# Ret-H@CKer

Iran "made a very big mistake" in shooting down a US military surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz, President Donald Trump says. However, he told reporters it could have been the result of human error, saying: "I find it hard to believe it was intentional." Iran said the drone had violated Iranian airspace, but the US military denied this. The incident comes amid escalating tension between the two countries. Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said Iran would take its complaint that the US "encroaches on our territory" to the UN. What we know about Gulf tanker attacks The Iran nuclear crisis in 300 words Profile: Iran's Revolutionary Guards "We don't seek war but will zealously defend our skies, land and waters," he said on Twitter. What did Trump say? Speaking at the White House, he called the drone's downing a "new fly in the ointment". Mr Trump said it was "documented" that the unmanned drone had been over international waters and not in Iranian airspace. "I think probably Iran made a mistake - I would imagine it was a general or somebody that made a mistake in shooting that drone down," he said. "It could have been somebody who was loose and stupid," he added. What other reaction has there been? Russia's President Vladimir Putin has warned that war between the US and Iran would be a "catastrophe with unpredictable consequences". UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has urged all parties to exercise maximum restraint. In the US, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the US had no appetite for war with Iran, while the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, Joe Biden, called Mr Trump's Iran strategy a "self-inflicted disaster". Meanwhile Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir told the BBC his country was trying to send a message to Iran that its behaviour was "not acceptable". "Nobody wants to start a war. But we can't let Iran go on a rampage like this. The evidence of Iranian involvement is very compelling. They said they would do it, and now they are doing it," he said. Oil prices have jumped by about 5% following the incident. What happened on Thursday? Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said its air force had shot down a US "spy" drone in the early hours after the unmanned aircraft violated Iranian airspace near Kuhmobarak in the southern province of Hormozgan. In a speech on Iranian state TV, IRGC commander-in-chief Maj-Gen Hossein Salami said the drone's downing was a "clear message" to the US that Iran's borders were "our red line". The US military's Central Command later confirmed that a US Navy Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS-D) aircraft was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile system while operating in what it said was international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz at approximately 23:35 GMT on Wednesday (04:05 Iran time on Thursday). "Iranian reports that the aircraft was over Iran are false," spokesman Navy Capt Bill Urban said. "This was an unprovoked attack on a US surveillance asset in international airspace." Lt Gen Joseph Guastella, Commander of US Air Forces Central Command, later said the drone had been operating at high altitude and was about 34km from the nearest point on the Iranian coast when it was shot down. US naval assets have been dispatched to the drone debris field in international waters, a US source told Reuters. The BAMS-D is a RQ-4A Global Hawk High-Altitude, Long, Endurance (HALE) drone that can carry out surveillance and reconnaissance missions over vast ocean and coastal regions, according to the US military. Trump leaves space for Tehran moderates President Trump's comments suggesting that the Iranians' shooting down of an unmanned US aircraft over the Gulf was possibly a mistake tends to confirm earlier reports from Washington that the White House was eager to dial down tensions. The Iranians had already attempted to shoot down a smaller US drone earlier in the week, and the two episodes are a powerful reminder of the dangers of escalation, with US and Iranian forces operating in close proximity. The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps had earlier characterised the incident as a clear warning to Washington. Mr Trump appears to be holding out the possibility that not everyone in Tehran is following the same playbook, perhaps leaving space for more moderate voices there similarly to reduce the tension. What else has fuelled US-Iran tensions? On Monday, the US defence department said it was deploying 1,000 extra troops to the region in response to "hostile behaviour" by Iranian forces. It has already sent an aircraft carrier strike group and B-52 bombers. The US has also accused Iran of attacking two oil tankers with mines last Thursday just outside the Strait of Hormuz, in the Gulf of Oman. Iran rejects the allegation. It was the second time in a month tankers had been attacked close in the region, through which a fifth of the world's oil passes each day. On Monday Iran also announced its stockpile of low-enriched uranium would next week exceed limits it agreed with world powers under a landmark nuclear deal in 2015. Iran stepped up its production in response to tightening economic sanctions from the US, which unilaterally withdrew from the deal last year. Is this the first time Iran has targeted a US drone? Last week, the US military accused Iran of attempting to shoot down a US MQ-9 Reaper armed drone with a surface-to-air missile in an attempt to disrupt surveillance of one of the tankers that was attacked, the Kokuka Courageous. The drone had earlier observed a fire on board the other tanker, the Front Altair. The previous week, another US MQ-9 Reaper was shot down over Yemen by a surface-to-air missile fired by the Iran-backed rebel Houthi movement. The US military said the altitude of the engagement "indicated an improvement over previous Houthi capability, which we assess was enabled by Iranian assistance". Iran denies providing weapons to the Houthis. In 2011, Iran said it had captured a US RQ-170 Sentinel reconnaissance drone that had been reported lost by US forces in neighbouring Afghanistan. It developed its own version of the drone, one of which was shot down by Israel last year. US-Iran tension: Recent events May 2018: US President Donald Trump withdraws unilaterally from the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers, and begins reinstating sanctions to force Iran to renegotiate the accord. Iran's economy slumps as they take effect. 2 May 2019: Mr Trump steps up pressure on Tehran by ending exemptions from secondary sanctions for countries still buying Iranian oil. 5 May: The US sends an aircraft carrier strike group and B-52 bombers to the Gulf because of "troubling and escalatory indications" related to Iran. 8 May: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani says Iran will scale back its commitments under the nuclear deal in retaliation for the sanctions, including by allowing its stockpile of low-enriched uranium to increase. Enriched uranium is used to make reactor fuel and potentially nuclear weapons. 12 May: Four oil tankers are damaged by explosions off the UAE coast in the Gulf of Oman. The UAE says the blasts were caused by limpet mines planted by a "state actor". The US blames Iran, but it denies the allegation. 13 June: Explosions hit two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. The US again accuses Iran, releasing footage purportedly showing Iranian forces removing an unexploded limpet mine from a damaged vessel. Iran says the evidence is fabricated. 17 June: Iran says it will breach the limit on its stockpile of enriched uranium set under the nuclear deal on 27 June, unless Europe protects Iranian oil sales. 20 June: Iranian forces shoot down US military drone over the Strait of Hormuz.

