Blank

yeah, i liked the first one the best. funny stuff. Then the second one i started to really dislike fuzzy. and then by the time i got to the fanart, which depicted fuzzy very well, i hated fuzzy and wished that sam got rid of him.

Here is why i say it is illogical. Why would any LS jedi want to bring balance to the force? I would want to bring extreme imbalance to the force in the favour of my alignment. i've never heard anybody talk about this fallacy before, so i wondered what others would think of it.

lol, i chose malak only to discover that so did many others. i agree with what people said about how malak should have learned from revan, and malak wasn't very good tactically. he needed bastila just to have an edge over the republic. whereas Revan would have torn through the republic like he did the mandalorians. I don't see why people think Darth Maul is the dumbest. he was just another puppet of Palpatine like Dooku, that one chick with dual lightsabers in the clone wars cartoons, and then anakin too. they are all the same level of dumb, except anakin ends up redeeming himself by saving his son.

Yes. Korriban was a late addition to replace M4-78. The cave probably was meant to be there, and since it was already completed planted it on Korriban... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ah, smooth. as i always say, "if at first you don't succeed, make it look like you did."

Foxdez, that is exactly the point. Only lame jedi like Bastila and Anakin will fall to the darkside because of love. All the other pimp LS/grey Jedi like Exile, Revan, and Jolee have no problem with love and are actually motivated by it. You have to be a real loser to love somebody and then kill them (anakin) or try to kill them and fail (bastila) The thing about Visas is, her personality reveals no real cruelty or hate as one would expect from a sith. Even though she claims to be a sith, at heart, it doesn't seem that way. even when you go darkside, she doesn't display debauchery or a survival of the fittest sith attitude. Basically everyone replying here but you thinks Visas is better. And about love. Why else would one do charitable acts for others? there is no reason to, it would make no sense unless you were to gain something for yourself, and that is rarely the case during one's lifetime. Without love you just have selfishness and/or hate. Kalfear, i liked that scene with the handmaiden too. i agree with your rating of which scenes were better in the order you did.

ah, i agree then. i will bow out for now, since i don't have anything very constructive to say, and u guys seem to be doing fine on your own . but once i really disagree or really agree with something, then i'll be back.

lol, snap. you just picked a fight with me. Do you know what is in the Bible (the basis of Christian religion)? because if you did, then you would see that anyone commiting a crime is not adhering to the laws and precepts established therein, and therefore how can one blame the Bible for telling people to do crimes if it doesn't tell them to do crimes? This is where i agree with Shadow Paladin. The nation ideally is never wrong, unless their own laws are immoral. but if their laws are not immoral, then ideally they are never wrong. However, we are talking not just about ideality, but also reality. In reality, Azarkon has a point, that the nation doing evil is responsible, but by commiting the acts they did, they are going against their own laws, so is it the ideal nation's fault anymore? no, but it is the real nation's fault. i can't generalise everyone in that nation like Azarkon can, because everyone has their own opinion and to just label everyone guilty as a whole during their criminal acts, is just stupid and illogical. So i won't say it is the nation's fault, but it is the fault of a select conglomeration of people who had enough power to influence others for bad. Lol, fundamentalist christians. fundamentally adhering to the Bible, they are not wrong, so why would you hold them responsible if they didn't do anything that was truly based on the Bible? if it is a crime, then it is not based on the Bible, because God doesn't want us to sin. So then one who commits a sin is no longer under the label of being truly fundamental to the Bible.

Arkan, i can't stop laughing at your sig. lol. so funny

that was harsh. Harsh but funny, here are a couple of my favourite quotes from the article: talking about the enemy a.i. "Eventually, you discover that the best tactic is to either retreat and funnel them Pied Piper-style down corridors and take them down up-close one by one..." talking about the graphics "The real killer is the distinctly rubbery, glossy feel about everything. If you're not cringing at the latex enemies and their bizarre ragdoll death animations then you'll baulk at the artificial shininess of the world around you. Rocks should be gritty and harsh, not slick and shiny. Waterfalls shouldn't look like molten acrylic.

Do you normally appologise for the actions of others ? The answer is political. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> lol. i didn't notice myself do that. it is partially political, but i guess i naturally sympathize and regret reporting to you that i cannot change something which i would like to change. <afterthought> although, i could if i really wanted to, but i guess i don't really want to. i can sift through the history books as they are, with bias and all. the only disturbing thing is that one must wonder if they are getting the whole truth, even with bias it is okay, but when stuff is left out we can't do anything to get it, neh?

If by public morality, you mean a public indoctrinated into the service of ethnocentric nationalism (which is all that is truly imbued by the kind of education we're talking about), then I say down with it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> but if you went down with all the public indoctrination of morality then you would start seeing anarchical type attitudes from people. i think the public does need help, because left to their own devices, it gets ugly quick. i agree that they shouldn't feel guilty for what they didn't do, but that doesn't excuse the fact that in reality other people judge them just the same. to not apologize would just look bad because other countries attribute Germany's choices in history to modern-day Germany. It shouldn't necessarily be singled out for attention, but it might as well be. it was a bad one. there are other bad ones. but they don't single those out. Why not? i don't know. i am not a history book writer. sorry that i can't change it.

I assume you are asking for our personal opinions. I believe because the holocaust occurred, to deny it would make one a kind of co-conspirator for the whole ordeal. I think it is a good law, i think its reason for existing is because the German's want others to see how they repent and will not forget the mistakes they have made.

