Baxie

The missing car is a 2007 Renaultsport Clio Which is also the free car download to get the graphics. Currently LOVING my E30!

yay E30, 5 Turbo and Sport Quattro! They did good. Atari could learn a thing or two Awesome collection

Game is boring... come play TDU instead!

I find NFL to be tremendously enjoyable... So I'll steer clear of the canucks for now. As for NHL? If I wanna see a bunch of toothless men fight, I'll go to the senior center.

I borrowed the last Need for Speed.... can't even remember the name now... That was done in four hours. Got one achievement for completing the "story" part. Returned it to my littlebrother and was utterly disappointed. I enjoyed NFS: MW immensely. I did. Not afraid to admit it. Lots of cool cars. Lots of challenges. All round sweet game. Sensation of speed was good. Graphics as well, as it was on PS2. I saw the demo of ProStreet and I have to say, that it is very good looking. Sensation of speed is aweinspiring. So here comes the problem. Which is also why I returned PGR4 for Madden. (Yes. I am an NFL hea.) I hate PGR. I can't see the idea of having a car game that is about how long you can ride on two wheels, how long you can slide and other completely useless stuff that has NOTHING to do with racing. I am afraid that ProStreet is the same all over. If it isn't though...... Who knows.

The fastest way to clone a car is to get in your Koenigsegg, go to the 180 mph in heavy traffic, win that as many times as needed to get the car you are going to buy. (Each win gives you 70.000 and takes less than a minute!) This way you don't have to fiddle around with connection issues, which in turn I am sure will be even more bothersome than the other way around. Furthermore you can safely claim that you are able to play this game without resorting to cheating. And even better, people will not be bothered with your illegitimately gotten cars, and they will also be without risk of getting into trouble for driving around in stolen cars. And they have had to play the game properly to get the money to buy the cars in the first place. If it took hours or even days to get the most expensive car in this game, there might be a point to cheating, though there is never an excuse. It takes around 20 minutes for you to gather the 1.5 million you need to buy the top-end cars in this game. Some people....

Yestreday night I had just bothered Baldred into giving up on his important workstuff and come play with me, when I got the idea of a race under special circumstances. I'll name it Blind Blowout. The rules are simple: No GPS, No Gamertags. The objective is to get from point A (Start) to Point B (Finish) as fast as possible. The only thing you can use is the physical map and your sense of direction. (As good as it might be) Isolate you session and go go go! We did three races with various people and it is quite a laugh, listening to the chat, when some people are heading the excact opposite direction of where you're supposed to be. I wont mention any names here. Was great fun guys. Always ready to do it again :)

Thanks. This is where it goes wrong. This statement claims that you have more right to be in a pub than a smoker has. The owner clearly decides to let in smokers or not, and by choose the former it IS your choice to go in or not. Smoking when there are kids around, smoking when pregnant, smoking in other peoples homes. These things are objectionable and people who don't take their smokes should have a severe beating. But a pub which allows smokers to smoke everywhere is the right of absolutely everyone. I want to open a restaurant which doesn't allow children. It is the same thing. 18 years or above or you don't get in. Why? Because it will be a restaurant for couple to get away from children or where you get to conduct business. So why not let children in? Because they make noise and they are disturbing for the atmosphere. Why not teenagers? Because they cannot figure out how to dress themselves and will be disturbing to the customers who come there for the clear experience of being able to have a nice cozy dinner without being disturbed by the inconsiderates who fill their lives with visual and sonic pollution. If you don't like it. You don't have to come. It is my right as owner of the place, and as long as people accord by the rules set by me they are more than welcome. Equally. This is how it has been for ages. Some places do not allow smoking, others do. So why is it, that smokers should stop smoking in the places that you go, just because you don't smoke? Why is it that you can't go to the places which didn't allow smoking? Slip of the tongue here. Substitute drug addict with junkie. I often hear people come with condescending remarks about the character of smokers, as if they have any idea how har it is to quit. It's easy to be preachy about something you have absolutely no idea about. It IS a smokers fault. It is stupid and why people start is inexplicable. It isn't that these people think: Hey! I want to get lung cancer at 25. I want to have to cough up my lungs every morning for 10 minutes. I want to spend a third of my salary on something that makes me unable to climb stairs. The second hand smoke from someone standing outside smoking generates about a millionth of the smoke you inhale on the streets. Factories and more importantly for these forums, cars generate the main bulk of smoke for people to inhale. Are you going to complain about car-drivers next? I honestly cannot for the life of me understand the opinions stated here on these forums and outside: "I hate smokers" and "They dug their own grave. Now lie in it." Do you really have so little sympathy for the people around that you can't inspire them to quit, but instead mock them for being pushed outside to smoke? I know and love many smokers to this day, and I do not think they are in any way idiots, simply because they started smoking.