For the first time since Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down in July 2014, prosecutors have announced charges against suspects in the case. Three Russians and a Ukrainian have been charged with bringing a missile into the area in eastern Ukraine and with murdering 298 passengers and crew. Passenger flight MH17 was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was shot down over conflict-hit Ukraine. A court case will begin in the Netherlands on 9 March 2020. International arrest warrants have been issued for the four men. What we know about flight MH17 The Dutch-led joint investigation team (JIT) named the men as Igor Girkin, Sergei Dubinsky and Oleg [CENSORED]tov from Russia, as well as Ukrainian Leonid Kharchenko. The JIT, which seeks to try the suspects under Dutch law, previously said it had a "long list" of persons of interest and appealed again for witnesses as the investigation continues. Image copyright Reuters Image caption "It's a start" - Silene Fredriksz, mother of one of the victims Speaking ahead of Wednesday's announcement, Silene Fredriksz, who lost her son Bryce, said that in the five years since, some relatives had died not knowing the truth. "We all get older... I hope that I will know the truth before I close my eyes." Who are the suspects? The most prominent of the four is Igor Girkin (also known as Strelkov), a former colonel in Russia's FSB intelligence service, according to prosecutors. He was given the minister of defence title in the rebel-held eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk. He is believed to be the highest military officer in the area who was in direct contact with the Russian Federation. In a statement Mr Girkin said: "I can only say that militia did not shoot down the Boeing." The others charged are: Sergei Dubinsky (known as Khmury), who was employed by Russia's GRU military intelligence agency, was a deputy of Mr Girkin and was in regular contact with Russia, according to prosecutors Oleg [CENSORED]tov, known as Giurza, a former soldier of GRU special forces and deputy head of the intelligence service in Donetsk, the JIT says Ukrainian national Leonid Kharchenko who has no military background but led a combat unit as a commander in Eastern Ukraine, according to prosecutors "The JIT suspects Girkin, Dubinsky, [CENSORED]tov and Kharchenko of having played a significant role in the death of 298 innocent civilians," said prosecutor Fred Westerbeke. "The means of evidence these suspicions are based on will be elaborated on during the criminal proceedings, then the judge will pass sentence. The suspects are innocent until the contrary is proven in court." He added that investigators had "evidence showing that Russia provided the missile launcher". Who were the victims of the plane crash? Dead remembered amid tears and sunflowers Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov earlier told the BBC Russia had been given "no chance to take part" in the official investigation. Asked whether Russia would hand any suspects over for trial, he said Moscow's position was "very well known" but declined to comment further. What is known about flight MH17? The passenger jet left Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport at 10:15 GMT on 17 July 2014 and was due to arrive at Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia the following day. A few hours after take-off, the plane lost contact with air traffic control about 50km (30 miles) from the Russia-Ukraine border. The plane crashed in the Donetsk area, in territory controlled by Russian-backed separatists. Parts of the wreckage were found distributed over an area of about 50 sq km (19 square miles). In October 2015, the Dutch Safety Board concluded the plane had been hit by a Buk missile, causing it to break apart in mid-air. The JIT - which includes officials from the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia and Ukraine - concluded in May 2018 that the missile system had belonged to the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile brigade, based in the western Russian city of Kursk. It produced evidence that it said proved how the missile system had reached eastern Ukraine. Russia responded by denying any of its anti-aircraft missile systems had ever crossed the Ukrainian border. Its foreign ministry has accused the JIT investigation of being "biased and politically motivated". Australia and the Netherlands have both officially held Russia responsible for the crash. A total of 283 passengers, including 80 children, and 15 crew members were killed on the flight. Delays and difficulties in the recovery of victims' remains prompted widespread international criticism.

Hello , To Fix Your Problem just do this few advices Re-Open Your cs1.6 ( Cloose it and open it again ) Restart your modem ( OFF modem for a while and ON it ) Check Your wifi work ( Maybe you have lag or your net is bad ) IF it does not work watch this : For more info pm me in [ CSBD / TS3 / GFX-DESIGNER ROOM] #PEACE

News that Ford plans to close its Bridgend plant next year, with the loss of 1,700 jobs, is just the latest in a series of blows for the UK car industry. In February, Honda said it would close its Swindon plant by 2021, with the loss of about 3,500 roles, while Jaguar Land Rover and Nissan are also cutting production and jobs. It comes as carmakers around the globe struggle with a range of challenges, while consumers are buying fewer cars. So what's holding manufacturers back? 1. Falling demand After years of strong growth, global car sales were broadly flat in 2018, largely because of a slump in demand in the world's biggest market, China. It has hurt carmakers who had been doing brisk business in China, says Dave Leggett, editor of the car industry website just-auto. Nissan chooses Japan over UK to build new X-Trail car Honda confirms Swindon car plant closure "Trade tensions between Washington and Beijing have hit confidence in China generally. The economy was slowing down anyway, but that accentuated it," he says. Jaguar Land Rover has blamed its poor performance recently on falling Chinese demand, while Ford has pulled plans to sell a Chinese-made Ford Focus in the US because of the impact of trade tariffs. The Chinese slump comes as demand in two other giant car markets, Western Europe and the US, has also slowed amid waning consumer confidence. "It is creating more competition, which makes it tougher for everyone," Mr Leggett says. 2. Emissions woes In Europe, emissions issues are also causing headaches for car firms. Air quality concerns and taxation changes have led to a big drop-off in diesel sales, contributing to a 7% fall in new car registrations in the UK in 2018. More challenging, perhaps, is the introduction of tough new CO2 emission standards, designed to tackle global warming, that make it much more expensive to build cars. From 2021, manufacturers will face big fines in the EU if their fleets break agreed emissions limits, and these targets will get progressively tougher. "Carmakers have to add on average €1,000 of content to cars to make them comply with the new rules," says Arndt Ellinghorst, an automotive industry analyst at Evercore ISI. "It means consumers will be less inclined to buy, which only adds to the general slowdown in consumer confidence." 