Yst

Nah, he referred to playing light side on one playthrough, playing dark side the next, and cheating to get his lightsaber right off the bat. That ain't Republic Commando, I don't think.

I think all possible thread ideas have at this point been covered. It's either rehash old ones, or close the board down.

Takes me longer than that just to get off Peragus. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Play times vary per person. When i play a game I want to 'see it all'. That means I'll play through trying EVERY side quest, reading/listening to EVERY dialog and trying new strategies (just for fun). That includes when I go through as a different character (4 ways to go through this game LS/DS/MALE/FEMALE) It is impossible to finish the game in 6 hours unless you skip the majority of the side quests and skip all of the dialogue. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Beating it in six hours on the second playthrough would have to involve skipping the majority of even the main quest dialogue while completely ignoring all optional quests. I'm fairly sure just doing all the dialogues in the game non-stop (i.e., not fighting any enemies or going anywhere, which both consume substantial time, just reading the text) would take at least six hours for most people. I would consider six hours a speed-run, and those usually have to be planned and mapped out, not done by chance on the second playthrough.

Ah, Longing. Deionarra is certainly among the most meaningful game personalities I have ever encountered. She may well be the one who touched me the most. By comparison, for example, the much-vaunted Aeris was simply meaningless to me. She lived an undeveloped, cliche anime character's life and died the death of just such a character. Signifying nothing. Deionarra had already touched me thirty minutes into my first play through the game, when I encountered her ghost and learned something of her past with TNO for the first time. Sad, then, that whatever story might have been developed by her stone in the Brothel of Slaking Intellectual Lusts (I realise the game misspells "slaking," "slating" but refuse to reproduce the typo) could not be told: there is one stone which was left unnamed, but which was presumably originally meant to be hers, as we know she worked there. We also know that development of the brothel basement was cut, as per Scott Warner. But so it goes, with game development.

This tends to be true in real life as well. If you go around killing people and committing deplorable acts of evil in front of your acquaintances, they are unlikely to respond to you the same way they might respond, say, to a nice person who isn't a psycho killer.

Heh. This isn't a board that sees a lot of novel thread ideas. But to this thread, I give a

Play RTW. RTW is god. Or at least very similar. The difference being, I got bored of religion and gave up on it after a while whereas I haven't gotten bored of the Total War games and my fondness for them has failed to wain. All Powerful Deity vs. Total War Games Total War: 1 All Powerful Deity: 0

I spent 200 on Steel Battalion. I win! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I spent, in total, over $1000 on DAOC in my time playing it, when game boxes, expansions and monthly fees are totaled for my three accounts.

A truly awesome mod. Especially awesome because 1) It gives you a quest option for acquiring the item without turning on cheats and 2) It gives you dark side points if you use the item to modify influence of party members, which makes sense to me. Really, my favourite mod so far.

It is my long-time obsession, and chief academic pursuit. Texts on my desk right now, as always, include: A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, A Guide to Old English, The Student's Dictionary of Anglo-Saxon, Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Reader...oh, and about 10 others related to Old English. To simplify things, it would be safe to say I own pretty much every major study text published in the last 100 years on Old English language and literature (all the way back to a 1905 version of Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Primer). Uncovering the heritage of the English language is a difficult thing to do, tied up as it is in fragments of myth laden with superimposed Christendom, and written in a language which only a few take the trouble to learn (quite understandably), but it's somehow become part of my cultural identity. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I couldn't agree more, min gesi

It is my long-time obsession, and chief academic pursuit. Texts on my desk right now, as always, include: A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, A Guide to Old English, The Student's Dictionary of Anglo-Saxon, Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Reader...oh, and about 10 others related to Old English. To simplify things, it would be safe to say I own pretty much every major study text published in the last 100 years on Old English language and literature (all the way back to a 1905 version of Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Primer). Uncovering the heritage of the English language is a difficult thing to do, tied up as it is in fragments of myth laden with superimposed Christendom, and written in a language which only a few take the trouble to learn (quite understandably), but it's somehow become part of my cultural identity.

And for that you should be grateful. Objects shouldnt have a gender, it's not natural. ..like those bloody jerries have it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> *flashback to school* Ludozee: -der des dem den -die der der die -das des dem das -die der der die errr, i mean die der den die <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And Old English just beats out German for number of noun case inflexions. Modern English - Definite Article The Old English - Definite Article Nom Acc Gen Dat Inst Masc se

CHEATER WE EXILE YOU TO MOD CITY <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's not cheating...as long as you use KSE to reset the "cheats used" flag for the game in question

Polluted by Danish too, though. The Danes, as much as the Normans, are blamed for the final death of the Old English noun case system (with the Dative and Instrumental finally dying off) and dual (instead of merely singular and plural) pronoun numbers. The most popular theory goes that Danish and Old English were sufficiently mutually intelligible that both languages, within England, probably attempted to simplify themselves (by ignoring case inflexions) in order to facilitate communication. That's a gross oversimplification itself, but it's the gist of the predominating theory. The Instrumental case was already almost dead when the Danes arrived, but the Danes and Normans saw the death of the Dative case, the Dual number, and distinctive (masculine, feminine, neuter) noun gender.

