|
drat I'm disappointed I just found this. Hands down my favorite game of all time, I just replayed this late last year and was blown away by how pertinent all the conversations were, even more so than when they were written. The Hong Kong bartender discussion blows me away every time. Anyways, I am really excited by this and will probably mainline this over the next few days to catch up. The lectures are fun too, you're doing a great job with this.
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 04:15 |
|
|
It's a ways away, but today really made me think of one of the best lines from a conversation in Hong Kong, "The West, so afraid of strong government, now has no government. Only financial power." Goddamn this game creeps me out sometimes, in light of recent Supreme Court rulings.  Also I'm really pleased that you're hitting all the conversation options on people. I can't count how many times I've played through this game, but you're hitting dialogue I've never seen at times and that's really, really cool. Edit: I think in terms of the recent conversation, we're supposed to see that the bartender is "correct" in that China remains autonomous. Outside VersaLife, the soldiers are all Chinese soldiers, not UN. China is nominally in charge, and the Chinese military and police, while in the pay of Maggie, aren't under the direct control of MJ12 and so on (just on the payroll of Maggie: they don't know she's representing Page et al). So we're supposed to go "oh, well, China is still free, but even that's not true freedom because there are soldiers in the streets." Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
Deus Ex doesn't do a lot for providing substantial options, in my first playthrough I too wanted to stick with UNATCO at first. And yeah, the main plot is basically on rails. What impressed me about DX is that it does provide a lot of divergence for dealing with particulars, as well as a fair degree of "your decisions have real impacts" that upon a first playthrough isn't evident, but by making different divergent choices you can get different outcomes down the line. Multiple playthroughs really reveal that there's a pretty elaborate web of dealing with smaller plot points, while the main plot stays the same. And like has been said, I think that's pretty consistent with the setting, since the general idea of a mostly helpless protagonist being ground up in gears within gears is consistent with the postmodern setting. Incidentally, while I was disappointed by the inability to join UNATCO, the following series of events and the absolutely radical shift in events and tone and pacing and so on really is pretty jarring and does an awesome job of immersing the player, I think. The first time you start seeing all the wheels within wheels in play is pretty awesome, and it's too bad there's no way to really recreate a lot of those first time conversations and experiences. I think when people talk about Deus Ex being the best, a lot of that is because it was a great experience when a lot of us were young and, at least for me, it really represents the first time I'd been really immersed into a game in that way. Like, the "big bad" is shown in the opening cutscene and then doesn't reappear until how long? Like, way late in the game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Literal Freemason here. Naturally I have some minor objections regarding motivations and suchlike but that was pretty on the head there. One minor point is that International Order of Odd Fellows is not a Masonic organization, they're similar but unrelated. Anyone interested in catching up on our most maleficent conspiracies is welcome to check us out in our mysterious and well guarded thread in A/T.  Edit: Also, I'm not an Eagle, but the Order of the Arrow was developed for Eagles when a scoutmaster who was a Mason decided that Scouting needed more Masonry. As a result, it's heavily influenced. Introduction to Masonry for young men, or secret indoctrination for foot soldiers for our new world order? You decide. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Apr 15, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
I always found the plasma gun just terribly unsatisfying. I wanted it to be cool, and even tried a playthrough where I wanted to use it, but ended up ditching it immediately because it's just super weak. Unless you shoot dudes in the head, MJ12 troopers can absolutely soak it, you have to unload into them 4-5 times, and it doesn't have nearly enough ammo to be useful. At best it's something I will use when I find it if I can use it up and pick up my real gun soon. However in the past I've been a real sucker for a long ranged scoped silenced sniper assault rifle. I've never bothered to math it to realize how bad it sucks, so I'm gonna end up playing again here using not the assault rifle. The scoped "loud pistol" is also something I used a lot in several playthroughs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
I confess there was a period of my life where I slept almost exclusively to DX soundtrack music. I really wish there were longer versions of the various endgame themes because Helios ending song can trance me out if I let it.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Notably the Templars were wiped out by MJ12 before the game events. I haven't played IW, I bought it for digital download once upon a time but the computer I had couldn't handle it and it's long since gone. Everything I've been told says it's the worst, but is it worth it, even from like a storyline perspective?