3. The electric challenge To get their emissions levels down, carmakers are also going to need to sell a lot more electric vehicles, but there are big obstacles in the way. "A lot of carmakers are not ready to deliver electric vehicles at the right quantities," says Mr Leggett. "They need to change their operations and gear the cars much more to a mass market, but that requires investment." The other side of the problem is that the market isn't quite ready for electric cars. Global sales of battery electric cars surged 73% in 2018 to 1.3 million units, but that was still just a fraction of the 86 million cars sold overall. Brexit: Car investment halves as industry hits 'red alert' UK car output driven down by plunging demand in China Ford set to close Bridgend engine plant in 2020 According to Dr Jonathan Owens, supply chain and logistics expert at the University of Salford Business School, one issue is the lack of charging infrastructure on roads in Europe and the US, although he says China is making great strides in this area. Another is about the limited range of some mid to lower-market electric cars. "Ford has had an electric Ford Focus since 2011, but the range is hopeless compared to competitors at less than 100 miles," Dr Owens says. "And the VW golf can only drive for about 120 miles." 4. A shift away from ownership? Other worries are weighing on carmakers' minds, too - one being the emergence of new technologies that could radically change our relationship to car ownership. If driverless cars go mainstream over the next 15 years, Mr Leggett says, then many of us might opt to share or rent rather than own our own vehicles. That could slash the cost of travel per mile, making ownership seem much less appealing. Traditional car companies are having to fight to stay relevant as technology giants such as ride-hailing firm Uber and Google's driverless car business Waymo dive into this market. However, the research and development (R&D) costs a lot and so many are teaming up to spread the risk. Recent examples include Ford and Volkswagen's agreement to "investigate" ways of working on electric and autonomous vehicles together, while Honda invested $2.75bn (£2.1bn) in rival General Motors' driverless unit with a view to launching a fleet of unmanned taxis. 5. Brexit In the UK, car firms have been warning repeatedly of the dangers of a no-deal Brexit since the EU referendum in 2016. And investment in the UK car industry has fallen in the last two years, slumping 46.5% in 2017 alone. The problem, analysts say, is that British car plants rely heavily on components imported from the EU, while most of the finished cars they produce are exported to the European mainland. "If we are going to have uncertainty in the form of tariffs, then that will cause bottlenecks and delays which will make UK plants less economic," says Dr Owens. However, Mr Leggett stresses Brexit is only one of many factors troubling the UK industry. "Firms are seeing lower exports to China, and sluggish sales in Europe. The UK economy isn't that buoyant at the moment too."

Egypt's former President Mohammed Morsi, who was ousted by the military in 2013, has died after fainting in a courtroom, officials say. A top figure in the now-banned Islamist movement Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi collapsed in a cage after speaking at a hearing on charges of espionage. Morsi, who was 67, had been in custody since being ousted following mass protests a year after he took office. Officials then launched a crackdown on his and Muslim Brotherhood supporters. Morsi's hearing in the capital, Cairo, was related to charges of espionage emanating from suspected contacts with the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas. He collapsed moments after addressing the court from a cage some defendants are kept in during sessions, Egypt's public prosecutor said, adding that a medical report showed no apparent recent injuries on Morsi's body. Profile: Mohammed Morsi Egypt country profile For a long time, there have been concerns over the former leader's prison conditions. Last October his youngest son, Abdullah, told AP news agency that his father was being held under constant solitary confinement and denied treatment for serious conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes. Five months earlier, Abdullah said in a Washington Post op-ed that the Egyptian authorities were "doing this on purpose, since they want to see him dead 'from natural causes' as soon as possible". The death of a leader, remembered by many as Egypt's first democratically elected president, is certain to inflame passions among his supporters and allies in Egypt and beyond. Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been quick to describe him as a martyr. Others are certain to do the same. There has long been concern about the politicised trials which have kept him in prison, as well as his conditions of confinement. Morsi had a history of ill-health. But last year, a British parliamentary panel reported he was being kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day, which they concluded could be classified as torture. They warned this could lead to premature death. His sudden collapse comes at a time when the United States, reportedly at the request of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, is working to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organisation. The death of one its most senior figures will deepen the anger and anxiety in this global Islamist movement. Who was Morsi? Morsi was born in the village of El-Adwah in the Nile Delta province of Sharqiya in 1951. He studied Engineering at Cairo University in the 1970s before moving to the US to complete a PhD. He was chosen as the Muslim Brotherhood's presidential candidate for the 2012 election after the movement's preferred choice was forced to pull out. Critics complained that, as Egypt's president, he had failed to deliver during his turbulent year in office, accusing him of allowing Islamists to monopolise the political scene and mishandling the economy. Public opposition to his government grew and millions of anti-government protesters took to the streets across Egypt to mark the first anniversary of the day he took office, on 30 June 2013. On the evening of 3 July, the army suspended the constitution and announced the formation of a technocratic interim government ahead of new presidential elections. Morsi, who denounced the announcement as a coup, was taken into custody by the army.

