alanschu

Hey, it's Ender! Long time no see :D

I've always been fascinated that many people find "The Universe just exists" as being completely unacceptable...but "God just exists" is perfectly ok. My main reason for "removing" God from the equation is based purely on reading up about all the messed up explanations people had for stuff that they didn't understand. Unfortuately, it's human nature to need reasons for something. We can't just be on this planet to procreate and pass on our genes...there must be something else, otherwise what's the point? Right? I feel God was created simply as a means to explain the unknown. Oblivion is impossible to conceive. For the universe to just exist seems "silly" so we create abstract notions to satisfy our desires. Ah yes, an all knowing God created us.....what's that? Who created God? Blasphemy! He's always existed! It was funny to know that initially the Big Bang theory was criticized because it reeked too much of divine intervention.

Let's play spot the Paradox!

According to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, reaching the speed of light is not possible, since as our speed increases, it's functionally equivalent to our mass increasing (good ol' E=mc^2). Since for all intents and purposes our mass is increasing (and it increases at a higher rate the faster we go), you essentially need an infinite amount of energy to achieve the speed of light. Also, I don't think Red Giant's are very massive. Our sun will become a Red Giant at one point, but I suppose I'm just being picky. :D As for hyperspace....I'm not sure. I have vaguely heard of bending space-time to create wormholes.....but the classes I have taken just glanced over the issue.

Fair enough. I considered this under the "ease of use" however. I have no problems patching a game if it's simple and was released in a timely matter. But I do know that many do not share my opinion. It probably helps that I don't actually own any consoles as an alternative. The problem is you post stupidly because you seem to only read what you want. I never said that 'crappy games' is the downfall of the PC. Heck, I like the PC. All I gacve was MULTIPLE reasons why consoles are doing better than PC. You took a whiny fit; because facts are stated about your precious DS. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You said: You did NOT give "MULTIPLE reasons why consoles are doing better than PC." When I then point out the "multiple" reasons that you somehow think you mentioned (at no point during our discussion did YOU mention "multiple" reasons), you r00fled me and assumed I was associating consoles as being "kiddie" things or whatnot, which was not the case. You also "defended" yourself by using my points to support your "PC is not as good" argument, when I was never arguing that PC gaming wasn't "losing." You clearly state that "the games aren't all that." You then state that "if they were" then they'd be winning the 'wars.' What I did was point out that you are wrong. The ironic thing was you accused the other guy of being blind. Nor is it "undisputable fact" that "Sports games on console = awesome." Unless "awesome sports games" are the unrealistic arcady pooch-screws they make. I mean, I'm sure when Tiger gets a perfect shot he decides to step back and Happy Gilmore it and can dynamically change the spin of the ball in the air! r00fles! (Although having actually played most EA Sports games on both console and PC, they are remarkably identical...shocking!) Hey...I wasn't the one that thought my comments about the social acceptance of video game consoles meant I was talking about consoles only being for kiddies like you did. I don't even like Dungeon Siege.

The Final Fantasy game play themselves just as much. It's like playing a movie. As for settling my "lack of taste," I wasn't aware it was what we were talking about. It sure seemed like it was about your bogus claim that the PC is "losing" because of it's games. Ironic that you lecture me about lack of knowledge, when there's other, more significant reasons, that I already stated (which you didn't comment on). Doesn't change the fact that the PC version of the game will be more complete than the rushed out the door console version. But I guess all that extra content makes the game suck even more, and further contribute to the "crap games that are the cause of PC gaming's death." r00fles! The problem comes in when you start saying stupid stuff like the decline in PC gaming is a direct result of it's "crappier" games. Sure you may not like the games and I may not care for the same console ones you mention....but don't say stupid incorrect stuff like that.

Hmmm...aren't geometric and exponential interchangeable here? I mean, geometric is just a discrete from of exponential.

