America's Army 2.0 Available for Linux and OS X 112
Time Doctor writes "Linux and Mac gamers will be happy to hear that America's Army 2.0 is out of private beta, and available via mirrors at 3DGamers and HappyPuppy, among others. See this news post on the AA site for the gameplay changes." We covered the release of the Windows version of AA 2.0 a couple of weeks back, as this free FPS recruiting tool continues toward its goal of "providing civilians with an inside perspective and a virtual role in today's premiere land force, the U.S. Army."
Yes! (Score:1)
All I can say is... (Score:1, Interesting)
Frankly I'm a bit surprised that an entity of the U.S. Government would have published a game on a non-Microsoft platform, but kudos to the Army for it!
Now I'll just have to see if it will run on my laptop...
Re:All I can say is... (Score:2)
It's too early in the morning for me to find the relevent articles, though
D
Re:All I can say is... (Score:1, Funny)
In other news: SCO sues US army, Utah wiped off map.
Mac classic (Score:4, Informative)
fwiw, I had trouble getting the download link to work with either IE or Safari in OS X--the link would not present the contextual menu to me that gives the option of "saving to disk", required on this particular download.
However, I found that using the "download manager" in Mac Classic IE worked--I had to chose a previous download, and then change the pointers to the game download info.
Re:Mac classic (Score:2)
DevKit (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:DevKit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:DevKit (Score:2, Informative)
That was the original idea, though. And back a while ago they also said we'd never get pistols in game, but we have them now. So you never really know.
And I believe they said they won't release a Devkit during the life of the game. So maybe they'll r
Re:DevKit (Score:1)
Yes, it does. Fires can be put out with explosions.
Dom
Re:DevKit (Score:2)
Best case scenario : A modder creates some kind of paratrooping features/maps/missions thats so badass that the U.S. government reinstates the draft just to hire him.
Worst case scenario : Some jackass retard fanatic makes a mod using the U.S. Army models and skins along side maps/missions where the objective is to kill the President/blow up a school/kill unarmed children, with the opposing side appearing to be civilians
Re:DevKit (Score:2)
Is there any kind of devkit or plans for a devkit? One of the things that adds life to a game are the user created levels. I know I wouldn't be playing Ravenshield these days if all I had access to were the stock maps. This extends to other games as well. If this thing is to have a decent life expectancy then there needs to be some kind of dev kit for user mods.
Their FAQ says they have no plans to release such tools, which I find rather disapointing. Maybe it has to do with their UT Warfare license? Wh
Re:DevKit (Score:1)
Was the source released? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Was the source released? (Score:1, Informative)
Un-American .? (Score:3, Interesting)
Finally, I can have a go at it
Maybe the army has to recruit some more IT-personnel...
YES! (Score:3, Funny)
Now I have a game more stimulating that Photoshop and dreamweaver to play on my Mac!
Re:YES! (Score:1)
Re:God bless America! (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:God bless America! (Score:1)
Now for Linux (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Now for Linux (Score:1)
Isn't that the wrong way round? The US army would need the Linux users to muck out the attack penguins, not vice versa.
the game is about fighting (Score:4, Funny)
The army's been starting to switch some things to Linux
I don't want combat troops that know Linux - their muscles are probably too atrophied to carry an M16.
(runs for cover)
DDR (Score:1)
Not all Linux users' muscles have atrophied. Pydance [icculus.org] and StepMania [stepmania.com] are physical exercise games that both run in Linux.
on virtual roles... (Score:1)
Oh? So the game provides you with thousands of innocent civilians to kill [iraqbodycount.net]? Or does it offer you leisure time to get some feedback from the locals [seacoastonline.com]?
I hope not. I hate it when fun little fantasies get complicated by reality. Hopefully all the bad guys look like Osama or Saddam.
Wanted: torrent and exe (Score:2, Interesting)
2. is there an archive with linux exes for those who have the win version ?
seems not, please prove me wrong.
kthxbye.
still no vehicles... (Score:1)
Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:1, Insightful)
If you think our freedom is something that was just given to us, then you are both naive and ungrateful.
Have a chat with your grandfather about how much freedom costs; I'd be willing to bet he is very well aware of the price our soldiers pay to keep people like you safe and stupid..
fucking moron (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course Freedom isn't free. Ideally, in an anarcho-capitalistic world, it takes money to pay law-enforcement agencies to protect us from random criminal acts. However, you cannot preserve Freedom or increase Freedom by murdering thousands of individuals (which is all that war is).