Thanks For this Job ? T/C

Like most of the rest of the internet, I was taken aback, to say the least, by the teaser EA released 5 months ago. The bright, cartoony-looking graphics and Uncanny Valley version of Kane put the execrable Tiberium Alliances in my head. I was really worried about what EA was unearthing the sullied corpse of Command and Conquer for this time. As it turns out, that fear was more than a little misplaced. While Command and Conquer: Rivals doesn’t fit the venerable Command and Conquer formula, it’s a remarkably, even surprisingly good strategy game that works perfectly on tablets and phones. It’s not without its issues, but the tight design and interaction depth has me returning to the meat grinder at odd times during the day to get another fix. EA and Redwood (the development studio) have created something really interesting here. Let’s take a look at the details. Boot Camp: The Basics of C&C Rivals Let’s begin, as my grandfather might have said, at the beginning. What is C&C: Rivals? At its core, Rivals is a deckbuilding strategy game. You pick the 6 unit types you’d like to have available for you in combat, and you load into one-on-one brawls with opponents to fight what are often three-to-five minute battles. There’s no timer, so matches can technically go on longer, but we’ll get to that in a minute. Once you’re loaded into a match, you’re getting right into the action. There’s no protracted build-up phase in Rivals: you’re immediately building a production structure to unlock its associated units, or a harvester to ramp up your income, and you need to start contesting the map right away. And yet, your opening strategy does have an impact: are you going to play defensively, setting up a large economy and hoping to hold on until you can bring out heavy hitters? Are you going to not build a harvester and instead train some harassment units, hoping to make up your early economic deficit by sniping the enemy harvester, or keeping your opponent on the back foot and off balance? Essentially, the gameplay itself comes down to a kind of Rock/Paper/Scissors, with units being either Infantry, Vehicles, Aircraft, or Buildings, and other units having damage bonuses against one or more of these types. You’re trying to get counter-units in place next to the units they’re designed to deal with, while keeping your own units away from the counters your opponent is producing, while fighting over control of 2 or 3 launch pads on the game map. At the beginning of a match, each player’s MCV crawls into position and unpacks into their base structure. Within a match of Rivals, each player is building units, harvesting resources, and unlocking tech structures in order to either own the launch pads and hit their enemy with a missile, or to straight-up destroy their base structure. The base structure can take 2 hits with a missile – typically, this is how matches are resolved. But some units do a lot of damage to the base structure, and it’s definitely possible to win by whittling that down, too. This might sound simplistic, but in practice it’s not at all. Knowing when to expand from 0 harvesters to 1 is a strategic choice with immediate consequences, and moving from 1 to 2 can be a risky decision (many high level players rely on 1 harvester unless they’re playing greedily or are confident in their ability to harass effectively in the early game). Additionally, many units have special abilities or attributes that bring a surprising amount of depth to their use. Whether you’re looking at units like the Orca, that have limited ammunition that has to reload after it’s been spent, or units like the Stealth Tank that are untargetable unless detected by infantry or until they fire, there’s a lot of tactical depth in this game. It doesn’t really feel like Command and Conquer, though there are some obvious overtones and nods to the classic RTS. But if you look at it not as the heir to the franchise, but on its own merits, it stands up surprisingly well. The game isn’t likely to attract users who are looking for a new iteration on classic C&C, but for those who approach the game with an open mind, its gameplay is remarkably solid. Cash Money: Progression and Monetization While the gameplay itself is phenomenal, especially for a mobile strategy game, the monetization and leveling are more likely to leave players in the cold. Similar to Clash Royale and, honestly, a significant portion of mobile games out there today, C&C: Rivals uses “cards” in conjunction with 2 currency types as a metaphor for progressing in the game. Playing matches nets you ‘fuel’ you can use to order loot boxes and speed up their progress. You can also buy these loot boxes with real currency. Loot boxes net you random assortments of ‘cards’ that represent the different units and characters you can use to build loadouts. Units become available based on your character level – not your MMR rating, as many similar games do it. This is good, as players aren’t locked out of content based on how good they are at the game. Eventually, you’ll be able to earn and unlock everything, even if you aren’t a pro. The order and rate at which content becomes unlocked has been controversial, especially since it’s possible to be matched up against players who have unlocked units or commanders you might not have come up against yet and aren’t sure how to deal with. To help minimize the feeling of the game being ‘pay to win’ EA has introduced a system called Fairplay. If you go up against an opponent with significantly higher level units than you, or a higher ladder/MMR rating, you can’t lose your own ladder rank by losing to them, and will gain bonus ladder points for beating them. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s a nod in the right direction. It’s easy to criticize monetization models like this – even being inured to the pay model thanks to seeing about a thousand (note: hyperbole) other mobile games that use it, it can feel unfair if you’re up against a player who’s got units 2 or 3 levels higher than your own. But, given that this is the way they’ve decided to go with monetization, at least they’re trying to buff off the worst of its sharp edges with systems like Fairplay. Note: Our copy was reviewed on a Samsung Galaxy S9; the reviewer was a part of EA’s Game Changers Network beta test. COMPARE TO: Castle Burn, Clash Royale, Star Wars Force Arena

Dauntless wears its Monster Hunter inspiration on its sleeve. This fantastical ride revolves around fighting monsters in confrontations that can last a few minutes or almost half an hour, with significant degrees of difficulty and rewards. You go out to battle a beast, then return home to craft new gear; like Monster Hunter, that entertaining loop propels you through Dauntless. Because it’s a live service, the prospect of an infinitely expanding experience distinguishes Dauntless from Capcom’s series (developer Phoenix Labs has already announced an expansion), though how that unfolds remains to be seen. Regardless of the game Dauntless eventually becomes, its current form is a welcoming banquet for a voracious new wave of monster hunters. Dauntless’ core progression is seductive, even if the missions and maps are threadbare in terms of tasks. It’s all monster slaying, all the time. Pick a weapon and go start smashing monsters, break off some pieces, come back to down and forge new and powerful gear. Combat is fluid, simple, and accessible; I appreciate how the weapons have straightforward movesets, but also leave high skill ceilings for mastery. New players can gravitate toward easy-to-use swords and chain blades, while seasoned hunters may choose heavy-hitting (but timing-critical) weapons like the axe or war pike. All the weapons are fun to try, but weapons like the hammer and the axe are the most enticing, as you can really feel the impact of each massive swing, leading to big staggers and broken chunks of monster bits. Each weapon is unique, but Dauntless only has a small selection of them, and the essential combinations are few and easy to learn. While this works well for onboarding new players, the lack of options dulls the experience over time. Outside of weapons, armor, and consumables, you can augment your gear with cores that provide various boosts and abilities. Creating sets of gear with powerful bonuses – like the chance to deal double damage, or the ability to revive an ally with full health instead of a fraction – is incredibly satisfying. You can feel the weight of each new tier and choice as you take on behemoth