Wrath of Dagon

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110210/wl_time/08599204672600

They don't love them in the hands of their enemies, because they can't get away with assaulting them. I posted an article a while ago about Nicaraguan goverenment thugs beating up opposition. That can't happen in the US. Edit: Yes, they love fighting, but only if their victim is a lot weaker than them, like all bullies.

You guys should read The King in Yellow.

Why is this surprising? The guy's the biggest attention whore ever.

So can we negotiate with dragons instead of killing them?

I didn't say they were actually fighting fascism, and that's why I said "all forms of fascism". precisely. In general I think you just misunderstood my meaning. I'm not sure if this was a direct response to Monte's (tongue-in-cheek I think) remark about the 2nd Amendment but, do you really think that small arms protect you from fascism? Really? Yes it was, and yes it can, among other things. If you think that was actually representative, then lol.

No, fascism is not another word for tyranny, look it up on wikipedia.

The real problem was the entire game design. They just couldn't come up with anything better than a long, repetitive dungeon. There were no real quests to speak of. Fade wasn't too bad since at least it was something different.

Madison meant auxiliary to democracy, not to government. Such as the constitution and an idependent and unbiased judiciary to interpret it, in other words the rule of law.

FDR is also a giant, he certainly conducted the war effort much more effectively than Churchill did. I agree about Europe, but there are extenuating circumstances. As far as Joe Kennedy, see my edit above. You can't just ignore FDR, Harry Hopkins, and a bunch of others who were very pro-Britain and single out one guy as representing the US. I believe there were quite a few upper class twit nazi sympasizers in Britain also.

WoD I'm extremely Pro-US, but you're talking utter balls. The most cursory reading of history in that most fun of all periods (WW2) will show you how strong anti-British tendencies have run in the US> If that fails to grab you, have a look at what the US State department did to back us up during the Falklands war. Not familiar with any of that. You'll have to educate me. If you're talking about US resisting various Churchill hare brained schemes, I'd say it has nothing to do with being anti-brit and everything with being sane. Edit: You hold the entire US responsible for Joe Kennedy? He's probably as reviled here (by people who know anything I mean) as much as anywhere. Falklands, so far as I know US did everything possible to help Britain except join in the war.

New screens: http://www.gamebanshee.com/games/the-elder...html?tab=images

When you say "you", you imply the government. Surely you don't hold me responsible for what someone else might be doing? Besides, we're discussing a UK government act, so I understood you in that context. Edit: Btw, there is no anti-British tradition in the US at all, quite the opposite, excluding people of Irish descent of course.

That's right, the US was founded on the principle of opposition to all forms of fascism, before fascism was even defined. Edit: James Madison He just destroys all utopias right there.

I really don't think the US would have. The whole not negotiating with terrorists thing is taken pretty seriously by the US government. Not that I think it is always the best policy, but in this case it would have been appropriate. LOL. You gave the Russians all of our nuclear weapons ORBATs to boost your start treaty. You gave safe haven to IRA terrorists for years, stood by whilst a section of your community funded and armed them, then your judiciary put obstacles in the way of their extradition when they sought sanctuary there. Puh-leez. That's a mighty high horse you got yourself there. You may have a point there. Do you have evidence of the US government sheltering the IRA though? Also, the judiciary is independent, so again, is there evidence of political influence?

Obsidian already got paid for making NV regardless of how well the game does. Then depending on performance, they'd get some kind of bonus share of the profits as well. It's usually much less than the publisher's share, but then the publisher took all the financial risk.

If he considers it important enough to cause a crisis, I'd say yes. Why would he expect the indictments if there's nothing to it, and why is he taking the tribunal so seriously? But I suppose technically you're right, we'll have to wait for actual indictments to be certain. As far as Harriri withdrawing his accusations against Syria, it's not clear that he wasn't under duress. Edit: If the UN report said that Syria was involved, that's a lot more credible than Harriri denying it, for one thing where's his evidence that Syria wasn't involved? He was forced into alliance with Syria because of Hezbollah, so that had to be a condition of their alliance, plus he's betting that so long as the tribunal is operating, the facts will eventually have to come out. Edit2: Syria is far from being off the hook as you portray: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East...rst-indictments

If that's the primary purpose of the game, it's a pretty sorry game to start with, and making it even more puerile doesn't help.

From the ESRB description it's only suggested by the scene, nothing is actually depicted.

NV made the 2010 top ten sales list for the 360 in the US: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/32873/E...er_Platform.php The best news though is that it curb stomped ME2. Edit: Unfortunately there are no actual numbers, that would be interesting.

I have to say that game is starting to sound really good.

You guys realize that Google can translate any web page, don't you?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20110204/cm_csm/361222

Luddites

I understand the situation pretty well, for an outsider. Hezbollah does not have all the guns. Everyone has guns, from the itty bitties on up. They may not still have formalised militia but they certainly can reconstitute them quick and they'll get their stored hardware and the central military's hardware (which H will get none of as they have their stand alone militia) if anything kicks off. Everyone knows it and that is largely why things don't restart. Also, Jumblatt was one of the more strongly pro-Syrian leaders in the Civil War. A year or so ago 'everyone' "knew" Syria killed Hariri. And Lebanon is deeply, deeply hostile to Israel. They may not be willing to fight a war they know they'll lose (border clashes on the other hand- and with that nice pro western government in place) but it doesn't come from Hezbollah alone, it comes from a history of extremely unpleasant Israeli actions that have systematically managed to ... annoy just about every group in a staggeringly complex ethno-religious mix. Even their erstwhile allies on the loony maronite fringe hate them for betraying the SLA. Almost all your facts are either misstated or distorted. To give just one example, Nasrallah himself said he expects members of Hezbollah to be indicted by the UN tribunal, which is why he engineered the fall of Harriri's government for refusing to denounce the tribunal. So unless you agree that the tribunal is a US/Zionist conspiracy as he claims, you can't deny that Hezbollah was involved.