Re:fucking moron (Score:1)
defensive means exactly that (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:defensive means exactly that (Score:1)
However, in practicality, actually obeying those dictums means that any person without scruples would immediately overtake any person with scruples. You'd have immediate degradation to rule by tyrrany. Any country with nuclear weapons that felt like attacking a "morally right" country could just give their leader a cell-phone and let him call in a nuclear attack. The only fear they'd have is that we might shoot the 15 or 20 people directly responsible for the missile launch, if we could f
Re:defensive means exactly that (Score:2)
Any country with nuclear weapons that felt like attacking a "morally right" country could just give their leader a cell-phone and let him ca
Re:defensive means exactly that (Score:1)
What is morally wrong may not be the wrong thing to do. Considering human nature and the ease of tweaking the system, there appear to be cases where it is better to be morally wrong than to be morally right.
you said it (Score:2)
Re:you said it (Score:2)
appeal to authority (Score:2)
A true fundamental axiom is indisputeable. The non-aggression axiom fits that
Re:appeal to authority (Score:2)
I wasn't aware that that is what I did. I just pointed out that your statement that a thinking person could not accept a paradox was not necessarily true. I certainly didn't mean to use it as a defense for my argument.
"To hand over large amounts of centralized power to individuals and then ask them not to abuse that power is laughable"
As is handing all power over to the wealthy and then asking them
Re:appeal to authority (Score:2)
Sometimes I can be so easily trolled...
Re:appeal to authority (Score:2)
As for your assertion that libertarianism hands power to the wealthy, that's non-sense. They earn money by satisfying the consumer; if they stop doing that, they stop earning money. Because of private courts, they cannot abuse that power.
Re:appeal to authority (Score:2)
the reason they're wealthy (Score:2)
Re:the reason they're wealthy (Score:2)
We have an unaddressable fundamental belief difference, which is a good place to stop this discussion.
hmpf (Score:2)
Re:hmpf (Score:2)
I've seen too much oppression of people without money by people with money to believe that, given more freedom, people with power will use it more responsibly.
Witness bans on the hom
wow, what idiocy (Score:2)
Firstly, Libertarianism makes no assumption that people are inherently good. It would work better than any other system even if people were only inherently evil, crooked, selfish and corrupt. Obvio
Re:wow, what idiocy (Score:2)
The "problem" is with people with mental illnesses. I'm not sure that the free market is any better than any other economic or governmental force at curing that. If you believe the homeless are all that way because they are lazy or regulated out of easy but low paying jobs, you might want to take your nose out of a book for a while and actually look around you.
"no-one has the right to tresspass on anyone else' property, homeless or n
god fucking damnit (Score:2)
Re:defensive means exactly that (Score:1)
ha! ad hominem (Score:2)
Re:fucking moron (Score:2)
WWII?
Did you know that the Japanese printed money that they were going to use as the official currency of the US after they took it over?
Where the fuck do you think that the axis powers would have turned their attention after conquering Europe, Asia and Africa?
LK
bzzt! wrong! (Score:2)
Re:bzzt! wrong! (Score:2)
And???
What you describe is a pre-emptive war, which is really no different than me saying "I think you're going to hit me, so I'll just kill you now".
Pearl Harbor? Come on, I know you saw that Ben Afleck movie. In case you didn't know, it was based on a real event.
As for WWII, that was made a certainty by the way we handled the ending of WWI ("the war to end all wars").
True, but hindsight is 20/20. That mistake is be
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:1, Offtopic)
Where were you when Iraq invaded Kuwait? Or when the Kosovars were getting massacred by Bosnians? When Hilter invaded? What were you doing while Somalians were starving? Or when the Taliban had Afghanistan under it's terroristic grip? When two planes crashed in the World Trade Center, what were you doing?
I hear a lot of talk from a lot of people. But never any action.
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:4, Interesting)
But, you know, your question is correct. What are we doing? I see your president as a new Hitler (his grandfather was, after all, a great supporter of Hitler). People, at the time, did not say anything when he annexed Austria. Not when he entered the de-militarised zone in the East. They only took notice when he entered Poland. Well, what I am doing my dear friend is making people realise that Iraq was the same as Poland but NOBODY GAVE A FUCK this time. But the tide is turning, and your president WILL face the question come election day 2004.
Also, funnily enough, you mention the Taliban. You are obviously ignorant to the fact that YOUR GOVERNMENT DIRECTLY financed the Taliban and provided diplomatic cover for them.
Godwin's Law Hereby Invoked! (Score:1)
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
Yes, it was about WOMDs. Though they haven't been found yet, would you rather Saddam Hussein stay in power? Regardless what the war was about, getting him out of power was beneficial for the entire global community, including Iraq. The time for talk and half measures was over, Hussein had clearly violated UN resolutions.
I see your president as a new Hitler
Oh really? And
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:1)
However, we supported the Taliban because it was politically advantageous to us, only to suffer the repercussions of it. Now we've taken out Hussein for financial reasons...It's only a matter of time before we suffer the repercussions of that.