after behemoth. You can dance around the flames of giant turtles, avoid the deadly tail of a mutant beaver, and find the squishy core of a rock-ensconced foe. Whatever you’re fighting, you need to learn and adapt. Battles are more complex than simply dodging a behemoth’s standard attacks. Learning how to “boop” an enemy during certain animations and knock them down, interrupting dangerous attacks and getting a large window of opportunity, is enjoyable and allows you to take on tougher monsters with experience and skill. Later encounters task you with dodging at the disco as an immense laser bug showers the sky with beams, and fighting under a cloud of darkness as the behemoth hunts its pray unseen. While some behemoths are recycled across difficulty tiers, various tweaks and changes to their abilities keep them interesting and fresh. One monster lays down structures that fire deadly projectiles, and hunters need to destroy and manage these electrified blasters. A later version of the same monster drops the same defenses, but they’re shielded – so you this time you need to bat their projectiles back. The cycling of collecting, building, and customizing cycle is great all the way to the end. At that point, things change. Dauntless’ endgame offers players a new type of loot to collect, rare recipes that provide insane bonuses that break all the rules (like resurrecting after death for a few incredibly powerful vengeful blows). However, the true top end of the game is currently limited to two challenging monster encounters. Both these fights are awesome to learn and master, but after you’ve brought them both down 20 times or so, even hoping for those amazing exotic drops doesn’t provide enough incentive to hop back in for another round. As a live service, developer Phoenix Labs could address the scarcity of content for advanced players in the future, but that possibility doesn’t excuse the missteps in the current version of the game. Dauntless is a great foundation for a rollicking monster-mashing time, but without the critical component of a compelling endgame, your journey has no satisfying destination. Only time will tell if the swirling islands around Ramsgate can provide something more. Concept : Take on a variety of behemoths that threaten the safety of the Shattered Isles while amassing a stockpile of weapons, armor, and augmentations Graphics : Colorful and cartoony graphics convey a stylized, whimsical world Sound : A stirring score adds a bit of a bump to uninspiring sound effects Playability : Dauntless ramps up to difficult encounters slowly with plenty of “tutorial time” and dripped unlocks, perfect for those unsure of their monster-slaying prowess Entertainment : A satisfying progression loop makes it easy to get sucked in, but the endgame is tedious and tiresome Replay : High

Having a fast-paced shooter in VR isn’t unheard of. With games like Robo Recall, Pavlov VR, and even the less traditional games like Audica around, shooting is commonplace within VR. It is completely natural to start firing off weapons in VR because of how intuitively the first-person perspective fits and how much more intense it makes everything feel. So, when Ubisoft announced Space Junkies, while there may have been some excitement, it’s not like it was new ground being broken here. Space Junkies is a light-hearted free-flying space shooter that pits you against up to three other players. The tutorial sets the kind of tone you can expect from the gameplay. It is exceptionally silly and doesn’t take itself seriously. You start by learning the controls as you would in any game, but you also get to try out some of the weapons on offer. The movement is done in a similar style to Blade and Sorcery, you move in the direction you are looking. Unlike Blade and Sorcery though, you can look straight up and fully explore the zero-gravity environments in which the battles take place. The freedom of movement makes the battles in Space Junkies absolutely exhilarating. Plus, the way the game moves never induces the motion sickness you can sometimes get with some VR games because you know the movement is unnatural. It means you can be boosting straight down at the floor and always feel in control. You can move using the thumbsticks too, but it is rarely needed outside of strafing in three-dimensions. The weapons are excellent and have some great variety too. You get to choose a couple that you go into battle with like a sword and shield. This allows you to always have your own playstyle, but these are mostly gadgets like a sonar or a medi-kit rather than weapons. Most of the weapons can be picked up in the arenas themselves; whoever cleans up space is incredibly lax when it comes to immensely powerful weaponry it would seem. There are standard things like pistols and sub-machine guns, though even these have a fun twist on them. Of all the weapons, though, three standout as being more interesting than the rest. Not because the rest are bad, just because these ones are incredibly good fun. The Slingshot is exactly what it sounds like, except instead of rocks or water balloons, you fire off powerful grenades. The Plasma Rifle is a long-range sniper rifle you have to charge up before each shot. It makes landing a hit so satisfying. Then you have a shoulder-mounted rocket launcher that fires rockets you can control. It’s reminiscent of the Cerebral Bore from Turok. You even have different classes of character to play as. These give you a different mix of speed and resilience to allow you to play how you want to play. Take a strong class like the Juggernaut and then use a shield and you can be a tank. If you prefer speed, then playing as the Buzzkill and using the sonar allows you to hunt down enemies and then race away if needed. The time to kill in this game is fairly small if someone has a good aim. It makes combat more satisfying when you are the first to react, but also means you can die out of nowhere because the enemy was below you. It never feels frustrating, though, because the respawn is exceptionally fast and you always get a new weapon to begin with. It’s just a lot of fun and very reminiscent of Unreal Tournament so many years ago. Now, time to address the space elephant in the room. What is it like when compared to Echo Combat? Well, where Echo is a tactical shooter, one that requires good positioning and forethought, Space Junkies is chaos and fire. Space Junkies is very much an arcade shooter, one designed to be easy to get to grips with. There is no grabbing onto walls and using cover, it is pure, uninterrupted mania and it is, quite frankly, a lot more fun for it. The mindset is different two, the matches are faster, the games have less riding on them, so the atmosphere is a little mor jovial. Sure, there is a comparison here, but there really shouldn’t be. Space Junkies is quite simply a different breed of game, and the setting alone isn’t enough to make the two similar. It is pure fun and unconcerned with things like tactics or thinking ahead. The only thing you need to keep in mind is what level you’re in, and where the weapons, armor, and health spawn. It effectively replicates the halcyon days of multiplayer shooters in VR. This is an incredible feat and one that is well worth paying attention to. There are some small drawbacks. There could be more modes for example. While the deathmatch and king mode options are good, it all comes down to shooting each other a lot. It would be amazing to see some more classic modes introduced, things like zone control, or a sword only mode for example. What is there is an incredible time, but a little more would make it unmissable. Space Junkies does what games have done for decades: it brings a smile to your face. It’s the kind of game you can either play for one match, or accidentally lose hours to. The matches are fast-paced and frenetic, the weapons are fun and varied, and the customization brings a deeper level to it all. Frankly, it’s fun in a way that is sometimes missing from more serious affairs. It’s already an exceptional experience and if it evolves and gains new content it will become unmissable. Now, if you’ll excuse us, there is a slingshot with our name on it. Note: This version of the review is specifically for the PC VR version of the game. There are a few differences on PSVR not accounted for here. Space Junkies is available now on Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, Windows VR and PSVR for $39.99. Read our Game Review Guidelines for more information on how we arrived at this score.

