I've coached the high school speech and debate team for 20 years and practicing movement is a big part of platform speaking.
If you're trying to engage the audience in a less-formal, more personal way, then you definitely want to move away from the podium. The podium represents a barrier between you and the audience and you step around the podium to remove that barrier.
Movement is a great idea as long as it has some purpose. You have to be careful because your nerves can take over and turn the movement into nervous pacing, which is distracting to the audience. Shifting weight from foot to foot and swaying are distractions as well.
To prevent the movement from just looking like you're nervous, try and move naturally and with purpose. For example, if you start your presentation behind the podium, move around the side or front of the podium during your opening/introductory comments. As you transition to your first point, move to a different area of the audience. Talk from there until you transition to your next idea, then move again. Just make sure you talk while you move and that you look natural as you walk.
Other ideas are to reinforce your points and message with movement. Step towards the audience when you make a point that you want them to remember. As you move to background information or something less interesting, it's ok to turn your hips and move away from them to reset your position. As others have said, don't turn your back, but showing the audience your profile while you move to another area is fine. You may have to compensate by raising your voice while you move.
There's such power in becoming an effective public speaker. Kudos to you for doing it.
I think it'll be ok, if I can get around my comic-ingrained notion of Jim Gordon.
To me, he was a nobody, a thick-glasses-wearing grinder of a detective that worked his way from beat cop to detective over 30 freaking years - barely - and was kept in the lower ranks because he wouldn't embrace corruption. He never advanced until Batman broke the chokehold corruption had on the Gotham force.
It's jarring to see him portrayed as the handsome action hero with the blonde bombshell girlfriend.
Quote from: wonderpug on September 16, 2014, 07:06:13 PM
Quote from: ATB on September 16, 2014, 06:54:42 PM
Quote from: wonderpug on September 16, 2014, 06:29:45 PM
Does it even make you move faster in this game?
Harder to hit (for some).
Is that what bunny hopping means nowadays? I thought it referred to the weird diagonal crouch hop people did to run faster.
I was referring to the practice of hopping or boost-hopping or double-hopping or hop-strafing all over the map instead of running. It is kind of amusing. The maps that have a lot of outdoor areas look like a massive flea circus, with players bounding all over. I think it makes them harder to hit because the hit detection or whatever the game uses to determine hits and misses is less accurate across all 3 axis. But maybe I just suck.
I think Tony voted for Kass because he knew Woo had flipped and in his demented-dramatic-as-a-school-girl-ego-fueled mind, he couldn't be on the losing side of a vote. So, he votes for MalnuTrisha and he can still say it was his "strategy" and he didn't lose that vote.
Or, it could be that he's just a moron. I've never seen anyone run a tribe like he does, without any appreciable skills or value. It's nutty. He tells them who they can talk to and when they can do it, and throws a tantrum like a little girl when they disobey him.
Received it yesterday. Tried to play over lunch hour yesterday but the install and required download for teams took too long. Expect a wait that first time, if running it via the retail disc.
Played a couple Live games last night and some RTTS. There's a definite improvement in animations, improved visuals (though not drastic) and other than that, it's The Show. Stadium models are awesome, at least the ones I saw. Same options for pitching or hitting, customizable camera views. I thought the play-by-play got more repetitive than last year's so I don't know if they didn't prepare as many lines, or what.
It does play a great of baseball. The physics definitely feel right - the hits, the fouls, the plays and base running. I'm having a heck of a time getting throws across the diamond in time to get runners so there's something different about the fielder throwing. Also saw some plays in the minors that should probably have been errors that were scored errors - but also saw lots of errors, too - so maybe the official scorer just sucks in some stadiums. Also noticed more variation in the umpires - some miss obvious calls - others will miss a call but then give you a make-up call on the next pitch - you definitely have to pitch to their strike zone.
Those who play it - which pitching method do you prefer? Pulse? Meter?
Great game. Haven't tried the cross-play on Vita yet.