People joining the army know that it could mean their death. What I wish they would remember is that by killing themselves in order to get politicians' frie
you are naive (Score:2)
No, actually, Democracy is not a beatiful thing. Democracy creates a situation where the best liars will compete with one-another for the priviledge to steal from and exploit the taxpayer (that is, for the priviledge to be the net receiver of taxes).
Re:you are naive (Score:2)
Re:you are naive (Score:2, Insightful)
Just a guess.
While I also feel that the author is just being flippant and "rebellious", I have to say that just because something is the best, doesn't mean that it's "beautiful". Solid poo is better than squishy poo or watery poo. That doesn't make my poop beautiful.
Ok, I guess now I'm being flippant ^_^
anarcho-capitalism (Score:2)
If we have to choose between the evils of various forms of The State, the least harmful form would most likely be monarchy. See Democracy: The God That Failed [mises.org]
Re:anarcho-capitalism (Score:1)
I'd rather the police and courts protect me than to have to walk around with a gun everywhere like some bad Mad Max movie, thank you. The system may not be perfect as it stands, but it's better than living every day in terror.
Re:anarcho-capitalism (Score:2)
Libertarianism sounds great at first, a world where you can do what you want and nobody bugs you, but in actuality, then big business can be as large as it wants, do as it pleases, in a world where they aren't bugged.
Philosophically, its close to exstentialism, which any philosopher knows is clearly incorrect and flawed.
C'mon now, especially here on
mis-characterization and mis-understanding of (A)c (Score:2)
Re:mis-characterization and mis-understanding of ( (Score:2, Insightful)
red herrinb (Score:2)
liberal drivel (Score:2)
PS (Score:2)
Re:red herrinb (Score:2)
Who would be responsible to only thier investors.
Libertarianism is about property rights.
That's funny, there was a time that Libertarianism was about liberty (which was then defined as "freedom of action").
how exactly is The State helping anyone?
building public roads, providing public education, protecting your right to own property, etc.
As for the "needy" individuals that you say The State helps -- namely, the poor
and the working class. You know, those
Re:red herrinb (Score:2)
Which would be almost all property owners, and all those who own apartment complexes. Since many of the lower and middle class live in apartments, they're covered by their landlord's private law-enforcement, even if they don't have their own private insurance. Furthermore, you continue to ignore the fact that law-enforcement is provided by the hard work and labor of law-enforcement agencies. No-one is entitled to their labor without compensating them for i
Re:red herrinb (Score:2)
I'm beginning to wonder what exactly you might be tempted to include in your definition of property.
wow, you've really been brainwashed (Score:2)
The following links may prove informative on
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:1)
2) A glimmer in grandpa's eye.
3) Playing a video game, probably
4) Worrying that the US was supporting such an extremist group.
5) Watching TV with my girlfriend.
military personal (Score:3, Insightful)
Hitler, WWII: Caused by the short-sighted and ignorant actions of the victors of WWI. WWII was made inevitable by the politicians who set up the treaty after WWI.
WWI: WWI would have been forced to resolve peacefully, as it was at a standstill, had not the US intervened. Btw, the British weren't "good guys". They formed
Re:military personal (Score:2)
Oh yeah? Which military? Have our enemies been as humane as the United States military? I think not. Our enemies have been the ones using underhanded tactics, torture, the muder of civilians and innocents. They dress military personal as civilians, torture and starve prisoners, throw the Geneva Convention out the
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
Second of all, if you are going to present yourself as a member of the military, please don't automatically assume that anyone who disagrees with your viewpoint is unpatriotic. A lot of us who th
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
-Edmund Burke
Either way, regardless of your views, you've done nothing but complain... your apathy to both sides amuses me. "I think both sides are wrong, so instead of doing something about it either way, I'll just be cynical". You may disagree with my standpoint, but like it or not, at least I've done something proactive about it.
As for Vietnam, all cadets and junior officers study it extensively so that the mistakes are nev
Hell with 'em (Score:2)
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:2)
Re:Freedom ISN'T Free! (Score:1)
How many more UN resoultions were you willing to allow Hussein to defy? 12 wasn't enough?
Re:Logical fallacies, anyone? (Score:1)
You attack Americans as nationalistic, yet cite "Rumsfeld et al" as an authoritative source. You can't even distill out your own inconstistencies, let alone that of the news you've read.
you're missing the point: "If even (insert name of someone who has a very strong interest in believing the opposite) admits this is true, it MUST be true". he doesn't believe Rumsfeld/etc generally, but he's saying that it must be true if they can't help but step away from their normal propaganda line to say it
Re:yay! (Score:1, Offtopic)
I'm sure that you'd also hate to see what it looks like when they make sausage.
War is ugly business. War is an abomination to God and man. War is also unfortunately sometimes necessary. Some of the people in this world are BAD people. Some of the people in this world think nothing of killing innocents. The on
fine with me (Score:2)