It isn't Moby. I know pretty much everything he's ever made (HUGE fan) and this is nowhere near his style. I, myself spent my teenage years being an indie-kid as well. Nirvana (Before they broke through), Breeders, Pixies, Radiohead, Sonic Youth and seveal others, while at the same time keeping up with Biohazard, Sepultura, Metallica, Napalm Death, Body Count, Pantera and more of the harder bands. As I got older I learnt to appreciate Pink Floyd, Faith No More, Queen, Rammstein and other mainstream stuff that you just can't get around. New rock today died while the producers spammed Linkin' Park, Creed, P.O.D. and other junk that looked and sounded the absolute same on the market in order to make money. So I find myself in the same tracks that my father did by discarding most new stuff for being heard a million times before and not bringing anything new to the table. The stuff that stuck with me is stuff like Faith No More, Filter, Fun Lovin' Criminals and Rammstein. At the same time I enjoy Miles Davis, Coltrane, Cohen as well as Beethoven. So I spread out wide. And of course Moby

Oh dear lord. The entire smoking debate pisses me off royally because it is filled with trapdoors to insensitivity and comments based in speculations and ignorance. For those of you here who claims to actually hate smokers for being selfish and inconsiderate, how about looking at your self for a bit? You're laughing at people standing out in the rain. Now I know I been raised better than to laugh at other people's misfortunes. Government legislation has made sure that people who do smoke have nowhere to go other than outside, and if that consideration and acceptance towards others is followed, do these people really deserve to be pointed and laughed at? Hell I've even seen people getting yelled at by non-smokers. Getting compared to drug addicts and accused of actually killing other people. "If people don't like the smell of the smoke then why don't they just leave the pub." and a simple reply to this is. Why don't you stop being a selfish ....... and smoke outside. So now they do. How is this different, from what you yourself experienced? The pettyness behind comments like this is what I find the must disgusting. Have I smoked? Yes. I started smoking when I was 16 out of sheer stupidity. I stopped smoking january 1st last year. And I will tell you this: Quitting smoking is the hardest thing I have ever had to do. I spent the first week being edgy and unable to sleep. I'd get into discussions out of irritability mainly coz I needed my nicotine. It got gradually better over a few months and today I don't think about it in the normal days of the week. But when I drink a glass of red wine, or after a full meal I miss that one smoke. The sensation of relief and relaxation that surges through your body when the smoke fills your lungs.... I can feel it right now. And I know that I will have to deal with this urge for the rest of my life. I will never shake it. Furthermore it will take me ten years to have reduced the chance of cardio- or respiratory illnesses. And the worst part is that I have to deal with the fact that I am more than ten times more likely to develop lung cancer than a non-smoker and this never changes, no matter how long it takes. All this because I was dumb enough to pick up smoking when I was 16 years old. I went out of my way to be a considerate smoker. I never smoked in homes without smokers. I always left the room to smoke, if I was the only one. Every time I hear some holier-than-thou idiot shout out to make sure the smokers can hear him: "Look at those fools. Standing out there in the rain." I want to cram a carton of smokes down his throat and make him go through what every smoker has to go through when they give it up. Then I want to kick his ass for being poorly brought up and an inconsiderate jerk.