For my openion @BoRINg As All Said save GFX Team so many times and he re-build it and he was a good Designer , i think that he is The most good Designer and one of best adminstrator in this community @Verox Biuld a Good Team and re-prestige to GFX , he was helpfull and good Designer , i though that he the most who work hard for the best of this community

L.A. Noire is different. It's not like most video games developed by Rockstar. You don't play the outlaw running wild, free to kill, steal, and cause destruction. You're a cop. A good cop at that, determined to restore order to the violent streets of 1940s Los Angeles. L.A. Noire's not like most games. Sure, there are car chases, gunfights, and a point-tally to judge the quality of your police justice, but it's a slow-paced, meditative experience. The focus isn't on how good you are at scoring headshots with a pistol but instead your ability to read a suspect's face and determine if he or she is telling the truth, holding something back, or flat out lying. Using a brand new technology called MotionScan, L.A. Noire delivers pure performances from a talented group of actors. Every wrinkle, twitch, downward glance, grimace, and hard swallow is from an actor playing a part, not an animator mani[CENSORED]ting things from behind the scenes. It's a striking, sometimes unnerving effect certain to help push video games closer to true cinematic experiences. It's easy to fall into old video game habits like checking your phone while listening to a line of dialogue, but you're setting yourself up for failure. The actors' tells are in their faces, their posture, their eyes rarely is it revealed in what they say. This is where L.A. Noire shines. The interrogations are like lengthy dialogue scenes you'd see in an RPG -- but they're captivating. This is the core of L.A. Noire and that core is very good. You're a detective, so you're going to scour crime scenes searching for clues. And when you question witnesses, you have to think less like a gamer and more like a sleuth. It's not easy. In fact, it's often a real challenge to judge the trustworthiness of a witness' statement. The line between "doubt" and "lie" is very narrow. Though L.A. Noire's hero, Cole Phelps, is regarded as one of the best case men ever, I still managed to falsely accuse dozens of suspects, doubt witnesses who were actually forthcoming, and use the wrong clues to try and catch killers in lies. After every question, selected from Phelps' trusty notebook, you get a response from the suspect. Then you must choose to believe, doubt, or accuse them of lying. Get it right and you can open them up and get more clues. Get it wrong, and they offer less. The better you do over the course of a case, the more you'll understand the suspect's motivations. The worse you do, the tougher it is to get at the truth, but there's no possibility of failure in any conversation. L.A. Noire won't abruptly end if you fail to catch a killer's lie or miss an important clue. The bad guy only gets away if it's pre-determined in the story. The only game over screen comes from dying or allowing a fleeing suspect to escape. This makes you less of a real detective and more of a page turner, destined to always reach the next chapter so long as you make a choice -- any choice. L.A. Noire isn't all about badgering people, though. This is still an open-world game. You're free to deviate from a case, explore faithfully recreated 1947 Los Angeles, and tackle more action-oriented missions. No, you can't run wild like in Grand Theft Auto (you're a cop, accept it), but there are some other things to do. Forty "unassigned cases" come in as calls on the radio. These aren't random; they're single-scene missions where you'll stop a bank robbery, chase down a bat-wielding lunatic, or shadow a crook to his hideout A few other distractions can be had -- finding all of the famous L.A. locations and discovering more than a dozen hidden cars -- which earn you points towards leveling up your rank. New ranks mean new clothes, hidden car locations, and intuition points (which can be spent to reveal clues and narrow choices when interrogating a suspect). This is the "game" portion of L.A. Noire, the part built for those who aren't ready to release their old needs as gamers. And maybe Rockstar is struggling to release that same hold. I like going about town, but L.A. Noire would have been stronger with greater focus on the experience and less concern for including traditional game elements. Each time I start getting immersed in the world, I'm reminded "you're playing a game" with unnecessary text popping up on the screen or a score tallying my lie-detecting ability. There are moments when L.A. Noire comes together brilliantly, when the threads from multiple cases lead to a darker ringleader. But more often, things are perhaps too true to real police work repetitive, redundant, and unsurprising. Despite having 21 cases, some of which can take more than an hour to complete, L.A. Noire drags at times because it recycles the same drama. Ten cases in, I knew what to expect. I come to a crime scene and search for some clues that then open one or two new locations in L.A. to investigate. From there, I know I'll end up chasing someone on foot through the back-alleys of the city or through the streets in my car. All this leads to a final interview with a suspect in the police station interview room, where even screwing up completely still leads to an arrest. I might think the guy's innocent, but except on rare occasions, I'm just going through the motions and have no control over the end result. When L.A. Noire breaks free from the formula, it can be stunning. A great example comes at the end of Phelps' time on the Homicide desk, when you are freed from the usual case work and instead have to solve riddles that lead you to landmarks across Los Angeles. The end of the homicide desk is refreshing, startling, different, and necessary to hold interest in what is generally a series of the same song and dance. Even with its redundancies, L.A. Noire is still entertaining. Normally, I'd say a game like this has "great voice acting," but with its amazing new technology, L.A. Noire has great performances. It's more than just the voice it's the mannerisms, the way someone's mouth thins after telling a lie, the unease of a wrongdoer being grilled in the box. There have been games with graphics far superior to L.A. Noire's, with a level of fidelity that makes the world seem more real than what's outside your door. But I've never seen an Adam's apples move when people talk or throat muscles tense when someone almost says too much. It's fascinating to watch a sort of hybrid between an action game and an episode of Law & Order. With that gift of having detailed, human faces, Rockstar and developer Team Bondi have the vehicle to deliver an incredibly emotional and engaging story. L.A. Noire falls short, though. Despite great performances, some killer dialogue, and one of my favorite game soundtracks in years, L.A. Noire left me cold. Cole Phelps begins as a paragon of the LAPD, but his true past is eventually revealed. Whether hero or pariah, I just never liked him that much because his story is told at times haphazardly. There's an omniscient narrator in the early missions of L.A. Noire who disappears halfway through and never returns. Cole has a wife he almost never talks about until the plot needs a complication to Phelps' pristine image. There's a confounding "twist" with three cases left that changes the focus of the story and left me scratching my head. L.A. Noire has issues, but it's also a bold and unique take on games as entertainment. The core gameplay mechanics work -- no issues with driving, chasing perps across town, taking cover, shooting people, figuring out what to do next, or understanding how to interrogate a suspect. The various elements never come together at the same time to create something spectacular, but there are a lot of good things going on. Some will love L.A. Noire for being different and others are going to find the slower pace a deal-breaker. Crime is Always Black & White Click here for more of IGN's L.A. Noire coverage. The Verdict I struggle with L.A. Noire, because at times I love it, yet it has some notable flaws. As a noir fan, I find moments that really get me grinning. There are certain cases that draw me in and side characters who eat up the scene. But it never adds up -- amazing pieces that don't quite amount to an incredible game. At the same time, no one's ever played a game like this before. And unless there's a sequel, I doubt anyone will again for some time. Credit Rockstar for taking a huge risk, for succeeding in many areas, and for offering something fresh and different. L.A. Noire may not reach the emotional heights of a game like Heavy Rain, but it's something everyone must try out. It reaches high and almost succeeds as a brilliant new type of video game narrative.