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
The thing about the voice acting is it's not just bad accents, it's the delivery. The conversation in this episode with the Aussie barkeep is one of the better political commentaries in the game, but the delivery, cadence, inflection, and so on are just bad. He's delivering these great lines in a bad Aussie accent, poorly.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 08:11
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:I wasn't disputing the part about species that lack genetic diversity, but Bobbin said "genetically engineered species of all kinds are more susceptible" which is the part I don't think is true. Without genetic diversity, all it takes is one strain of a disease to wipe out the entire species. With naturally occurring diversity, this is usually less of a problem because there are more likely to be variations which can survive whatever epidemic. So the diversity found in nature tends to be able to out-survive the non-diverse genetically engineered stuff we create. I think that was the point here, not that engineering itself makes things more susceptible, like in the engineering process, but rather that engineered species have less diversity as a whole and so less survival power.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
Speedball posted:Pretty sure this is exactly the reason why such genres as horror are entertaining. Well, I'm sure it factors in why people seek it out, but another reason for this is that biologically there is no distinction between our various arousal states. The only difference is our mental assessment of why we feel an arousal. So horror movies, on top of providing stimulation, also provide physiological arousal feelings that at least some of us have adapted to seek out.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
I tried playing HR on the setting that said I was a "Deus Ex veteran" and can't get past like the very first "real" level. I get killed immediately because I'm not a badass nanoman I guess, and the world is absolutely teeming with dudes far more durable than I am, and I find third person sneaking just completely tedious. So yeah I don't know, I should give it more of a chance and maybe dial it back to babby difficulty but eh.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
All I know is I snuck past some people and was pretty much okay with that because that's classic DX, and I thought that was pretty good, and then I was in a warehouse with at least 6 guys all in separate places who could all see one another, and all I had was a gun that made a ton of noise. Engaging or being spotted by one of any of those dudes would cause dudes to come from every single direction and if I got caught by a burst I died. I basically quit when I realized I couldn't see half the dudes who would show up to kill me, so I couldn't figure out their patrols and didn't feel like trying. I will give it another go at some point but the fact that I went to raid a warehouse with something stupid like 2 magazines in a lovely rifle was annoying also. I'm talking about after the on-rails no-aug level, by the way, after you get your augs, the very first mission. The tutorial mission I found really simple by yeah, just basically shooting dudes in the brain box all the time.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Kunster posted:What did you say that Tracer Tong had? Rosacea, basically freckles plus.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
You definitely don't have to turn off the electricity, I know I've done it without. It kills the hell out of you if you jump in the wrong thing, but if you jump straight down into the correct chute, there's no electricity running to it, unless this changes in the patch? I'm sure I've never used that panel before to turn off the electricity. Edit: Yeah, I've always jumped into a vat of poison directly, bypassing the electricity, then I just jumped out and went into the right one. I didn't even know there was a ladder.  Double Edit: There is also a hospital near me that uses a door code 1723 and I love it. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Jun 16, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
The black helicopters are Airwolf. Don't act like you all don't know Airwolf is faster than any jet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
Olesh posted:The U.S. didn't really have a problem getting draftees to shoot their guns (mostly at the enemy) in Vietnam - how much easier to deal with UNATCO soldiers, all of whom intentionally signed up for the cause? I'm with you on the fact that it's pretty easy to get people to do evil things with the right circumstances. On this particular point, though, a lot of research has gone into figuring out why this is counterintuitively not true. Turns out, the vast majority of soldiers in Vietnam deliberately shot high. WWII, also. There is a book, On Killing, by a Lt. Col. Grossman, which investigates the realities of this and tries to find solutions. Truth is, it's still a pain in the rear end to induce normal people to kill readily, and when we succeed, well, there are definitely troubling outcomes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
As a Freemason, I personally love all the conspiracy theories directed at us, but equally amusing is when people get it wrong. Once I wore a ring to work at a psychiatric hospital, and a kid asked what it was. I asked him what he thought it was, and he said he thought I was a member of some dumb geometry fraternity. When I laughed and told him it was for Freemasonry he didn't know what that was, and this is a kid who was pretty savvy on conspiracies and knew allll about the Illuminati. I really enjoy the Illuminati stuff just because it's so outlandish. That said, Freemasons did have a hand in the French Revolution, and Pope Leo XIII even wrote an encyclical that blasts us for our obviously evil beliefs in self determination, naturalism, popular sovereignty, and separation of Church and State. Of course, the late 1800s were not a great time for the Church, and Freemasonry was growing openly, so we seemed as good a target as any. I have played this game tens of times, and have never talked to Dowd at length, or really explored all the small speech options for a lot of these guys. You've selected talking options in this playthrough I've never used, and it's been really cool. I appreciate seeing how a Denton I've never been handles things, and some of the exposition has just been awesome, so thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