I did some research on eating disorders for a series of articles a few years back. Now I can't remember here, but I think that you are somewhere around 16 or so? And I guess that your GF is of similar age (Can't really remember). There is something a lot worse going on that mere weightloss. I am guessing that your GF has taken off eating red meat, eggs and other iron-rich sorts of food. For a girl who is still "growing" these are exceptionally vital for her menstrual cycle and for her reproductional system. It is a huge problem among fashion-vegetarians, that they don't get a thoroughly balanced diet and this end up underdeveloped and even unable to haver children without complications at a later time simply due to problems in the development phase as she matures. My advice is to be supportive of her, but also to make very clear where you stand. I don't believe that one person saying she could stand to loose weight can send someone on a weightloss like you describe here. There are more issues at hand. Tell her, that you worry about her health and that you don't care if she weighs 300 pounds, but you don't like her eating habits and her recent diet. Another thing is to contact a help centre for people with eating disorders. Usually a hospital or doctor can redirect you to a place close by. Call them and explain what is happening. Then bring your girlfriend there. You said "wont go baelemic again" and this scares the crap out of me. If she has had an eating disorder before, then she really needs professional help. And soon. Your instincts telling you to call out for help here was right. It isn't something that you and her should be "handling" alone. She needs to talk to people who have been in her situation and who knows how to help. Best of luck Lewis. Really hope this works out for you.

Awww. Baldy posted his application video for "Idol". Very nice

Running the risk of sounding both patronizing and condescending here. Don't misunderstand me. It sucks being the person who gets hit by laws that are made by people it doesn't. But this thread has presented nothing in the ways of solid arguments against the proposed changes in the law. The arguments between those it hits are always: "Because we really want to!" while the lawmakers draw up statistics, which cannot be considered at all untrue, but which can easily be read a variety of issues into. This in effect turning the previously mentioned targetgroup on to the argument: "Well that is just a small group of people giving the rest of us a bad name." To which the lawmakers reply: "Well, if this law can prevent the loss of human life, you need to come up with a better reason other than: We really want to!" They're right. Every single argument in this thread can be and has been repeated in discussions and law-shaping banning certain privileges from certain population groups all over the world. Guns for instance is always a dangerous issue in America, and while some are working to legislate against home ownership of firearms, those that are opposed to gun-control head for the trenches and start dusting off the: "I want the guns to protect my family!" The hypothetical reasoning behind this is countered by the evenly hypothetical counterpoint: "If all guns were banned, you didn't need yours!" And eventually everything boils down to statistics, which show that more people are killed by accidents involving guns each year, than lives were saved by the defender carrying a firearm. And does these statistics really show that? Who is to say? Statistics are a very loose stanadard with which to measure the world we live in, but it IS the best way we have. And when the shouting and namecalling and partisan political agendas subside the realization is that mainly Americans have guns, in spite of every piece of investigations in the subject shows that America has more than 10 times the annual deaths involving firearms than europe which spans more than 20 countries and nationalities and has more than twice the population hitting 710 million with the States hitting 300 million. At the same time the National Rifles association states that accidental firearms fatalitites are racking up 649, including 63 children. These numbers, statistics say, would be drastically fewer if guns were illegal in the United States. So what does this have to do with raising the legal limits of driving a car? Again. Statistics shows that the higher the age of the driver the less chance of an accident. 80 percent of all accidents have involved a person between the age of 18 to 24 here in Denmark. I dread the numbers had we a legal age that were two year lower. The legal ages of consent, of criminal prosecution and the legal age of the right to vote are based on national averages read through statistics and legislated through processes of those elected. All this for a reason. They are usually those best suited for decisions. If you don't agree with them, then don't vote for them. I know it sucks to be 15 and not have the right to do anything, and even more so losing something that you are just about to get, because of what other morons does. But most of the arguments against in this thread have nothing of value as to why the legal age should be kept. The arguments of the government and legislature claims, well documentedly so, that a higher legal age of driving will save lives. If asked, why it should be kept at 16, and with that point in front of you, you need something better than: "Because I really want to." Well?

