Volourn

"As for Graves, I really don't know much about him, I was just saying that to bug Volo" Your master plan to bug me was to call a Ranger great? The logic is weak. L0LZ

"BGII/ToB/BG>KOTOR>Jade Empire>Mass Effect>NWN" NW:TP > BG2 = DA > ME > JE > HOTU > BG1 > OC > SOU

"I still say its a ripoff to take stuff out of the game and pretend its "extra content" that you just happen to have ready right at release. Its just like they're selling cars with "buy now and get all four wheels included for free!" Not remotely the same thing.

"Is there any team in the league that would be the best team if they built around one star player?" Definitive best team? Hard to say, but one of the best? Absolutely. Sabres with Hasek is one good example of a team that is MUCH better than it should be because of one guy. Gretzky on the Kings. They were a joke, they got him, and they made the Finals. The best players will make sure their teams are amongst the best. "Actually Marleau led the Sharks to the playoffs a couple years before the arrival of Thornton." Sorry, but in a league where more than half the teams make the playoffs, that ain't impressive. Thornton - despite his well known playoff problems - is the reason why the Sharks have been a powerhouse since the lockout. "A team built around him would not go anywhere, as was evidenced in Atlanta. " That's because a) Atlanta had literal crap around him. And, b) As great as Heatley is, he's not a team changer by himself. He's still better than Marleau despite Marleau having more goals.

"ME wasn't a good RPG, so it's better not to even try and go fully to the shooter line." Wriong. Way better than either BG that is for sure. "The same thing has crossed my mind now that my previously low expectations hit rock-bottom. It might actually be more tolerable now that it has quit pretending to be an RPG." Kiddin' right? You actually thinking of buying/playing ME2? Are you on crack? Why do that when you loathed ME1? At least wait until it hits the bargain bin.

"Right, so what you're saying is the leading goal scorer(s) are not the most dangerous (or best) players? Typical VoloLogic I suppose. " So... Marleau is better than Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Broduer, etc.? Come on, now. Don't be silly. No team that wanted to be one of the best teams would build around Marleau. Period. That's how I determine who is amongst the best. Marleau would be nothing without Thornton, and even Heatley. Those two takes LOTS of pressure off of him. How can Marleau be 'one of the best players in the league' when he's arguably 4th best on his own team. LMAO

"Anyway, that should've been known to every player as it would've made a lot more sense," While I think it was silly to do this for a DLC, I also thinjk this line of thinking is nmonsencial. No, every player shoudlnt' know this. It's called C&C. Soemtimes, it's a need to know basis. Why would any of the aprticipants in the affair circle feel the need to tell the PC about it except in the example of Anora above. Why do people want to be forcefed everything?

Boo really loves ME. Only explaination why he keeps spamming teh topic. Anyways, some of those changes are sad to me. That's what we get for BIO listening to Obsidian and Codex posters. R00fles!

"Also you've made these claims yet offered no proof, no article or source that supports them." Why should I/ I doin't need to prove anything to you. Your links are useless garbage anyways. You are so biased, you would make stuff up anyways ala 'Hussein is trustworthy because he was lying'. LMAO Your latest links about Hussein just proves my point further. He couldn't be trusted. He was too busy playing games to be left in power. The fact that he made a habit of lying is just another mark on him. And, no, way more than 20 countries were involved. Still, even with 'just' 20, it shows it wans't just the US. Nor does it matter what motivation the various countries had either. All countries act in self interest. Duh. "Except it seems like they dont' want us there volo... and usually people don't have good memories of the fat guy who came over, and then ate your food and destroyed your house after he kicked the naughty dog in the teeth." Only if you simplify things. Iraqis feelings on the whole issue are rather complex, and not one sided either way. It depends which factions you are referring to. It should be noted that most polls showed thatIraqis supported the war more than most non American countries did, and way more than their fellow Muslim countries. That says a lot. Of course, they certainly dissaproved of how the post war was handled (as do I since it was severely mishandled). It should be noted, btw, that most polls show that the majority of Iraqis believe they are better off post war than pre war. To add complexities as well there's the three different fnctions that play a part. And, thjere's even more factions as well within those. Bottom line, as above, Iraqis feelings on the whole issue are not simple or easy to just colour code either way. Afterall, NOBODY likes to be bombed for ANY reason.

I'll remember that if I see you being raped in an alley. I'll mind my own business as a courtesy to you.

