Meshugger

Excellent choice Worth evey praise it gets. ...and another excellent choice! How this movie didn't get the best movie award at the Oscar's (Went to Amadeus) is beyond me.

Oh, and i consider the additions to the Unreal Engine 3.0 to be expected. This is Sweeney we're talking about, the only rival to Carmack's brilliance.

So a giant dwarf is just an average fat guy? Not really, his head and hands would too big compared to the rest of his body. Dwarf = Hormone diffiency, causes abnormal limb and body growth. Midget = Genetical disorder, little in every way.

I did the test that Enoch posted a couple of pages back, and i got 76% for Gravel (yay! always loved his classical liberal social policy) and 71% for Obama. Oh, and i got 70% for Ron Paul. This test is strange. I remember doing a similar test at the university and i became "centrist-right"

Those were all tounge in cheek comments. Bleh, too tired to notice/understand

All i know about Ralph Nader is that he has been a consumer-rights activist, and a great critic of the bigger parties (all smaller candidates are usually that though). However, i have never heard about him being a forefront for planned economy. Not even the leftest of the left in Europe propose such ideas (except for the communists). Care to explain?

This is the soundcard i bought a while ago. Better SNR and general sound quality than the Soundblaster X-Fi. It also supports EAX 5.0 and Dolby Digital 5.1 LIVE (DTS Interactive support will be released later). Best soundcard on the market.

Usually the local supermarket. If i want a special edition of a game, i use any internet-based company. No preferences on companies really, just the one that happens to have the lowest price at the moment.

An NWN campaign in a tropical jungle Far Cry/Crysis with longsword +5 and dice?

This game needs a in-game video. As Tale said, those screens look to polished.

One thread late last year was about immigrants completely failing to integrate to european societies. This thread seems to be about europeans having demolished their blood by mixing with non-white immigrants. I am getting mixed messages here, anyone care to help?

Oh yeah, totally, the problem is that on one hand you're saying that humans are still, essentally, pray to their base insticts, which I agree with. But on the other you're saying that those base instincts are worse than those of other creatures, which is somthing I don't agree with. We're cursed with a degree of intelligence which gives us more insight into how to enact those instincts, but the basic survival mechanisms are essentally the same. Killing for a trivial reason is still killing for a reason and can still be traced back to those same mechanisms in the same way that great apes have been recorded developing cronic anti-social behavior disorders. Going back to the chimps, a group of them murdered this 'socal outcast' then proceded to beat his body and hang him from a tree. Sure, they're our closest relatives, but people underestimate just how close that is. I somewhat agree with you there. I find it more sickening when humans, who should have to capability to understand that murder is wrong, but we still do. From there we disagree, you see it as another kill and still as bad as any other. I find it very perverse that we as humans still do that, and therefore more sickening than animals doing it. Btw, i like horror-movies, Ninja Gaiden and 80's action. I am even less evolved than some of you

Exactly what about what I posted is not true at all? We aren't driven by our need for food and shelter and sex? We don't compete for these things differently now than we have in the past? The laws and punishments of society don't have any influence on how we act? You can't ignore reality just because it doesn't fit into your pessimistic world view. I never said we were angels. This seems to be your entire problem, the apparent belief that civilization and evolution means some form of perfection. Civilization doesn't mean we don't sometimes act uncivilized. Also, it isn't true that human kill for no reason. There is always a reason. That reason might not be obvious, it might seem stupid, you might not be able to understand it, but there's always a reason. I misunderstood you. By meaning are i thought that you meant that as in as is without a basic drive to it. My bad. And not killing and raping each other is not perfection. It is the very requirement to set us on a higher level, philosophically speaking and biologically speaking. Perfection is that man would be infallible, meaning that capable of doing nothing wrong at all, which i see as a goal rather than a viable setting for humanity. Also, it depends on what you see as a reason. Is boredom and curiosity a reason for murder? I think not, but it still happens. However, we're entering an area on universally define reason, so we have to agree to disagree there.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the sword made a comeback with a different character. The end of NWN2 seemed to hint at some kind of continued significance for the sword, but it more or less fell by the wayside in MotB, aside from using it as an interdimensional key for some reason. Also, MAC LOLOLOLOL I don't know much about the Forgotten Realms setting, but as Gorth said, MotB made several notions of Chult, just like Rashemen was mentioned in the OC *hint* *hint* Point being, is Chult in another dimension, or is it on the same "world" as Rashemen and the Sword Coast?

Come to think of it, MotB pretty much had a conclusion for the sword-bearer of the Gith. Trying to expand it even further might prove to be quite difficult, or is it more difficult to start anew as a level 30 character going to 40?

Nice, is it "midnight" in 20 minutes? Or is it way later, like, yankee-time-midnight? My sleep demands an answer!

