colors.
-
Back in 2004 astronomers thought that an asteroid, Asteroid 2004 MN4, would hit into the earth. If it were to hit land mass, it would devistate an area the size of texas and if water, it would cause widespread tsunamis. Currently astronomers believe that it will simply pass the earth scarily close.
The asteroid is 320 meters wide, which is roughly 1050 feet. This asteroid will come within 18,600 miles above the ground, which is 4,000 miles below telescopes and it will be viewable to those in Europe, Asia and Africa. Occurances of asteroids coming this close to earth are at 1000-year intervals. So this is pretty rare.
I was just wondering what some of you think of this. It's not really news...just for discussion.
Since this only happens every 1,000 years...I'm probably going to be in Europe, Asia or Africa to see this.
-
Just wondering...
I'm personally going to take my time with GTAIV. I was one of the first to beat VCS and I didn't get to really enjoy the game all that much because of that.
-
Ahh, so if you went and killed yourself at that time, it wouldn't be able to happen because you would already be dead..
That's what a lot of people say, but I see that as the easy way out. It's very possible that that's what would happen, but I think since the person that traveled into the past to kill their past self wasn't able to possibly exist at that point in time, that they would live until the point they could exist, which at that point they would...die.
Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say?
-
My ps3 name is smothboy... add me please.
Will do.
Excelent news PS3 beated the wii in japan....
-
So you believe that if I traveled into the past and killed my past self that I would have no choice but to wait until the exact moment in time where I last traveled back in time to travel back again to kill my past self that went back in the first place....I don't understand your logic. I would assume that's the same as believing in karma.
How does that line that is messing with my half-tired brain have any relation or similarities to karma, at all?
Because he was saying that you, the one that killed your past self, would have to live until that same point in time to go back and kill your new past self. That would mean it was your fate or destiny to do that again, in other words karma.
-
Is Resistance's online any good? I'd play it with you guys if we made a huge TGTAP party or something. I don't have a microphone for my PS3 though...
actually, we should do it on Rainbow six: vegas
my psn name is GTAGanxtaize2000, please add it
EDIT: sorry for double post. You're probably going to tell me that i should've used the 'edit' button, but it's too late now.
There are more people on here with Resistance than with Rainbow Six: Vegas. You're name has been added to the list.
-
There's already a topic for this here.
-
You know, talking about killing yourself in the past. (Got confused when Gerard started talking, so I'll start here)
Anyway, what I think is that if you kill yourself in the past, you de-materialise, nothing with you in it, you didn't exist, that would cause a downward slope in time to an alternative (lets say 2007). But if you are in the same place and time as yourself, that would cause a paradox, meaning you wouldn't be able to do anything and most likely again, de-materialise.
Going on about Time-Travel, their is no prove in the history books that it happened unless they disused themselves, if not, they'd most likely get burnt on a stake alive and people chanting, "WITCH, WITCH, WITCH!". But if it did happen, in the past there has been 'UFO' sightings, which could infact just be us from the future (I don't support this fact, just putting it out there).
You're not really explaining why you would de-materialise, although you could choose to believe that's what would happen. Just because there isn't any proof doesn't mean it won't happen. I think people view time travel wrong. Just because there hasn't been visitors from the future doesn't mean anything. There is a pretty big chance that people looked at that idea all wrong...maybe we're the farthest in time so far, which means it's impossible to have visitors from the future. Look at it simply as, the future isn't anywhere in existance yet.
1. I think, that the moment you killed yourself, both yous would die, and an alternate universe would exist, with you not interacting in it and the consequences of you dying affecting it. However, you, from that point on, would still live in the normal universe, just so you could come and kill yourself.So you believe that if I traveled into the past and killed my past self that I would have no choice but to wait until the exact moment in time where I last traveled back in time to travel back again to kill my past self that went back in the first place....I don't understand your logic. I would assume that's the same as believing in karma.
The obvious way to disprove most methods of time travel is to ask why there are no proven visitors from the future. Okay maybe one or two people have come back and been burnt as witches, but if the future really holds a time machine, surely (over time) millions of people would use it.There are actually people that have claimed they were from the future and came back to put their money in some stocks. Along with that, no one could find any records on him.
-
Yeah, Spaz is right. Not sure if it's Niko or not, but about the CJ shit yes, he is right.
But license plates are on the front of cars occasionally down here, but they're also on the back. I don't see the point in it to be honest, why the hell would they want them on the front and back.
It has to do with parking. If you park with your car facing out (with the back of your car facing the front of the car behind you) so you could just pull out quickly, well then a cop strolling by couldn't see your license plate could he? It would be on the back, which wouldn't be visible due to the way you parked. Thats why they used to have them on both sides, as far as I know. No one really puts a license plate on the front anymore, at least I don't see it.
The stupid cunts are too lazy to walk around the back of the car? Wow....
Yeah, Spaz is right. Not sure if it's Niko or not, but about the CJ shit yes, he is right.Oh, really. Which piece of artwork on the SA box art looks like it could be CJ?
Dude with the bandana over his face.
CJ didn't start off bald... These supposed artworks of Niko at least look closely similar.