"Besides, if Bush's governemt really wanted to get rid of dictators, they would be invading half the known world, starting with Saudi Arabia." Don't be silly. You can't do too much or else you'll end up not accomplishing anything. This is why, while I'd love to personally free evry slave in the world, I can't do it. *shrug* Gots to know your limitations. "Tthat wasn't why the US attacked," Never claimed it was even close to the main reason. " and even if it happened to be, it's not like the Iraqis were rolling out the red carpet in welcome." They weren't exactly crying about Hussein's removal, either. Plus, they remember the Gw WILL us, and the UN left them to rot. "alright so let me get this straight...no WMD's were found in Iraq, yet they must exist because there's no proof they were destroyed.. Nice logic." You have poor logic. We know by Hussein's own words that Iraq had x amount of WMDs. They were to destroy them and show proof that that it was done. They didn't do this. Are we supposed to take his word for it? LMAO He was a criminal who was proven guilty and consented to the Resolutions. Bottom line is Iraq had a lot of unaccounted for WMD. This is a FACT. "Also most countries went into the war thinking Saddam was an actual threat, because of the claims he might have been directly involved in 9/11 and that he had WMD's, both of which proved to be false." What a bunch of balony.

Good enough reason to get rid of him for non bigots. The same way I would help a stranger who wa sbeing mugged even thoguh the mugger may be no threat to me. R00fles!

"Why do you keep saying that? He already responded and told you that was not true. Troll" He's done it to me mutliple times. *shrugs* And, saying something isn't so when the evidence disproves what you say doesn't make it so. It's obvious he feels Boo is the best npc ever in game. Proof is in the pudding. Don't get mad because your stalking failed. Attacking me on the forums won't change that I hurt your feelings because I don't want to be your friend.

"100% sure huh? Alright, please link some evidence of that. " When Iraq surrendered after the First Gulf War they gave the allies/UN a list of their WMD, and they were supposed to then prove they had destroyed. While they did this, many of their supposed WMD were never shiown to be destoryed. "The way I remember no WMD's were ever found, nor any facilities where they could have been manufactured. Please, prove me wrong." You remember wrong. It also depends on what you mean by WMD. Prove me wrong. I don't feel the need to 'prove' anything to you as it gets me nothing. "Proof of this? You can't know what his intentions were. I'm sure he was up to no good and basically every dictator in the world wants WMD's of some kind." Sure, we do. His udnerlings, his own writings, his own history, it all reeks of a guy who have every intention to pursue WMDs or anything that could help him keep power. " That still doesn't mean Saddam had any, or had any realistic chance of getting any." This is uptodate. "Also the UN decided against the attack but the US did it anyway. Truly, what a joke." The US followed the UN's own Resolutions which called for harsh measures if Saddam didn't cooperate as the deal was. The UN just didn't have the ballz to follow through (plus, they were handicapped by countries like France who had oil deals with Saddam, lol). And, oh, btw, it wasn't just the US. Upwards of 50 countries were part of that war. So, don't make it sound like the US acted solo (even if they led the way and easily had the most numbers). This was NOT the same as Iraq attacking Kuwait. The UN is a joke that doesn't even follow through on their own Resolutions which is why the UN can't be trusted to be some 'world police'. resolutions are useless if you won't enforce them. "still doesn't change the fact that the Bush regime lied to everyone to get a casus belli on Iraq." Nope. Bush never actually cvlaimed that Iraq did 9/11. He did claim, truthfully, however that: - Iraq had unacounted for WMD. fact - Had ties with known terrorist groups INCLUDING AQ FACT - Paid suicide bombers' families as a ward for doing so - Had every intention in targeting US interests - Was a threat to US allies including the Kurds, Isreal, and Kuwait - Kept breaking multiple UN Resolutions like intervering with Kurdish governing themselves, no fly zone, pocketing money from the oikl for food program meant for civilians, and the list goes. - His mass murdering of fellow Iraqis is an affront to any dcent moral person, and such inhumane garbage shouldn't be tolerated if at all possible. That all said, I do agree that ultimiately the decision to take Saddam out had to do with self interest but that's ALWAYS true. Thaqt doesn't make it the less right thing to do. Then again, anti Bush people would have you believe that Bush was a dicator destined to mass murder Amerikans, bomb Iran to the stone age, nuke North Korea, and find away to keep himself in power as Presdient for Life. L0LZ

"i also believe claims of saddam having wmd's was a big reason why he needed to be attacked. which turned up bogus." Now, you are the one being ignorant. It was a fact that Iraq had WMDs. This is undisputable. The dispute is whether or not he destroyed them all when they claimed to. Since, in this case, he couldn't prove that WMDs that 100% Iraq was known to have were actually destroyed. They simply vanished. He constantly broke the agreement Iraq made when they surrendered. So.. where did all those WMDs go, huh? The boogie man? Not to mention Saddam had every inteiton to make more WMDs, and they even had various materials and plans lined up. Sorry, argue all you want, but whether or not Saddam had any direct ties with 9/11 ( he had none) doesn't mean he didn't have ties with AQ or had access to WMD which, bt UN LAW (lol, what a joke!), he shouldn't have. Stop defending Hussein like he was some poor innocent victimized accused. He was anything but.

