Tale

I think they should have Leonard Nimoy play Bilbo.

It worked for a short flashback. I don't think they're going to pull two theatrical movies with that trick.

Does it have to be irrational for me to make a joke out of it? See, we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I think the only people who would care about another Michael Jackson are nutjobs and myself. And I'm not even entirely sure I'm on that list.

This is part of what I have to contest. Not every generation is like the one that came before. Cheese is dying, if not already dead as a valid form of commercial humor. It'd be like releasing a Michael Jackson album to kids who grew up on Linkin Park. Sure, there was that Blood on the Dance Floor album, but I don't think that's what those kids are looking for. And music hasn't even progressed half as much in that time as gaming has in the past 10 years. That would be completely dishonest to the setting that Duke Nukem represents. I agree.

I've never had problem with the quality of the games. My contention is that the B-movie humor of Duke will easily show through as trying too hard to be funny with modern game design. They'll inherently be forced to provide more context to the adventure than in the previous games, which automatically means that facet of it will gain more prominence. If they apply Duke Nukem's B-movie style to the entirety of the setting, it will invariably end up with brain cells dying for every member of the audience. Whereas if they set up the setting so that it's all fairly serious, but Duke comes in and provides the comic relief, they could pull it off. All I ask is that when Duke Nukem gives off one of his atrocious one liners, someone in-game tells him to shut the hell up.

Now to be positive, I can see one way it could work. If everything about the setting is entirely serious with the exception of Duke himself. That's kind of how it worked for Ash.

In other words "because of nostalgia."

"Doom clone" is an old term used for just about any FPS game at all. It is an outdated term, however it is appropriate because at the time Duke Nukem 3D was released the term was still used and Duke Nukem as a design is just as dated as the term. Nice attempt at making yourself a martyr. Nobody's talking beheading. However if you start getting excited over Pong 2, we should rightly have you checked out by a professional. The game simply does not hold up without nostalgia.

Because the three first Duke Nukem games were beyond awesome? Or are you referring to those strange people who have been on the 3DRelams DNF forum for years without any news on the game still being in developement? No, I'm referring to people who are no longer teenagers aching to see boobies and excited by any "Doom clone" that comes to market. They might have been awesome for their time, but that time is long past.

I never said that I figured out what it was all about, just some of it.

Witcher is a little more demanding than Mask.

Not quite: Play it if you like KOTOR and RPGs because it won't be an epiphany if you dislike them. Edit: He does mention that the boobs were probably Biowares best idea Ahh, so too many words but he's glad for the boobs!

I'd like another series in that universe. I'd simply like the continuing story of Kain after Defiance. The part where he goes on to fulfill the destiny he forsook in the very first game and attempts to restore the balance.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ion-Mass-Effect Mass Effect Without sound I can still gather that he thinks it has too many words and relies too much on boobs. He also feels alone in not being absolutely enamored with it.

Legacy of Kain

TO THE SEQUELS THREAD! AWAY!

Even in spite of Stand-Your-Ground laws, I imagine most states do not give a civilian the right to kill to prevent robbery, but to prevent harm (even if only perceived) to yourself or other persons. I'm not sure how it works with armed security, such as at banks however.

I'm not clear on the question. If you're asking if announcing gives you the right to shoot indiscriminately, then no that would not be legal. If you're asking if announcing gives the right to shoot to prevent robbery, then it can vary by state. As I said about Duty-To-Retreat, in some cases (maybe all), you have to be unable to retreat. So, shooting someone who is leaving is a big nono. If you're asking if announcing a threat to scare off an intruder is legal on its own, well duh. The point of Stand-Your-Ground laws is that it is believed a person who is under threat of potential harm should not have to worry about getting arrested should they decide to defend themselves. They may not be in the right state to validly judge whether retreat is an option. At least that's how it is in Texas, as stated by the man who proposed the change in law.

That's the essence of the stand-your-ground, but it's not the whole of the US. If Wikipedia is accurate, it's 26 states, which is just over half. In contrast, some states have duty-to-retreat which requires you to either reasonably attempt to escape or announce intent to use deadly force. Again, up until the beginning of September, Texas had Duty-To-Retreat.

Psst, Universe at War is already out.

I think it's only fair to point out that until rather recently, even in Texas you could only shoot intruders if another person in your situation could not reasonably escape. It's called Duty-To-Retreat, and while it's been removed from Texas, it still is in effect for nearly half the other states. The contrary is called Stand-Your-Ground and Sand's home state of Illinois has such a law. Or does he live in Iowa? If so, he's plain fudgered.

SWG's (original) combat was fine for me. Though, I do have a personal disagreement with their melee-ranged balance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_Live...es:_Kevin_Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770 The danged thing runs on human fat.

Any spoiler questions about The Witcher can be PM'ed to me.