Craigie. Your point is well taken. Governments do not always make the best arguments, nor do they disregard public opinion in order to do what is right. Politics are tricky, and the people best able to govern are the ones who do not care about public sentiments. It is always an election year. I will never downplay the importance of safety for young people on any level. Longer pub hours has never been a problem here in Denmark where most places close at either 2 am or 6 am. Our percentage of rapes are below global average. Parents, as well as young people, need to be trained to handle these things. The day I get a daughter or a son, I will commit myself to driving late hours to pick them up whereever they are, if they need to. Rather this, than get in a car with a friend who has been drinking, or even worse... they themselves have been. Don't get me wrong. I know several people in the age of 18-24 who are responsible, levelheaded people who would never drink and drive or disregard speedlimits. My objection is to those who think that politicians are to blame for them not being able to drive till they are 18. Those that deserve blame are the ones who ruin it for everyone else. And believe me when I say this at age 31: Age does grant experience. Politicians are usually fuelled by the need and urge to do, what they see best for the society. And while Health and Safety might seem a joke, the existance is based on a direct need. Again, your points are duly noted, and while it does raise a genuine concern, to have young people moving around alone at night, yelling at Parliament is not the way to go. As I said before. One life is enough to pay for that one extra year till young british people get to drive. And reality is, that it isn't just one life. It is several. All you need to do is look in your family and consider this: These people that you love, they travel on the same streets as the drunk and the irresponsible. Will you trade getting a drivers license at 17 for the life of one of your parents? Or siblings? Remember, that for every car accident caused by a person above 25, seven others occur. Who is to say who is safe and who isn't?

The EOS 400D is sweet. Is that a Wide-angle lense?

In Denmark, the legal age for driving is 18 years. You are required by law to have had at least 24 driving lessons before you can take the driving test which, I've heard, is the hardest in Europe. When you do acquire your license, you have two strikes for three years. Running a red light, speeding at a certain percentage, hazardous maneuvering and such breaks of the trafficlaws result in one strike. Driving with more than .5 alcohol in your blood results in one strike. More than 1.0 results in withdrawal of licens in a period of two years to indefinetely. After having had your license for three years. Your strikes goes to three. After having driven without breaking the law for three years. You regain clean status of three strikes. Speedlimits are 31 mph in towns, 50 on country roads, 70 on freeways if indicated by signs. If not it is 80 mph. The police are only using mobile speedcameras and regularly change positions at 4 hour intervals making any sort of warning shortlived and useless. This being said, here in DK 70 percent of all accidents are caused by young people in the agegroup of 18-24. 57% of all these accidents result in bodily harm. 15% of the accidents had alcohol involved. 67% of which had a bloodalcohol of 1.61 or more. With all due respect to the people in that agegroup here, the people in this agegroup tend to disregard trafficlaws and endanger the lives of other people. Let me tell you a story I covered last year for the paper. APril 15th 2006 a 27 year old man was walking his 6-month old daughter in the babycarriage. He was obeying traffic-laws and walked against the direction of cars on a country road which is limited to 80 kilometres an hour. (50 mph) However, the road has very poor vision because it climbs and falls a lot. This day a 19-year old boy and his 18 year old friend was driving a Ford Sierra Cosworth and estimated speeds of around 180 kilometres an hour. This is more than twice the allowed speedlimit and more than 30 mph more than allowed anywhere in this country. Cresting a hill, the car left the road and hit the 27 year old father and the babycarriage directly on. The 6-month old baby was sent flying through the air and landed more than 30 metres away from road, the man was dragged under the car which managed to stop after more than 200 metres in a field. Paramedics were called to the scene and arrive after less than 20 minutes. The 27-year old died few minutes later, but they worked on the baby for more than an hour and a half before giving up CPR. The 19-year old and 18 year old were unharmed. As the driver was tried for vehicular manslaughter his defense was this: "I would not have hit him and the baby-carriage if he wasn't deaf. Then he would have heard me coming." You want to make fun of Health and Safety? Try interviewing a 26 year old mother who just lost her husband and child because someone thought that the trafficlaws didn't apply to them. You blame the "overpaid penpusher"? Why not blame those who are too stupid to realize that they are endangering the lives innocent people for ****s and giggles. Those moronic enough to drink before they drive. Those that thing the rules are idiotic and doesn't apply to them. All these people should be dragged out to see what I saw that day. A mother witnessing the death of her husband and having to see three paramedics trying to keep her 6-month old alive. A blood trail more than 100 metres long on the street. The sad thing is, that this 19-year old saw all these things, and he didn't learn a thing. These are the people you should blame. The "overpaid penpushers" are merely trying to keep me and my family alive. If this means that you cannot drive a car till you're twenty. Fine by me. Those that so desperately want a drivers license are the ones most likely to cause accidents. If you can prevent just ONE death by raising the legal age for driving to 20 it is well worth it. And you complain about it going from 17 to 18? Sheesh.