Playing BF4 is also so much more dependent on who you're playing with than the CoD series. It's designed to be played with coordination between squads so most sessions just suck. No one spots, joins squads balancing kits, etc. I don't get why people even play it if they don't want to run squads.
That said, if you can get the right group together, it's a freakin' blast.
Yeah, I don't really get it. Joined the GT crew but don't usually see anyone on.
My experience was similar to Bullwinkle's. PS3 lockups several times before getting in. Finally join a world, try and follow the directions for the first mission while other dudes on the map kill me with their assault rifles and I try to fend them off with my pistol. Another guy camps the Ammo Nation store and snipes me every time I try to go in and get a better gun or ammo. I figure out how to put the game in Passive mode, then listen to the other guys on the map bitch and whine about how that sucks and I should quit so someone else can join the map (and they can kill them, presumably).
Finally, I join a Last Team Standing job, win the map, then PS3 locks up on exit.
Whee. I've decided I'm not the target audience for GTAV Online.
I thought they did a good job wrapping it and tying the loose ends, yet keeping windows open in case they get another season.
If it's over -
Spoiler for Hiden:
Elam - dead. Tried something noble at the end, though. Cullen - lives the rest of his days as a Mormon farmer, tormented by the Bishop. Call it penance for their sins. Both of them - 'cause you know that Cullen would make even punishing him a bitch. Duran - builds the railroad and runs Cheyenne. Cheaters prosper, as usual. Mickey - mayor of Cheyenne, parlays criminal career into political career. Cliche but realistic, at least. Church Lady - embittered over loss of Cullen, raises kid as her own and becomes a bitter, old, spinster, ultra-judgmental church lady. Like all church ladies, really. Newspaper Lady - who gives a shit - geez, she was annoying.
Reviewers consistently fail to mention Madden's game-breaking gaffes or just gloss over them.
EA Effect? Wasn't it widely reported a while back that EA puts specific pressure on game sites and reviewers to publish positive reviews? I don't know how else you explain a reviewer failing to see these AI issues. One reviewer mentioned some "strange late game AI choices." Choosing to pass on 3rd and long with 3 seconds left in the game when you're on the opponent's 20 and down by 3 points is not a "strange choice" - it's a broken game.
I hate Madden reviews because they're all over the place. More than once, I've been burned by glowing reviews of a Madden game that turns out to be a stinking mess. A couple months after it's out, the consensus will be that some shit's broken but none of that stuff will show up in the initial reviews. It's like reviewers are looking at different games.
Other views note a buttload of problems with the game; inconsistent AI, stuck animations, bad commentary, and features that haven't been improved since last year. Then, at the end they'll say "best Madden yet" and give it an 8 or 9. It's crazy.
I don't know - all I saw was the same 'ol BF BS - shooting through a scope while taking bullets, magic scopes that see through cover, window coverings that act as cover, etc.
I can see BF4 having trigger-able set pieces on the battlefield, like put explosives right here and this bridge falls, but I don't believe it'll be an actual transformable battlefield. I'd love to be able to blast away all the cover from a sniper spot, or if the grenade in the video would have blown the train car door off so it couldn't be used any longer, but if the battlefield actually responded to every move, a helicopter would just raze all the buildings and let the soldiers fight through the rubble.
I can't believe it's doing so poorly. Everyone that I know that's seen it thought it was awesome. I figured word-of-mouth would bring the box office up. Such a great summer blockbuster (brainless fun) movie.
Malcom's vote makes no sense - unless he's going to go back to the Favorites clan and tell them he was just pretending to cozy up to the fans to flush Reynold's idol out. He did get that accomplished - and he also cemented the idea that he (Malcolm) does NOT have an idol of his own, or he never would have taken Reynold's idol like that. Crazy.
Allow it? She'll love it. When you're playing Tokyo Jungle on the PS3 and your wife wants to watch the six hour recap of The Voice, your ability to switch your game to the Vita so she can watch TV will make you a hero, man. Just think of it.