Available on Xbox One (reviewed), PS4 and PC Buckle up, Ghost Recon veterans. We’re a long way from Advanced Warfighter, and not just in terms of the 6000km southwards shift from Mexico City to mountainous Bolivia. For all that it shares GRAW’s third-person view, recon drones and four-man squad dynamics, Wildlands is another example of Ubisoft’s single-minded dedication to large-scale open-world games. Tactics take a back seat, action grabs the wheel and the whole vehicle’s heading in a familiar direction: Far Cry via Assassin’s Creed via Watch Dogs. Even then, I’m not sure that even Ubisoft has delivered something this big, dumb or bombastic before. Poking holes in Wildlands isn’t difficult. In fact, it’s on the fish/barrel, candy/baby level of challenge. The storyline is every bit as clichéd and stupid as you might expect, making you part of an elite unit working deep in drug cartel territory, taking down the cartel piece by piece. There are efforts at nuance, irony and satire, but these clash with the gung-ho spirit of the action. It’s as if Wildlands can’t decide whether to be Bad Boys 2, Narcos or Sicario, so it just tries to be all of them at once. There’s also something really cheap and nasty about the way it uses brutality and violence, as if hanging corpses and tortured bodies represent nothing more than suitable set dressing for a villain’s lair. There’s nothing here you won’t have seen in a Call of Duty, but so what? That’s not exactly a byword for intelligent storytelling, either. There are problems with the gameplay, too. As we noted in the preview, Wildlands hints at a tactical dimension without ever really committing to it. Sure, you can use your binoculars or a drone to spot ‘tangos’, mark them for death and synchronise shots – and there’s something undeniably cool about pulling that off. Yet your enemies are dim-witted, prone to dumb corner-camping strategies and spectacularly unobservant, to the point that shooting a helicopter down so that it crashes into a narcotics farm won’t necessarily stir the neighbourhood killers into action. I’d say that they’re all high on their own supply, except they’re meant to be chewing coca, not nodding off on dope. Your AI-controlled squad-mates are made of sterner stuff, capable of blasting away baddies and reviving you when you’re downed. However, they can’t do much more than that, and it’s not long before your limited command set begins to feel like it’s holding you back. Beyond this there are minor technical issues that see dialogue from one mission appearing when you tackle a later one, or where a collision between a cartel soldier and an SUV might see an assault rifle sticking out of the bonnet for the duration of the ride. At one point, my protagonist was wondering around with a sniper rifle emerging from his chest, and couldn’t shoulder it to take a shot. Bizarre and annoying. Ubigame-haters will take their usual grumpy satisfaction in knowing that Ubisoft has once again stuffed a map full of side-missions, systems and different collectibles without necessarily bothering to make them interesting or distinctive. Don’t worry if you botch stealing medical supplies, hijacking that helicopter or grabbing and interrogating that cartel lieutenant; another one will be along in a minute, and another one not too long after that. And why does a game where stealth and cover are so crucial have such dated systems for both? The cover system isn’t half as smart or flexible as The Division’s. Stealth-wise, it’s comfortably behind both Assassin’s Creed and Watch Dogs. In short, you might expect me to say I hate Ghost Recon: Wildlands, but the horrifying truth is that I kind of love it. Why? Well, it really comes down to a couple of things. Firstly, Bolivia. The world Ubisoft has created here is just vast, taking in a range of diverse environments and ecosystems: mountains, jungles, swamplands, desert, shanty towns, military bases, cocaine factories and upscale lakeside resorts. It’s fun to get around, too, whether you’re sliding a dirt-bike around the hairpin corners of some narrow, muddy mountain track, bouncing an SUV down a rocky hillside or racing a drug lord’s stolen sports car along the highways at ludicrous speeds. And that’s just the land vehicles; there are zodiacs and powerboats to speed around in, not to mention helicopters to hijack and planes to pinch. If you’re a fan of stupid vehicle high-jinx in a sandbox playground, you’ll love Wildlands – and it all looks absolutely beautiful to boot. Secondly, Wildlands has a more addictive and engaging gameplay cycle than some recent Ubisoft open-world games. Instead of finding towers to discover new collectibles and missions, you search for intel which will lead you to story missions where you’ll steadily frustrate the cartel’s plans. Bolivia has been carved up into regions, each with its own theme and its own cartel boss, and this gives each its own identity, so that you’ll end up smashing up casinos and running sex surveillance scams in one, then tracking down gold caches and fighting a weird, witchy cult in another. At times, Wildlands feels like a bunch of different episodes crammed together, but with the caveat that you can flit between them just by getting in a car or leaping in a helicopter. While Wildlands can’t match The Division’s compulsive shoot, loot and upgrade cycle, you can still enjoy levelling up, unlocking new skills and abilities and discovering and modifying guns, taking them apart piece by piece using the Gunsmith interface Ubi introduced with Ghost Recon: Future Soldier to tweak each and every one for your own style of play. Most of all, though, Wildlands gets the action right. Driving around like a maniac, blasting away at cartel goons is a lot of fun. Sneaking through the swamplands to find hidden prototype drug-mule submarines can be tense and exciting, as you pick off your enemies from a distance while dodging hunting ‘copters. The same goes for infiltrating military bases, instructing your team to take out snipers while you search for a lurking cartel boss. Even at its silliest or most cliché’d, Wildlands is wildly entertaining. If that’s true played solo, it hits a new level when you bring in other players. The whole shebang is designed for four-player co-op play, and you can join with friends or activate the automated matchmaking at any time you like. It’s flexible, too. It doesn’t matter if all four of you are fighting in different provinces or if two of you run one mission while the other two run another; Wildlands is cool with that. The automated matchmaking does its best to pair you with players that have similar play-styles, at a similar level and with similar objectives on the go, so if you can’t play with friends – the ideal option – playing with strangers shouldn’t be a waste of time. Of course, it doesn’t