FinalGamer posted:I have a boyfriend who recently joined the Freemasons through his father, and he wishes that half this stuff was true when instead he calls it "an old people's treehouse club with cool secret rings". Not that he minds, it's kinda cool to be part of something I suppose. He's definitely less secretive about it than my friend in high school who was a Mormon and just straight-up refused to answer any of my questions with a wave of "youuuu don't really wanna know it's pretty boring If you're into boring answers, the boringest is the answer to that question. Basically, the oldest Masonic lodges on the record are from Scotland, with many having records predating the formation of the first Grand Lodge by a century or more. So a lot of early American Masons were Scottish, or Scotophiles. The latter group basically formed the Scottish Rite in 1801 in the US, and since there is a long Masonic tradition of inventing provenance to seem badass, they called it the Scottish Rite so they could trace back to Scotland. Historically a lot of these little orders come and go, but the Scottish Rite caught on and became one of the main "appendant bodies" of Masonry, basically external, separate organizations that are Masonic in flavor and only accept Master Masons. The other big one is the York Rite, which has a similar provenance of name. Notably, all of the degrees of both the York and Scottish Rites really do predate those organizations, as most appendant bodies are amalgamations of previous work. So while the Scottish Rite has no direct relation to the Order of Strict Observance mentioned by Bobbin, it did crib almost all of their degree work and then adjust it accordingly. Masonic degrees are basically initiatic rituals that confer a moral message or lesson, like a big kid's version of a fable, so there's that. In Scotland and the rest of the UK, the Scottish Rite is known as the Rose Cross, not to be confused with the actual Rosicrucian organization, which is similar but not related to Freemasonry directly. It is also not to be confused with the Royal Order of Scotland, which is an honor society only for Masons but which actually has some connection to the nobility and is conferred only to Masons who have made some positive contribution to the world (and are Christian etc.). We have a thread in A/T (because we are so secretive) so if you want to check out more about Masonry pop over there.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 18:43
|
|
", so he tells me what he's allowed to tell me, I guess. I really don't know too much of how they operate nowadays or why but they really don't seem to be a harmful bunch to me, it feels more like a conglomerate of businessmen than anything else.
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Probably a good modern game would let you sink the ship through other means, but maybe assign you some kind of penalty (like a worse ending, killing off a character you liked, etc.) Your average modern game would give you a SHIP EXPLOSIVES key item which could only be used to blow up the weak points on the ship and for no other purpose. Your low end Russian modern game would have an option to buy explosives via airdrop for 2 USD micropayments, and it would show the explosives being dropped from a helicopter, even if you were indoors.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
I think HR is a great game but not as good, but I'm not sure if it's nostalgic reasons or just preferring the older gameplay style. I just don't care much for the third person shooting stuff or the drawn out action animations with the "kill cam" or what not.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
The very first time I did the Simons boss fight, I was already in invisibility mode because of the potential for snipers. He did his whole speech, and then because I was panicked I just ran past him, invisible, and slapped him once with the Dragon's Tooth on the way by. When I got to the bomb shelter I turned around to watch him explode. Then I burst out laughing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Another one of those "drat, I've played this game how many times and never gotten in there?" moment with that office. I don't think I'd ever even bothered with the building, let alone the Icarus phone call. That's awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Internet Janitor posted:I think dialogues and hidden areas that are not critical to the plot and are missable/skippable are a key success of Deus Ex, rather than a design weakness. Yes, I agree with this. I love that in however many playthroughs of this game there are still a few things I've never seen or done or found. It means the developers were really considering things from the player's perspective but not in the sense of railroading.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
I don't know anything of Bakhtin, but the war being fought over words also smacks of Baudrillard and postmodernism in general I feel like, and it's extremely critical to the postmodern Weltanschau that I think Deus Ex really does a great job of embodying.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
I think the not knowing how contributes to everything, frankly. It adds to the post-modern vibe. Even though there is this vast global conspiracy, poo poo still happens, people still get away with things. Even the all-seeing, all-knowing government conspiracy isn't flawless, a small enough dude can find a way to slip through the cracks. After all, we have been.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