-
Even if you're currently situated in a time that you are not suppose to be in, I think you'd die from killing yourself. Either that or you'll just destroy the world/universe/galaxy/whatever. Y'know, effin' up the space time continuum and shit. But you shouldn't be able to kill yourself in the past, because to alter the past you'd alter the present. If you kill yourself, you won't then live to the present in which you decide to go back in time and kill yourself. Therefore, you won't go back and kill yourself. Thus making you still alive because you were dead and couldn't go back and kill yourself. Go ahead, try and make THAT make sense. Endless cycle. That is, of course, assuming that killing yourself in the past doesn't just cease your existence as killing yourself any other way would've.
Yes, you won't live in the present, but if you kill yourself in the past and stay in the past, I think you would live on until you reached the point you initially traveled to the past. The only difference would be that there wouldn't be another you since you killed your past self in the past. Thus, no cycle but an end.
I could go on for hours about this stuff (and have done many times) but not tonight... maybe another time.Please do.
I think we need to look at this more at the physical level.Take the scenario of travelling back in time to kill yourself. You step into the time machine, disappear and reappear in the past. When you travel, you actually "magically" disappear, and cease to exist - anybody watching you step into the machine would see you disappear. When reappearing in the past, anybody watching would see you "magically" appear out of nowhere.
That itself is impossible - there is a finite combined amount of matter and energy in the world, and so to appear somewhere you need to use up some matter/energy. We usually do that by leaving somewhere and moving somewhere else - when you walk you move your matter from position A to B. When you travel back in time, does the matter/energy go with you? If you did disappear into thin air, you would expel energy and probably leave behind all your matter (dust?). If you did appear from thin air, you would take in energy and matter from everything nearby (dust?). Last time I checked, it was pretty hard to make a human out of bits of soil and blu tac, so you would probably have to send all your matter with you, not just the information about how to rebuild you.
If you could scan a human being and replicate it out of any type of matter (dust, soil, gravy) that would be a much more significant advancement than time travel - recalibrating matter into any format you want. It's called alchemy. But giving that matter life? That's witchcraft. Either way, without physically transporting your matter to the past, you can't be recreated at the other end. That's why teleporters are... non existent. Sure you can scan something and "print" it out at the other end, but that won't be alive, and it's pretty hard to have every possible substance in a human on hand ready for the build.
Well that's thinking about time travel in the Hollywood sense, but I think traveling into the past would work around the same way traveling into the future would work (In a way).
So back to the theory...Let's say you DO transport your physical matter back into the past (which would work). You would actually disappear out of the universe when you travel back. When you arrive in the past, you would be totally new to the universe - it's got a little bit bigger. You kill yourself, but you would continue to live, because that is where you exist now. You are not the manifestation of the matter that you just killed, you have been created in addition to it.
That's actually how I'm basically looking at it and believe that's what would happen.
The time-travel conundrum I prefer is the "knowledge out of nowhere" one. Lets say we travelled back in time 60 years, and took with us a record of a Beatles' song, then gave it to the Beatles before they wrote it. They then copy the song you gave them, record it and release the record. Then you in the future take the record back to them in the past, and they copy it again. Who wrote the song in the first place? It wasn't the Beatles, because they copied it from you. It wasn't you, because you took it from the copy. If that analogy doesn't work for you, try a book or a story or anything created. You could even do it with a physical object - take an iPod from 2009 and bring it back to 2007 and give it to Apple. Who designed it in the first place? Nobody? Impossible.These conundrums prove to me that time travel can't exist, because things can't come out of nowhere. I certainly believe that we will one day be able to view the past, but not to the point where we can alter it, because then by definition it is no longer the past. You may be able to alter an alternative past, in addition to the one that you came from, and you would alter the events in that past, but not yours.
Personally, I don't see how that proves that time travel can't exist, but how it could mess everything up. We're already able to view the past, of far off objects in outer space, but have yet to be able to view our own past. I think once we're able to make something travel faster than the speed of light, which at this point is considered impossible, that we would be able to view the past and possible go into the past.
If they say the closer we travel to the speed of light the slower time goes for us, maybe traveling faster than the speed of light will actually cause us to back track into the past.(just a random ass theory)
EDIT: Along with that last little bit I mentioned, maybe the faster we go past the speed of light, the faster we'll travel into the past. So time traveling would actually be quite slow.
-
In theory, the life we are living now could have been because someone travelled back in time and screwed w / it.
If someone travelled back in time and announced time travel, there would be no need for someone to invent it in the 'future' so no need for it to be announced, therefore, it wouldn't happen?
Exactly, that's why they wouldn't announce it.
-
Either way, time travel will wreak destruction.
Depends on what people with the ability to time travel do. If they travel to the past to simply view something then they most likely won't screw anything up.
EDIT: I came up with a reason why you wouldn't disappear if you went to the past and killed your past self.
"You would not die instantly because at that time the existance of you at that current age was not possible to begin with, which means if time travel to the past is even possible then so is this."
-
I have one.
If we become capable of time travel one day, shouldn't there be evidence of this now and in the past? The first thing we'd do is go to the past, now, and reveal ourselves to the people that time travel was/is/will be possible.
And as of yet there hasn't been sightings like this.
Exactly what I was thinking, if they have figured it out in future, why haven't they sent someone to tell us?Actually they wouldn't tell us because that might have effects and change a lot of history. If we know that we could eventually time travel...then we might not come up with the idea because we know it'll eventually be possible.
GTAIV: Vice City/GTAIV: San Andreas
in GTA IV Discussion + Help
Posted
Yeah, but I'd still like to see what Vice City would look like now.