Besides, it's a Limited Edition. Limited! There are probably only 100 of these in the whole world. Maybe a few more, but still.
Hadn't really heard about this one until buying it due to the Forum Effect and I'm really enjoying it.
This is an awesome game for the anti-social MMO gamer. I liked WoW but couldn't find a stable enough group to ever get together at the same time and clear the instances, so finally gave up. That, and I get lots of work calls at home, so couldn't guarantee I wouldn't have to bail in the middle of some instance.
I love the community instances (events) in GW2. I show up at the quest point and there's a bunch of other dudes already there beating some boss and I get to jump in or help or watch or do whatever. Since my XP is based on whatever my contribution level was, I feel like I deserve whatever I got and don't feel like I'm ripping someone off for just hanging out. And when you get the Gold contribution level, it's awesome.
Community's been great, random people have been cool. Overflow servers beat the hell out of queues. Great stuff.
All of the arguments are an interesting mental exercise but aren't most of them irrelevant? Sure, you could ban new sales of assault weapons and I can understand that. But for the handgun debate, that war's been lost.
The cat's out of the bag, right? The FBI estimates there are 200 million privately owned guns in the U.S., and 90 handguns per 100 people. It's a $10 billion dollar industry in the U.S.
If a handgun ban went into effect next year, there is no workable mechanism that could enable the government to get those guns out of the hands of private individuals. Then, they would have to address private sales between individuals. If they criminalized that, imagine the cost of conducting a 'war on guns', policing, enforcing and incarcerating citizens - most of whom are responsible, legal handgun owners.
And if you can't solve the handgun problem - you can only mitigate the issues that gun control intends to address.
I live in Wyoming, where a concealed carry law was passed last year that allows any non-felon to carry a concealed weapon without a permit or training. I have to admit I'm concerned about getting shot accidentally at Safeway by some idiot that doesn't have any idea how their shoulder holster works.
I just don't think this is a gun control issue - it's a cultural one. The statistics between handgun ownership and gun deaths show a correlation between those things but not necessarily a causation. You could conclude that a high percentage of handgun ownership = a high % of handgun deaths but you could also conclude that a culture that glorifies violence to the point that gun ownership is desirable also = more ownership but more directly leads to deaths.
It's too bad we can't have any meaningful discourse about kids being at that theater without people screaming that we're trying to blame the victims.
I obviously don't think the victims share any individual blame for the tragedy but I think our culture bears a lot of blame, myself included. The most anticipated cinema event of the summer is a ultra-violent movie. People in our culture think it's ok to expose young kids to that level of violence. That exposure may have have actual effects in real life. It wouldn't be that shocking, would it?
As an aside, I also disagree with the popular media characterization of people who do carry handguns as people who 'live in fear' or are looking for trouble. The people I know that carry aren't fearful. Guns make them feel safe or secure (whether that's true or not) and, in particular, empowered. That makes a statement about our society as well.
I recently read a quote from Bret Easton Ellis talking about why he didn't like the movie adaptation of American Psycho that I think applies to Prometheus:
"I think the problem with American Psycho was that it was conceived as a novel, as a literary work with a very unreliable narrator at the center of it and the medium of film demands answers. It demands answers. You can be as ambiguous as you want with a movie, but it doesn’t matter — we’re still looking at it. It’s still being answered for us visually."
I loved the movie and didn't at all mind the things that didn't add up because the characters in the film are unreliable. The pilot speculates about the facility being a bio weapons factory but he doesn't really know. The scientists speculate about how the black goo works but they don't really know either - all of those answers are beyond them.
Sometimes I wish filmmakers were just allowed to put their vision on film and just say - This Is What Happened. Maybe it doesn't make sense, you figure it out, but this is what happened to these characters. They don't know why and neither do I but here it is. Kind of like the classic film Picnic at Hanging Rock.
But then the director has to do a press tour and answer questions and try and explain and it all gets convoluted and in the end, Ellis is right. Film demands answers.