It's been a while since I had played Throne of Bhaal.....could you remind me? And I cannot think of many games (not even KOTOR 2) where you actually have an impact on the NPCs. They stay static...and even in KOTOR 2, they may be darkside but they still responded like their old selves. The ability to make influences on the NPCs is a great idea, since it provides a more plausible and dynamic experience. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There is "reputation" in BG2, without the ToB. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh? I still don't remember. I played SoA even earlier I don't consider the "reputation" attribute to be influence though. Just your reputation. As far as I know, you couldn't convince anyone to be good or bad. I know so many people complained that you should be able to convince Viconia to be good, since she seemed more good than evil.

The sports controls configure very nicely to my Saitek controller, and smooth gameplay? Hmmm....sounds like rubbish. Runs fine on my system, and is vertainly not choppy. My computer plays sports games better than most of the recent games. Although playing them with a keyboard is not as good as a controller. All that shows is some good games are PC only, and some are console only. As for the FF games...I'd rather play Dungeon Siege than Final Fantasy. And it's neat that the PC version of Fable is going to have roughly 50% more game (they are opening up an area that was never finished for the XBOX version), and it's equivalent to about half the game now (so there'll be 3 parts essentially). And what about the people owning a PS2? They aren't playing Jade Empire anytime soon. I never said that the consoles aren't winning. You said that consoles were winning because of the games (or rather, PCs were losing because they don't have as good of games), which is not the case. Consoles are winning because they have two VERY attractive advantages with their price and ease of use. And if they can't afford all three, they certainly cannot afford a PC. Which is why the consoles are winning...not because of "better" games. There will always be great games that are PC only, and great games that are console only. (and crap games for both) I never said consoles are for kiddies. I said that because of the widespread distribution of consoles in the 80s (which is why I mentioned people aged under 25), video game consoles are much more mainstream. People can play a console for hours and not face the social stigma that a PC gamer would have. This also has to do with the ease of their distribution. I was just talking about social acceptance...never about maturity. So have I, and not since the NBA Lives in the late 90s have I seen the consoles have better games than the PC. I prefer my sports games to be more realistic, not arcadey shoot fests where hole in ones are a dime a dozen, or having fights after the race in NASCAR.

It's not that it's "hard" to implement...it just has a more exponential effect on time. It becomes "hard" because you get a larger amount of scripting and whatnot.

It's been a while since I had played Throne of Bhaal.....could you remind me? And I cannot think of many games (not even KOTOR 2) where you actually have an impact on the NPCs. They stay static...and even in KOTOR 2, they may be darkside but they still responded like their old selves. The ability to make influences on the NPCs is a great idea, since it provides a more plausible and dynamic experience.

Not that it truly matters. The game isn't too tough.

Most of the automatic memory managers are slower however. But it is nice to have a garbage collector take care of everything for you.

Influence = good! I also don't think that there was anything in the main story that required you to have a huge amount of influence. I hate the fact that you can be a dink to people yet they're still willing to talk to you!

The influence was the best idea of the game. I hate it when the PC is able to convincingly become friends with everybody. It's stupid and unrealistic. Having said that, the influence in KOTOR2 was not implemented properly. Turning Atton to the DS should result in him becoming a jerk, not getting upset at me when I kill an innocent person. The ability to affect your party members is a good thing. It adds replayability and makes the characters more dynamic, living creatures. I actually would have preferred it if various NPCs hated each other and would actually attack each other.

I have a feeling death will be oblivion. On the plus side, I'm not too concerned about it, seeing as Death and I cannot coexist. Let's just say when I'm dead...I won't be worrying about the fact that I'm dead

I actually feel kinda sad when those two Ewoks get blasted by the AT-ST. When one gets up, he quickly bumps the other one to get up and is about to get on his way....he stops and looks back for a second...and he says something that sounds like "Buddy?" as he nudges up against him. He then kneels down beside and everytime it happens I always think "Aww" :D

If they set gender and stuff for the Exile, then they'll set gender and stuff with Revan.

We don't even have an official announcement on #3. So there's definitely no word of the locations.

Looking forward to number 4!!

Errr.....5 battleships a day??? As for Aponez, I think you are sorely underestimating the usefullness of the german tanks. If the Panzer IV was such a crap tank, why was it still able to punch holes in Allied armor towards the end of the war.