Just because one man can set his sights on conquering the world does not mean conquering all of Europe is to be scoffed at. It is ludicrous. Not ludicrous to aspire to such a thing. Ludicrous to count a grandiose aspiration as the only thing that is significant. Lacking perfection is not the same as achieving nothing. Just a small step forward is still a small step. We haven't evolved much from the jungle until we're gotten several steps further. And I've already pointed out many steps. That you completely ignore. Heck, what you're saying here isn't even addressing the point I just made. Does somehow using the words "small steps" justify ignorance of anything but the grandiose? Or does it only demonstrate it? No, didn't ignore them. They're just too small for my grand scale human evolvement. Thank you and good night. Remember not to steal, cheat, lie, rape or murder and we've taken another small step tonight

No, I understood perfectly and while on one level you're right, on another, you're talking crap as per my examples, and that's even ignoring the fact that it's impossible to test how animals would react when placed under modern social pressures. Dolphin and Duck males will both form into rape gangs and hunt down any nearby females while a Gorrilla that has just become head of his set will actively murder the offspring of the previous leader. There are very few examples of humans doing naughty things that arn't mirrored somewhere in the animal kingdom, it's just that we do all of them, which accounts for much of our success as a species. I can agree that we can't truly measure animal pressure under modern social situations. But... - Berlin 1945, mass rape of the women in Berlin. As much as 100 000 cases of rape was done by the Red Army *jungle drums are booming* - The second example...you get my drift. What is it with you people and your active replying? And what is this collective replying of *HURR! Wrong!* at this thread? you make it sound like i've "done a Sand" or something...

Just because one man can set his sights on conquering the world does not mean conquering all of Europe is to be scoffed at. It is ludicrous. Not ludicrous to aspire to such a thing. Ludicrous to count a grandiose aspiration as the only thing that is significant. Lacking perfection is not the same as achieving nothing. Just a small step forward is still a small step. We haven't evolved much from the jungle until we're gotten several steps further.

Animals kill because of the reasons you stated and is expected, since they are less evolved than humans. Good reason to kill? I see no good reasons to kill anyone myself. But countless of times killers (proved to be in mentally good health) killed because of curiosity, boredom or even pure laziness. Again this is not exactly what one would expect from a species that claimes itself evolved.

Seems like people are wanting to compare Serbia/Kosovo to Israel/Palestine. Pretty much wrong. The issues surrounding the respective countries is much more complicated than that. The thing that they remotely have in common is that the conflict will probably last very long, even to the point of being almost unsolvable.

Wait, so killing for territory or greed is actually less contemptible than other types of killing? Killing without reason is what humans are good at, and seperates us from animals in a very negative way.

You didn't read my post properly. I never suggested that humans are the only ones capable of committing murder of any kind. Humans are even more vicious than animals, as in humans can kill without the need of expanding territory, greed or survival. We just do because we can without any previous external stimuli. And that is my point, as in we haven't truly evolved as a species until we stop killing one and another. Civilizations with human rights are only the first baby-step, and can be easily taken away by a huge disaster. To set the bar of social evolution at the stage where no killing occurs is absolutely ludicrous. And to say that "humans are more vicious than animals" when there are animals who eat their own young with a manner of regularity is just ignorant. Absolutely not ludicrous. It is a goal tried several times before, and will be in the future. Remember what i said earlier about those people who tried to praise such things? But of of course, they got killed by us, humans.

You didn't read my post properly. I never suggested that humans are the only ones capable of committing murder of any kind. Humans are even more vicious than animals, as in humans can kill without the need of expanding territory, greed or survival. We just do because we can without any previous external stimuli. And that is my point, as in we haven't truly evolved as a species until we stop killing one and another. Civilizations with human rights are only the first baby-step, and can be easily taken away by a huge disaster.

Next thing you'll be telling us is that the sky is blue. This is all wrong. Both eating and breeding are necessary for survival (though the latter isn't necessary for the survival of the individual) and directly comparable because they are things we are willing to fight for. You speak of our "basic instincts" as though they are some kind of urge we must find the will to suppress, which is nonsense. Food, shelter, sex - what drives and will always drive the human animal, what makes us human, and mankind will always be willing to fight for them if necessary. Where once we might have relied solely on violence by killing our neighbor, stealing his cave and his food, and taking his woman against her will, now we compete with our peers for a promotion so we can can buy the best clothes and cars and home, eat at the best restaurants and attract the best mate. We still fight, we will always fight, but thanks to the social, cultural, and technological advances of our civilization how we fight has changed. The laws and punishments that come with being a part of a civilized society mean that resorting to violence is no longer the winning formula it once might have been. Not true at all. We are not god's little angles, far from it. Man is the only animal capable of murder out of self-interest. No survival, not expanding ones territory or eliminate competition. Until then, we haven't evolved at all.