Well make that three for me. Congratulations on the moderation-position :) It's a thankless job.

confirmed this is in one hour 40ish minutes right?

Also last longer... hopefully :) Psyched to get this in the air.

Looks like I will have to reinvent the Golf. I'll be ready and rearing to go tomorrow (tonight) night. little addition to the rules: How about we go, till it is last man standing. Currently I am inclined to grab a C paced car with high top speed and win by finishing first. A "final survivor" type game makes it more interesting. In my opinion.

Thursday works for me too. And as a taste, I flicked this little thing together. BEHOLD:

Well... Gotta say that the best game I ever played was Final Fantasy VII. I played through VII, VIII, IV, X, X-2 and tried out XI. Still considering buying an old PS2 just for XII. These are always a sure thing to be entertaining and lasting. I always played them through once for story, one more for content. Then picked them up later and played through again for strategy and to see if I lost out on anything. And then later... and later... and later... For a lot of reasons this game has stuck with me through the years, and I still have my old grey Playstation, and some of my old favourite game series on that. Tomb Raider: Very atmospheric and great value for money. Resident Evil: Camp and a good hit off Romero's Zombie world. Though the movies sucked. Silent Hill: Maybe the most scary games I ever played. I still remember emptying an entire clip in to those small black ghosts out of sheer adrenaline. Racing Games: Gran Turismo: Still the greates racing game ever. The second in that series . With the third one, they screwed up something awful and removed the feature that made you able to race your friends with all your customizations and setups still running. That really ruined the game for me. WipeOut: Fastpaced with fantastic music, these are a classic. Formula-1: A fan, this has given me great many hours of fun on the classic courses. GTA: Obviously also a force to be reckoned with. I also played a lot of games on the PC, and some stick out as well. Civilization: Hours of strategic fun. They really worked hard to implement new stuff with the new additions to the series. X-Wing and Tie-Fighter: The space-sim of all time. From crap graphics and poor handling I spent hours in all the games from X-wing over Tie-fighter, XvT and Alliance. Unreal: Best FPS ever. From the Game itself till the tourneys I've had my share of head-shots and Multi-kills. And last but not least: Doom: How can this be left out. What an excellent game, and even though the third is darker than a grizzly bears butt. This is still a great series. I am not sure, that I have tried other games which are in a series on the 360 other than Forza and Madden. But I like those too. :) And there are more: Black & White, Knights of the Old Republic and so on and so on..... Did I ever tell anyone that I am a nerd?

Hell yeah. Sounds like F-U-N! How about sticking to old cars? 70's models?

Can't say for sure. But each year some do.

The Oblivion expansion cost the same on XBL as it did to get it on CD for the PC