Because Civ is a single player game. It isn't meant for multiplayer, and multiplayer has always been a terrible experience. I'd prefer if they dropped it entirely and spent more time on polishing the AI or released it earlier. Because they shove in a half baked multiplayer we get a worse game.
I've had lots of fun playing Civilization 4 over LANs, so please allow me to disagree, for the most part, with your statement. That said, the AI in Civ 5 is rather flawed.
Think about it. Our greatest right is the right to vote. If you can't trust people with a gun how in hell can you trust them to vote? This might explain everything.
One person with bad voting sense is a fraction of a percentage point—hardly of interest. One person with bad shooting sense is a classroom full of dead teenagers—kind of a big deal. Does that make more sense to you now?
or do proper crop rotation with crops that help replenish.
And what exactly is wrong with using fertilizer? Even the iron age farmers knew about spreading fertilizer although they mostly referred to it as manure or just shit. But continue down the luddite path if it makes you feel better about yourselves.
Over-fertilization pollutes the groundwater. This has already been problematic and a reason for agricultural reform in the Netherlands.
My Alienware M11R3 can play Crysis (and warhead) with decent FPS. Mind you not as well as a desktop, but then again my desktop isn't 4.5lbs and can be taken anywhere (battery life is better too, darn UPS for the desktop weighs as much as it does and only lasts 10 min, the laptop at full burn, ie gaming, runs for 2.5hr).
I take this LAN parties all the time, WAY better than packing up a whole desktop. Maybe I'm just getting old, but not having to spend 1hr setup/tare-down is very nice. Sit down, plug in, turn on, play games. And the heated keyboard keeps you hand warm while you play.
That notebook is not an Ultrabook, however. It's too thick.
With video games costing tens of millions to develop nowdays, $600,000 for a multiplatform 3D game seems like a very low figure. Will they really be able to pull this off?
This is about porting the game, not creating it from scratch.
The eye is a very complex organ though, so we would be behind. I'm glad to see progress, but even so, 4 months is a little short-term to say "no bad health effects". Given the cells are embryonic stem cells, I'm more concerned with the 10-20 year range.
As someone also suffering from one of the diseased potentially cured by this, I may not be ready to wait up to twenty years for long-term results, since I may very well be blind by then, thank you very much. With that said, four months is a very short time.
Mind altering drugs?
Worked for me...
Ask five economists and you'll get five different explanations (six if one went to Harvard). -- Edgar R. Fiedler