Istima Loke

I just got back from uni and on my way I picked the game. I'm installing it right now...

they aren't the greatest, but they aren't the worst I'm not a Drizzt fan, but those books were good. You get to know about the drow and the Underdark. Yes, I read the first. Though writing is mediocre (though I am reading it in Greek and the translator appears to have little to none knowledge of fantasy and translation principles) and filler material exists aplenty, it's a nice idea and gives a lot of drow details...

I have a friend's, Salvatore's Dark Elf trilogy for months and I am thinking of reading them in order to return them.

All-new? The first part of it is two years old and the second (most recent) part is a year and a half. Pre-edit: What...the...heck?! PART THREE IS OUT?! ASGDJAPSDGAPSDG I need to go home to play it! It actually adds two chapters this time, "Depth Charge" and "Pegasus" that brings an end to "Minerva:Metastasis" (but not the whole Minerva thing).

Last night I played the all-new Minerva: Metastasis mod single player mod for hl2. It was great.

Grrrr... When I went to the local store to ask when they will have the game (about a week ago), they said that they were supposed to have it in their storehouse at about the 20th of September (or something to that extend) but they hadn't got it yet, thus the game will be here (in the city that I live) during the first days of October.

I started playing Icewind Dale. So I have to ask: is spiritual hammer a ranged weapon or what?

I just did it (on the emulator)! It is possible to win Super Mario Bros. without killing anything except for the final Bowser.

I have heard of the famous speed runs but never about a run without killing. But I think it's possible, with the exception of the final Bowser, though you should use warp zones...

And let's not forget this piece of art...

The shippuden (whatever it's called) naruto is pretty annoying as the pace is extremely slow. I never got into Bleach, cause after the introduction arc (ep 1-20) a lot of inconsistencies appeared and really ruined it for me...

I 'm spending my night trying Fortress Forever....

Yes and I am in the middle of the exams... grrr... Today is the Super Paper Mario release day in Europe. I am also waiting for Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Portal, HL2 Ep:2 and as it turns out MotB. Too many games I want to buy this fall if you ask me (and maybe others I am not aware of...)

I don't like the word "philosophical" (let alone "pseudo-philosophical"). I mean, ok the game uses some (mostly eastern if I'm not mistaken) philosophical patterns (which also appear to be connected with the setting - with which I am not familiar) like the change through belief and regret as an important part to reach the afterlife but I wouldn't prefer to call it "philosophical" (not because I don't think that it was deep, moving etc - I don't even like these words) because it feels like saying that it teaches philosophy, something that is not the point (as I see it) and it makes it look like some kind of textbook. PS:T, I think, showed that a game can tell a nice story, has nice characters, good witting. It presented a very beautiful and touching personal story. I think the "questions" presented in Torment (on the nature of a man, on regret, on who are we, on good and evil) are questions that bug most (if not all) humans. It was not a game that tried to give answers to that questions, it just shared them and some points of them with us. And I think that this is what makes this game what it is. I also think that PS:T showed that videogames are not inferior to other mediums. I think PS:T is what it is not only for a story well done but also for a game as a whole. I sometimes try to imagine how it would look like if it was a book or a movie and it looks to me that it would be much worse. Of course this could be said about other games (actually about almost every game with some "adventure" titles as exceptions) but some people (like Ebert) will appear to say that the are not a complete story or there is not authorial control or whatever (and I disagree, but anyway). The difference with Planescape is that it is a linear game which doesn't gives you a lot of options, that is better played by a charismatic-intelligent-wise character than anything else, that it is extremely story-driven etc. (things that make it look as easily adapted to more "sophisticated" mediums) but again when (imagined) adapted into these it looks vastly inferior. (I know there is a book out there, I haven't read it, but I have heard that it's worse than the game) Now whether or not games will be considered as art. I think in time they will. As Walsingham pointed, movies used to be considered as mindless entertainment when they first appeared. Though nowadays games are considered (at least by some) worse that killing puppies. O tempora O mores (as they say)...

Here (in Europe that is) you can find a pack with Icewind Dale 1 (+exp) and Icewind Dale 2 for 15 euros. I picked it up (along with BG1+exp and BG2+exp pack, also for 15 euros) but never got around in playing ID1 more than half an hour (the game being too dungeon crawling and hard for me). But I have no idea if that thing exists in the US...

Fallout 2 also has (other than good roleplay and nice storyline) one of my favourite MacGuffin, the G.E.C.K.

Just finished Planescape: Torment for my first time. I kinda want to play the game again. I think I became addicted.

Because they feel insignificant? PS: Sorry, couldn't resist

Actually, I consider this, one of the worst argument I have ever encountered. Saying that the game designer does not have authorial control over the game is totally (and obviously) wrong. When a team makes an rpg game (for example) don't they choose exactly what the game will contain and what not? They know all the side-quests and the main quests, they are aware of all the encounters all the choices of the player and the whole presentation of the world. The only difference is that they give the player more than one paths, showing the plot from different perspectives. But they choose what these will be and they choose how they will be presented. If they want to make a horror game they won't add funny encounters or relaxing moments in a local inn and so on. Also, playing Torment without paying attention to the main plot points is no different from going to the most thought provoking, deep movie and laugh all the time because the nose of the actor is big or eat the popcorn so loudly that you can't hear the lines. I always have the impression that they search for arguments just to support what they want to support and they don't even care if they make any sense.

You go to that guy who knows of the planes and has travelled in them (in the smothering corpse bar that gives you the negative plane token) and you tell him of Ingress.

I have just started "Majora's Mask". One of the best gameplay/storyline mechanic I have ever seen.

I just finished Fallout 2. I was a lucky thief (with exceptional power weapon skills). It was the first time I dealt with the Enclave using weapons. It's a lot harder in comparison with charismatic/smart character.

I must had been 4 or 5 when my brother and I decided that I should hide under a small table in the living room in order to find out if santa existed or not.

One part I enjoy a lot in Torment is the stone where you experience Deionarra's memory of meeting you from her and your perspective. But then, most (or maybe all) things in torment are very well written. I also enjoy the conversation between Irenicus and Ellesime near the end of BG2. There must be others but I can't recall any for the time...

I liked the ideas to improve roleplaying and they seem ('cause I have little knowledge on whether they are) achievable. But why to totally get rid of charisma and intelligence? One reason they should exist is because they somehow represent (in a generalized form) the character's experiences before the game starts (when he was younger). If someone was a bookworm as a kid he should probably have more intelligence and less charisma than someone that was playing with other kids all day long. The second one will be a better talker but when it comes to discussing science the best he could do is pretend he has some knowledge but won't really be able to take part in the conversation. The bookworm guy will be able to counter every argument presented to him, but probably the others won't understand him or won't bother to listen to him. Also, even if the second guy reads a book about the subject before they start talking we won't be able to understand a lot of things because he never really learned (when he was younger) how to concentrate when reading or how to extract information from the book. Another reason is that they represent (along with professions or classes) the human ability to create abstract thoughts and gain general knowledge from a certain situation. This is the means with which experience and classes are linked to the real world. In a war a trained soldier will learn how to fight better, a poet will learn how to write about war, a cook will learn how to cook faster and with fewer ingredients and a man with high intelligence may learn a lot about mechanics and vehicles. It's wrong to gain knowledge and power only based on class and abilities but they should be a part of that. What does that have to do with the article? Well, abilities (I think) should alter how you affect, see and learn in the world. Anyway, it was a nice, thought provoking article, though sometimes it kinda drifts from one think to another making some of it's points hard to follow.