always work out. Sometimes you can find yourself tackling the same infiltrate-and-abduct mission over and over with some moron triggering the insta-fail alarm every time. At other times one player will pull down an army on your head before quitting out to leave you alone to face the music. But when you’re playing with friends or with a great bunch of strangers, Wildlands can be one part ridiculous to two parts sublime. At one point I was close to death’s door trying to escape an almost endless swarm of cartel sicarios when a team-mate suddenly appeared in an armoured car. I jumped into the gunner’s position and it was payback time. I did one tricky infiltration mission alongside a pair of snipers, with me and another player running in to do the dirty work while they gave cover and picked off enemies around us. I’ve been part of a wrecking crew that dropped into a cocaine factory by helicopter before ripping the place apart with grenades and machine guns. It can be crazy, chaotic or even just plain carnage, but there’s something about this over-egged, ultraviolent sandbox that just works. Verdict I’m not suggesting for a minute that Wildlands is one of the open-world greats. It hasn’t got the style or attention to detail of Metal Gear Solid 5 or the depth of The Witcher 3. It’s not as rich, articulate or funny as GTA V – and any comparisons there aren’t helped by a single radio station that starts to repeat itself within the first few hours of play. Arguably, its sheer size and scale is a bit exhausting, both over long bouts of play and the campaign as a whole. But if you’re looking for a really big, extravagant sandbox game that’s great fun solo and hilarious in co-op, don’t be shy. Wildlands isn’t Ghost Recon as we know it, but it’s the wildest party in town. Score Unlike other sites, we thoroughly test each product we review. We use industry standard tests in order to compare things properly. We’ll always tell you what we find. We never, ever accept money to review a product. Tell us what you think - send your emails to the Editor.

Google has barred the world's second biggest smartphone maker, Huawei, from some updates to the Android operating system, dealing a blow to the Chinese company. New designs of Huawei smartphones are set to lose access to some Google apps. The move comes after the Trump administration added Huawei to a list of companies that American firms cannot trade with unless they have a licence. Google said it was "complying with the order and reviewing the implications". Huawei declined to comment. What does this mean for Huawei users? Existing Huawei smartphone users will be able to update apps and push through security fixes, as well as update Google Play services. But when Google launches the next version of Android later this year, it may not be available on Huawei devices. Future Huawei devices may no longer have apps such as YouTube and Maps. Huawei can still use the version of the Android operating system available through an open source licence. Ben Wood, from the CCS Insight consultancy, said the move by Google would have "big implications for Huawei's consumer business". What can Huawei do about this? Last Wednesday, the Trump administration added Huawei to its "entity list", which bans the company from acquiring technology from US firms without government approval. Trump declares national emergency over IT threats Huawei: The world's most controversial company? Which countries are blocking Huawei? In his first comments since the firm was placed on the list, Huawei chief executive Ren Zhengfei told Japanese media on Saturday: "We have already been preparing for this." He said the firm, which buys about $67bn (£52.6bn) worth of components each year according to the Nikkei business newspaper, would push ahead with developing its own parts. Huawei faces a growing backlash from Western countries, led by the US, over possible risks posed by using its products in next-generation 5G mobile networks. Several countries have raised concerns that Huawei equipment could be used by China for surveillance, allegations the company has vehemently denied. Huawei has said its work does not pose any threats and that it is independent from the Chinese government. However, some countries have blocked telecoms companies from using Huawei products in 5G mobile networks. So far the UK has held back from any formal ban. "Huawei has been working hard on developing its own App Gallery and other software assets in a similar manner to its work on chipset solutions. There is little doubt these efforts are part of its desire to control its own destiny," said Mr Wood. Short-term damage for Huawei? By Leo Kelion, BBC Technology desk editor In the short term, this could be very damaging for Huawei in the West. Smartphone shoppers would not want an Android phone that lacked access to Google's Play Store, its virtual assistant or security updates, assuming these are among the services that would be pulled. In the longer term, though, this might give smartphone vendors in general a reason to seriously consider the need for a viable alternative to Google's operating system, particularly at a time that the search giant is trying to push its own Pixel brand at their expense. As far as Huawei is concerned, it appears to have prepared for the eventuality of being cut off from American know-how. Its smartphones are already powered by its own proprietary processors, and earlier this year its consumer devices chief told German newspaper Die Welt that "we have prepared our own operating systems - that's our plan B". Even so, this move could knock its ambition to overtake Samsung and become the bestselling smartphone brand in 2020 seriously off course. What about the US-China trade war? The latest move against Huawei marks an escalation in tensions between the firm and the US. The company is facing almost two dozen criminal charges filed by US authorities. Washington is also seeking the extradition of Huawei executive Meng Wangzou from Canada, where she was arrested in December at the behest of American officials. It comes as trade tensions between the US and China also appear to be rising. The world's two largest economies have been locked in a bruising trade battle for the past year that has seen tariffs imposed on billions of dollars worth of one another's goods. A quick guide to the US-China trade war Moving to Vietnam to avoid US-China trade war Earlier this month, Washington more than doubled tariffs on $200bn of Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to retaliate with its own tariff hikes on US products. The move surprised some - and rattled global markets - as the situation had seemed to be nearing a conclusion. The US-China trade war has weighed on the global economy over the past year and created uncertainty for businesses and consumers.