That's because they are simple, and dumb. ME is awesome, complex, and superb. Then again, Boo is the kinda of guy who belives a rodent is the best npc ever to be in the game so... can't take what he says too seriously. R00fles!

"Cheechoo was one of the best players in the league that season." No. "Marleau is that guy this season." No. " Oh yeah, not to mention the fact that this isn't Marleau's first great season... " Thanks for admitting my initial point was right. Marleau is not polaying great becasuse of not having the stupid C like some suggested. He's playuing great because that's the way he rolls. Still not one of the best players. "You can make the argument that pretty much every great player has had other great guys around them to elevate their play. Ovechkin has Semin and Green. Crosby has Malkin. Lemieux had Jagr. I don't think Marleau is there yet, again he was very inconsistent in his early career, but if he keeps up this type of play for a couple years, then Thornton-Marleau deserve their place." ERROR. ERROR. ERROR. Ovechkin wa sbefore those two bozoz. Ovechkin makes THEM great. Crosby did well without Malki in his rooki season and Malkin did find when Crosby was injured. Lemieux had plenty of great seasons without Jagr and vice versa. Same with Messier, and Gretzky. Thornton is one of the greatets players. Marleau is not. Unless you mean 'one of the top 100' when you say greatest then sure, he's one of the greatest. But, he's not top 10 or even top 20.

"But just the flip side is, if you've got some decorated hero who raises his hand and says "I didn't do it." and some relative unknown who potentially has an axe to grind who says "he did it"... In absence of any real proof.. who are you going to believe more? " Except you *do* give proof. Over, and over again. Why would Shepard have a grudge against Saren? He never met. Heck, Shepard doesn't even know the Captain's history with him. It's bigotry 100%. It's ALL racist politics. It isn't motivated by the truth. Heck, the Councile keeps bashing Shepard yet they still make him a Spectre which is supposedly the highest honour one can get. If they don't trust Shepard why give him that much power? Racist politics. I mean they make Shepard a Spectre knowing full well he's gonna go around spouting his 'nonsense' about anceint evil robots, and they basically give him a blank slate to do so. Even though they think he's full of crap. The logic here is nonsensical.

Typical NHL.

No. He was a solid player who greatly benefit by playing with two of the best players ever.

"A couple of years later... a second human is given a chance.. the Spectre overseeing it ends up dead, and those pesky humans are saying Saren did it.. with absolutely no proof beyond their "word". And so far they're kind of known as being a bit pushy... It would be kind of like some third-world country turning up to the USA and saying "hey, you know that dedicated soldier guy who's won the Medal of Honor more then once? He murdered someone. Oh. we don't have any proof. But we're telling you the truth guv'nor. Honest." " Like I said, bigotry. That's the only reason why they make escuses for Saren. It's not based on facts. But, it's amde clear throughout the game, that many of the races - espicially the council races - fear humans. Plus, they loathe changes as evidenced by the fact it's been the same 3 races on the council for centuries illustrated by the frustration of the other non council races.

Not all GWs are alike. No doubt there is a mix of them. It's not like one's personality is automatically changed after the joining. So, Alistair is your typicval 'paladin'. Big deal. Duncan's focus is one dimensional on the plaugue. Big deal. The fact people try to paint all GW as exactly the same no matter what is silly. Not all GWs need to have that narrowm focus where the end justifies the means no matter what. It's absolutely silly to think so.

"Though the reapers was real there was a chance the council was right and Saren was just using the Geth for for his own goals." Except, Shepard knows thanks to an eyewitness, that Saren murdered Saren's supposed 'friend'. Yeah, yeah, the council dismisses the account; but that's because they are retarded to make excuses for the scumbucket due to their innate bigotry.

whereas some violent computer games can send a very very small number of disturbed individuals in the world the wrong ideas about reality." Sarcasm.

R00fles!