That's because your thinking on what it means to interpret art values trying to figure out what a piece of art symbolizes or means "actually." If the "actual" meaning of a piece is regarded as "what affect does it have on the reader" then in fact the historical context is only important inasmuch as the perceiver of that art uses it to inform his perception. All meaning is inferred, so the "actual" meaning of something is utterly subjective.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Just Offscreen posted:I would suggest picking up the skull in Nicollete's room. Yup, this is a good idea.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Some people, many people, believe that the current organization where a person's value is determined by their ability to work is nonsense, an arbitrary decision that we need to be rid of. Increasingly, the fact of the matter is there are more people than there are need for people. It's part of why we have this problem in the United States with employment. Many jobs are being replaced or reduced in manual need by automation, especially things like manufacturing, which once took many many people and now take one or two people who know AutoCAD. The world is moving in a direction where labor value is no longer a valid thing to tell, and that's really a good thing, because we should not be making value judgments about allocation of resources based on productivity in a system where more productivity-potential exists than need for productivity. Especially when we also live in a world where there are still ample resources for people to have, if we focused on decommodification. Robots and AIs solving problems of industry are fine, but they do require a social change. I think the argument of many of the nerds who think that this change is imminent and that any day now we'll be post-scarcity is that when the technology arrives, the change will necessarily occur, in response to it. I am not really such a nerd in that I don't think these things are on the horizon, but I do think there is a serious need, on a societal level, to reassess how we make value judgments on people. Someone should not need to "get a job" to be entitled to a basic standard of living, for example. That might have been reasonable in a world where every individual's contribution was necessary for the survival of the town, but whether or not my neighbor has a job is completely irrelevant to the turning of the gears of industry, and he is still a suffering being with needs to be met.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
I did not realize those pipes were climbable, and never use the sewer. I basically always approach from behind the gas station with the dogs being the first threat I see. I think I just double back to the start and run up? I'd have to replay to see how I do it but it isn't particularly esoteric I think.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Morroque posted:Well, yes I am aware of that. While there will always be some degree of separation between historical understanding and contemporary understanding, in this case I'm wondering if that gap is just a little larger than usual. The timespan between the activity of the assassins and the invention of terrorism is quite large, and even come time for the French revolution, the initial definition was too different to be a reasonable comparison. "The invention of terrorism" I think is what we're discussing because I don't think terrorism is a thing that is invented. When Ughthal went into the neighboring tribe's cave and smacked Nogtrar's wife with a club to tell him he meant business, that was terrorism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
psivamp posted:I'm a chemical engineer and around the time of the vaccine corner I was doing an influenza vaccine production plant design based on insect ( Sf-9 ) cells for a case study. You'd better keep quiet about that. What are you, Angel/0A?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
SirDifferential posted:How useless is the flamethrower? Watching you skip all those napalm canisters since you got max ammo in the first levels of the game and never used a single one of them made me wonder if I ever ended up actually using the weapon. Somehow I get the mental image of people running around on fire using the same AI as when you shoot them with a tranquilizer dart. It is completely useless. The inclination is to run charging at a guy flames blasting, but each unit of fuel is like a half second of flame. A full flame canister is good for like 2-3 kills unless you sneak up on people and use it as an assassination weapon. Which actually makes me consider doing a flamethrower/baton only run someday.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Scalding Coffee posted:What is China trying to do to get out of being the world's leading producer of pollution? Something has to give and developing countries shouldn't be punished. They do a ton of work reducing pollution in developing nations. Under the Kyoto Protocol, nations can reduce their own pollution, or spend bucks to help other nations reduce their carbon footprint by an equivalent amount. China has not been good about reducing their own footprints, but they do a ton of work on other developing nations.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
He was in the academy before that, the game just starts in his first 24 hours as an active duty agent.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Helios has the best music, also.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
So in truth, I do think Helios is the best option. Firstly, Helios' ending reduces suffering for the greatest number of human beings. Whereas Tong's ending forces humanity into a dark age of regrowth and rediscovery, and the Illuminati just maintains a previous status quo, Helios has already given people what they want, and is already beginning to improve things. Helios provides a world where people can live happy and free, without the interests of the very rich or very powerful driving their suffering. He also lays on the best philosophy at the ending. "You will be what you will be. We are our choices." It's excellent and truthful.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:Problem is though that Helios is a child of the Illuminati and MJ12 and simply wants to rule and restore "order" than anything else. Remember that Helios is originally Echelon IV, in essence, and wants to protect humanity by finding terrorists. It turned on MJ12 because it classified their ambition to rule as terrorism. It doesn't want to rule at all, I think, but rather sees it as an function of its purpose, a function of its programming, and it needs JC to create for it a human interface. Its ending ties closely in with the conversation with Morpheus - people want Divine Rule, and this is that divine rule, this is the machine become god, that will rule justly and ensure happiness, and JC becomes, well, JC, the human aspect of the divine. So to me, this always struck me as the most philosophically satisfying ending, the most consistent with the thrust of the game's underlying philosophy, as well as the most ethically appealing and humanity-benefiting result.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