I dont think grown ups do. Teens with image issues maybe. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> **reads mkreku's post. reads SP's post. looks at SP's avatar. pauses. laughs.**

I don't agree that it ever could be. You can't make history completely neutral and fact-based. Someone has to select which facts to include in the curriculum, and which to exclude, and that person has his own agenda. So the biases are still there, only they're hidden, and the students don't learn the skills to deal with the biases. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i don't agree that it ever could be too. however, the someone who selects which facts to include in the curriculum, and which to exclude, could have an agenda to just present the cold-hard facts. and they could also say that. and they could also have a section to teach about bias and tell kids they are dumb if they take it at face value.

This thread is not a work in progress anymore, as it claims in its description. Kumq, or anybody have time to do their own? it's a lot of work, so i am not whining about it, but this thread dissappoints.

the other day i only just realised how dumb consoles were. i mean, you can do it all with your computer just by investing in it's own hardware instead. this revelation has changed my opinion about consoles and i like pc for gaming better now. plus you can do more with the keyboard, seriously, a lot more. <second opinion> but the consoles aren't that bad. there is something satisfying about slapping in a cartridge and immediately being cast into an unadulterated state of playing. However, as the nex-gen consoles get more and more multimedia capabilities, i see the line between console and computer thinning. <free rant> multimedia is so stupid. everything is multimedia nowadays. My cell phone reeks of options that it shouldn't have, i.e. GPS. okay, i don't want people knowing where i am at, and i don't need a GPS. Nobody ever uses their cell phone's GPS. even a person who is stranded and lost would want to be found the old fashioned way, not with their phone. phones should stay phones, the "cell" doesn't make it more than transportable. Also, i currently can't buy a houseware appliance that doesn't say my name when i activate it. For instance, when i go to cook something in the microwave, i have to shuffle through the address book menu and built-in dvd player just to nuke my corndog. My socks sing "jingle bells" and have wireless networking capabilities. The only thing not multimedia in my house is my dog, and he is also disturbed when the automated food dish/thermometer violates his private space unwarranted. my computer is enough multimedia for me, and it does its job better than the alarm clock/mp3/scheduler could. so please, anybody that makes anything, don't make it multimedia unless it is actually practical.

Any history major will tell you that history itself is rarely, if ever, about cold hard facts. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But ideally... hence the words "should be". unless you were just noting that it is not that way and it would be difficult to get it to be that way...

i concur... partially. i'd rather not buy an xbox 360 just to play a K3, so having it for my computer would be better.

Rockstar's games have never appealled to me. beating and killing everything while trudging through a lame excuse for a storyline gets old for me somehow I don't know, it must just be me. Okay, so for the first day of having a rockstar game you say, "wow you can kill this and destroy that and run around more and shoot that and it blows up so funny and then you sprint over there and kick the fuzz with your special combos and realistic combat abilities" But then it got boring for me. sorry, but i will save myself some time, stress, and money by not coming out to play with the warriors.

i like how it says K3 rumours and then it says "well its true!" lol. and then you shouldn't have put the rumour's source, it would have had more credibility that way. like, from .000021% credibility to .001034% credibility. definitely more though.

hey everyone! It's Raffy! RING RING RING RING RING RING RING BANANA PHOOOOOOOOOOONE RING RING RING RING RING RING RING BANANA PHooooooOOOOOOne I've got this FEEEEEELING It's so appeeeeEEEEElling RING RING RING RING RING RING RING BANANA PHOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooNE

I think public morality can ill afford to turn away any assistance whatsoever. Oh, okay that was a lame joke, but i actually think it is a good point... I agree with what Azarkon said about history education, that it should be only the cold hard facts and not coated with different flavours to change what it actually is. I mean, there are other facets of education that can do that such as humanities or our own religion or whatever. we all make our own opinion anyway, but to be biased in reporting the facts is sickly demented, erm, i just think it is not fair. < opinion alert , well, it was all my opinion, but this moreso > For France to uphold that law in order to smooth their history is prideful and opens cause for strife in their dealings with other nations. Blank thinks this is unwise. Blank thinks Blank is lame for talking in third person. Blank does not edit this part so that everyone can see the cold hard facts of how lame Blank is.

I am one of those "too many people". We think that we enjoy our old and boring ideas and we also think that they don't get old. that is why we are too "many" and not only a "few". K1's romance was slightly cheesy at parts (i've said this before on another thread). Whereas K2's romance was not complete, (the game itself wasn't complete ) Kalfear, you should try writing a romance for a sci-fi/fantasy and then attempt to satisfy everyone; it won't work. I didn't mind the "true sith" junk they had. and i didn't think the "echo" was so overused as many people believe, i mean, they say it like 15 to 20 times. you all must've gone to Kreia a whole bunch and went through the same loophole dialogue. <warning: rant> Rpg's with relatively linear stories are better i think than smelly pieces of slimy poop such as: elder scrolls 3 morrowind which i recently bought used (looking for an rpg to pass the time) and was very dissappointed in. not my type of RPG. it was like a MMORPG without the second M and the O and without quality for the R and P. basically it was in its own money-wasting genre. in essence, an MRPG: Massively Really Pathetic Game. The fighting system compared to Kotor was sorely lacking to say the least. The graphics were also atrocious. and no parties? wHAt!? NO PARTIES IN AN RPG!??! i would take Final Fantasy 7 graphics over that any day. And Final Fantasy 7 was made in '97. Mhehh, this game i need to go destroy... right now... serious... no game has ever made me feel this way. i'll be back when i am done. Okay, back... i much better now Guys, just be happy there are people from Obsidian and Bioware that brought to us a coulple of good RPG's with romance in them too. i appreciate the creators more because of this experience.

i didn't find anything to hate about him, but i also didn't find anything to like about him. i thought he was just a well-made enemy boss for the game.