I'm curious Volourn...which sports games have you played on the PC?

I guess I should have been more clear....as in sequels that have stories that are directly releated to the previous title(s). I also play sequels to expect more of the same. In that I expect the excellent story, gameplay, characters, or any combination plus other stuff too numerous to mention. I certainly don't require them to be related storywise to the previous game though.

Glad to see you haven't changed. In any case, talk to the people that play Tiger Woods golf or NASCAR racing how much better these sports games are on their console. As much as I like having "powerup shots" and the ability to dynamically change the spin of the ball in the air to go on how I feel it would help me most. Not to mention the fact that if I am even just close to the hole in the console version of Tiger Woods, I have an increased tendency to sink it if I enter the "heart beat mode" of an excellent shot. I've seen my shot completely shift it's trajectory a bit so that it goes in the hole. And the mess that is NASCAR....ugh. I don't know how anyone would rather have such a goofy arcade experience. Grudge matches and fights in the pits because of aggressive racing...WTF? The game is an insult to anyone who likes NASCAR (and even to me...since I don't care for NASCAR). The last version of FIFA, NHL and NBA Live were also direct ports, with no difference in functionality...at least in my experience. If you can give me examples, then knock your socks off. They get stuck with their own sets of crap games like Crime Patrol 2: Drug Wars, or Endgame. All systems have crap games! It also doesn't change the fact that the consoles have missed out on great games like Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, The Total War series, IL-2 Sturmovik, Battlefield 1942, Half-Life 2 (still not out for console), the XCOM games (if you want to go back in time), Neverwinter Nights, the many great modules for Neverwinter Nights. It also looks like they're going to get the shaft for stuff like Dragon Age, Age of Empires III. There's many great games that are on console and not on PC, but there's many great games on PC that never make it to console. Before accusing people of being blind, check your own prescription. Consoles are (arguably) winning the "wars" because of the advantages that they have over PC, which in no way include the games. The biggest thing about consoles is that they are cheaper. It's much more appealing to buy a $300 gaming rig compared to something over $1000. Consoles are also attractive for their consistent architecture. It's much less nerve wracking to develop a game knowing full well what everyone that plays the game is going to have for hardware. APIs help the PCs somewhat, but even still manufacturers do different things with the APIs that eliminate identical usage. It's easy to get more out of the hardware because there's no concerns for overhead from a beefy OS, and compatibility concerns are out the window. The low cost of the console also improves the demographics. Even a crappy game has a better chance of being successful since there's simply more people that buy them. You can also look at the sociological aspects too if you want. Game consoles have long been a part of the mainstream, especially considering many people aged 25 or under have used them, and likely owned them at some point. This even excludes any Atari owners! Since it's more a part of the mainstream, it has become more socially acceptable to spend larger amounts of time playing a console, than it has to play a computer. And this is coming from someone that hasn't owned a console since the Playstation. I'm all PC.

because the hawk is the falcon in the books it said the original design for the millenium falcon was an old freighter the freightor was so old that they didnt know how old it really was, but it was such a well engineered ship and held a fairly good design. so they decided to use it and then the yt 1300 freightor was born, it does look different but they made some major alterations to it this part is rumor but I heard that lando got the original yt 1300 which still had components from the old ship <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes the Hawk is the Falcon.....but it made sense for the Falcon to be in the original three movies, since the pilot/owner of the Falcon is in all three movies. To have the Hawk simply for having the sake of the Hawk begins to stretch plausibility...no matter how convincing of a story they make it out to be. The Hawk in KOTOR 2 makes sense, because they basically just found it, and since everyone knew it was Revan's ship, they'd pick it up. After hell breaks loose, they try to escape on it simply for escaping on it. That was a good reason. But if something like that were to happen again, then I'd feel it would still be stretching it simply to have the Hawk for the sake of having the Hawk. The only way I would want to have the Hawk in the game, is if the Exile is still using it and they make up one hell of a good reason for it to transfer over to your control.