With regards to the discussion about Bobbin's positions on reality, I think probably one of the biggest errors in reasoning I see regularly is the misunderstanding that scientific measurement and study, for all the good it's done us, is still inductive, not deductive. In a world that increasingly moves away from religion, spirituality, etc. etc. and values more and more the metrics over the experience, this is a problem. Science, at best, points an indicator towards truth. It might show us a sign of truth, or a symbol of truth. We may, through scientific inquiry, approximate truth. But we cannot ever, through the scientific method, deduce truth. There is no absolute truth to be found in symbols, just as a railroad crossing sign only indicates that there might be a railroad crossing, but it cannot prove it. Science helps us to refine our understanding of reality, and it helps us to make predictions that allow us to improve our technology and our ability to affect reality, but at the end of the day, the question, to me, comes down to what we value more as "real." For a long time, I grew up believing in an objective reality, and I still do of course. But I don't know that an objective reality corresponds to an objective truth. Ultimately, the sun might burn out, as a million stars already have, but if there's not a living being to experience it, it's inconsequential, and perhaps not even true. I mean, truth is a value, it's a state we attribute to things, but every attribution requires someone to attribute, and the ability to meaningfully communicate that attribution state. What is truth? It's a complicated question, but I don't suspect it's a question we'll find an answer to through scientific inquiry. We can determine small truths, "people can see red," but this is not meaningful in a void. After all, Mary the super-scientist can know everything there is to know about wavelengths of light and dictionary definitions, but until she has actually seen red, she knows nothing about the experience of red. In what way does she know red, then? If I've read everything there is to read about a place, but have never been there, I really have no direct knowledge of that place. Let's say Niagara Falls. I can see photos, watch videos, eat, think, sleep, and dream of Niagara Falls, but until I've been there, I know nothing at all about the Falls, I only know what I have read, studied, seen footage of, etc. And, importantly, those things aren't the Falls. In a world where we have near instant access to media about so many things, it's easy to mistake the photo for the object. Baudrillard said a lot of crazy things, but one thing Baudrillard made a lot of sense about in Simulacra and Simulation is how easily we mistake the symbol for the thing. You can ask someone to describe Jesus, or describe Beethoven, or describe any number of people from the past, and many of us can. If I say "picture Napoleon," you get a mental image, but you have never seen Napoleon, you've only ever seen a representation of Napoleon. And not only that, but with, for example, Jesus, not even the artist has seen Jesus! Anybody who draws a representation of Jesus is either creating his conception from whole cloth, or representing a representation, to the point that the thing itself is no more. Nobody has seen or experienced a quark, because we lack that ability. We have all seen or experienced machines that tell us there is a quark, but that's not the same thing, just like if I show you a picture of a Beatles' concert, you've still never seen the Beatles in concert. Even if you watch a movie, in surround sound, of the Beatles in concert, you still don't have the experience of the Beatles concert, you have the experience of watching that movie. They're distinct, and different, but in our minds we're quick to blur them. As the LP points out, none of us have the experience of listening to Bobbin talk about these things, we have only the experience of listening to a video online that represents Bobbin talking about a thing. So the question, to my mind, isn't about whether or not there's an objective reality, but rather, how we experience that reality, how we interface with it. Increasingly as a society, we love metrics and measurement, even when people run, they take little machines to count their steps and heartrate and distance and time and so on and so on, to the point where if it's not documented, it's as if it didn't happen. We live in a world of "pics or it didn't happen." But when we live our lives that way, we miss out on the actual experience of life. And that, to me, is what's actually real. I know the sun burns at temperatures I cannot conceive of eight light minutes away, but to me, the sun is still warmth and light through the window, not some sphere of burning gas and plasma. And in fact, it is that to everyone, every single person, because even the most learned astronomer in the world has never experienced the sun as a sphere of burning gas and plasma, they've always experienced it as a distant source of light. The light I see from the stars at night started its journey to me before humanity itself existed, but that's not what's real. What's real is the beauty and majesty of a starlit night, the tapestry of lights against the darkness. To me, that's real, and all the talk of light years and burning gases? That's just something we've added to the experience. And it might be different to you! But that's your reality, and it cannot be mine, because our experiences are distinct, and our experiences shape what we do to that information, and what we do to that information? That's all we can actually experience. That's our reality.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:"There is a massive famine due to the effects of global warming that I was powerless to stop; I can only healthily feed 90% of the population, who do I allow to starve?" I agree with you about the dangers of utilitarianism, but Helios has a universal constructor. We don't know what the necessary ingredients are, but we do know he can produce organic matter essentially ex nihilo, so producing food can't be that complicated.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 04:15 |
|
|
This is a future where every traffic signal on the planet is connected into a central computer, a scenario that was engineered in by years of successive government policies and which only loosely mirrors the real life attempts at similar (Room 641a for example). The fact is that highly centralized telecommunications are a dream of organizations like the NSA, and they do everything they can to promote them. I mean, Echelon IV, mentioned in this game, is a real thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2014 03:06
|
|