Absolutely, categorically false. Look at computer magazines, publications and books from 20 years ago and compare them to today's computer enthusiasts publications and you'll see that exactly the opposite of what you state was the case. Furthermore, the Atari 2600 was not a computer at all, nor was it marketed as one; it was a video game console, and was sold as such. This might be a reason for your confusion regarding the state of computers 20 years ago. Anyway, games are far more prominently the focus of computer enthusiast fandom today than they were 20 years ago. 20 years ago, there still remained a focus on the computer for its own sake, as a platform for creative invention through coding. And that really did still constitute the chief focus of the community who claimed computers as their hobby. Video game consoles like the Odyssey and the 2600 are a completely different topic. Coding still remained the uniting interest of computer culture at that point. Sure, people had always been writing games and trading games, since the advent of the S100 bus systems and the Apple II in the '70s, but the core functionality of computers between the late seventies and up to the mid eighties was their support for BASIC and/or other programming languages.

Electronic Big Macs, you say?

The complexity of the Swedish vowel system is rather surprising, and seemingly the largest impediment to effective speech as a second language. But at least the vowels are orthographically distinguished. Nevertheless, I'm much happier dealing with the typical West-Germanic vowels. Sweden's culture industry is active enough, though, that finding worthwhile sources through which to watch the play of Germanic philology is quite easy, so I'm prone to doing so.

There are no video game characters which already existed when I was born that I would wish to be named after at the time, seeing as there were almost no video game "characters" before I was born at all. Nor would I wish to later assume a video game character's name, by any means. I think it would be terrible. As far as things with which to culturally identify one's person in the most meaningful of ways, I'd hesitate to use literature itself, much less to use video games (and there has never been a video game in all of history whose characterisation can hold a candle to even the minor classics of the written word). If I were compelled to choose a video game character's name, I'd choose one which could otherwise be interpreted as not being that of a video game character, and never tell anyone its other origin. Something of Christian or otherwise Anglo-Saxon origin.

I prefer the inconsistency to the reality of having to ride the mole-lobster gloriously down to Iziz.

I've lived in Canada all my life, and I don't recall store-bought major commercial PC games being typically in the $40CDN range...ever. I keep recalling the computer games of the '80s for comparison to games today because that's the most recent era in which I actually do recall the big games (for Apple II, TI 99, Commodore, etc.) frequently falling at or below that figure. But in the post-386 era? I don't think so. I think perhaps one needs to differentiate "major releases" and media-rich titles of previous decades, and otherwise expensive development projects (good flight sims were always very expensive) from games which heralded back more to the development style of the previous generation and retained their pricing even into the 486 era (e.g., simple, low-price sports and action games). Sure, there were budget titles, or console ports that persisted and sold for cheap, but they're not the kind of large-scale projects that bear comparison to the major name media-rich titles of today.

Basically, all I can do is agree with the majority of respondents. The first one was a good story, and a good RPG, but it was a very straightforward one in many ways. Even the great "twist" was about as incredibly formulaic as a twist could be. While the core story was engaging, it left little to the imagination, and when its story was unfolded, there was little left to inspire the player on multiple playthroughs. I found quite the opposite was the case with KotOR II. The story is full of a sense of one's character's engagement in a much larger universe, filled with additional depth and meaning. This is not simply a matter of things being left out and references being made to them, but held out of reach. It's a narrative device. KotOR II created, for me, what felt like a wider universe in which my character was a player. KotOR felt more claustrophobically centred around the set path which my character was compelled to follow. Consequently, I did not replay the first, while I have indeed replayed the second immediately. For some reason, KotOR just feels like the RPG equivalent of a rail shooter, for me. KotOR II's more vivid storytelling helped alleviate that narrative claustrophobia, in my play.

Heh. Oddly enough, "The Nameless One" as a name for a child had never occurred to me. I guess I'm just not quite that cruel "Algernon," after A. C. Swinburne, literary critic from an era of which I'm fond, and, most importantly (though perhaps more problematically), author of the poem Delores [Our Lady of Pain] cited in my sig, an assumed inspiration for TSR's Lady of Pain, I had seriously considered, however.

I don't think prices on computer parts have really gone up or down much in relative terms. There has always been a high end and there has always been a low end. Sure, when a 20MB HD was a rare luxury, they were expensive, but that doesn't say anything about computer prices in general. It just says that 20MB HDs were a rare luxury. I wouldn't compare the price of adding a floppy drive to my TI 99 when the technology was new to the price of buying a floppy drive today in order to get any sense of how expensive computing technology as a whole is. Storage technology was in a very different phase. Comparing it to storage technology today doesn't make sense. Nor would comparing a 300 Baud modem from that era give any sense of peripheral prices, really. Networking technology was a very different beast at the time. It had a completely different status within the market. In fact, a middle of the road "computer" has actually continually risen in value since the 80s, I would say. An entry level "computer" in the early '80s was anywhere from $99 (e.g., TI 99 after price drops) to $500 (e.g., later Trash-80s). That price range as a practical option for a family computer isn't really there anymore, or at least isn't popular. A viable "computer" is generally $500 and up.

Everything you need to know is here. P.S., DSimpson is god.