Aristes

See, I liked the third one best. The second one was worst for following the books, but that wasn't a real issue for me. I just thought the battle for Helm's Deep was overdone. Anyhow, the extended version is quite good. Anyhow, we just watched Doubt. The cast really did a great job with that one. I wish all priests could give sermons like that.

I don't see how anyone can blame you guys for enjoying the romances. Personally, I despise them. Really, totally despise them. ...But I won't hurl stones at anyone over romances in a video game. Maybe disagree vociferously, but do disagree in any other way?

Dude, that truck is backed by the full might of the United States of America! haha Seriously, though, that's gotta suck if you get any sort of rain at all. If it's only 2007, is the issue covered under your warranty?

lol at the quote in your sig, Boo. I think you've hit gonzo on the nutso scale, though. I mean, while it might be bad for Gaider to do so, I can say it guilt free. "If it doesn't sound lik your kind of game, don't buy it." *shrug* I mean, more logically, you should at least wait for release and then see if any reliable sources give you good information so you can make an informed decision. I will tell you that citing the Witcher as a mature game biased me against your assessment right away. The Witcher was a fun game, but it certainly had it's immature moments. I made the mistake of laughing and calling my wife over to see the sex cards at which point she castigated the game and gave me twenty solid minutes of cold shoulder just because I thought it was more funny than harmful. See, that's the sort of mature relationship we don't see in games. Where is Geralts wife complaining because he hasn't changed the lightbulb yet? I mean, do we really want 100% realism in games? It's like swearing. I associate swearing either with goofing around with friends and talking smack, which is decidedly not 'mature.' ...Or I associate it with some truly ugly things. Hookers? I've actually known quite a few prostitutes. Probably over a score. I've gone to restaurants where the food was served by prostitutes. Some were really nice gals. However, I don't think any of them would describe their life in fairytale terms. At best, most of them thought of it as a necessary evil. I don't want to speculate on the worst, especially for those who were recently brought into the sex trade. It was not a pleasant scene. This is particularly true for those who were basically forced into the trade by family. I know folks have hit the 'mature' sexual relationships in the Witcher pretty hard already and I don't want to pile on, but the meaningful definition of 'mature' revolves around the concept of well considered thoughts or opinions. I'm usually loathe to use dictionary definitions, but this one will work. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mature I think realism in computer games is great, but I don't think games must sacrifice all to realism.

And frankly, neither case is true. I think that there were so many factors building into the meetings that it's hard for us to make a fair assessment this late in the game. ...But, hey, the Europeans did bring death and destruction to the Americas. That much is certain. They also had the wherewithal to bring it because of their economies, although I would also argue that Spain, having emerged with a highly trained and effective army and a growing population had extra incentive at any rate. The point is, though, that capitalism didn't genetically engineer diseases to which the native population had no natural resistance. Without that biological factor, there's really no telling what might have happened here. Africa? That's a much better example, in my opinion, because the biological factor actually worked against the Europeans and the case against Capitalism is much stronger. I'm a dyed in the wool capitalist, but I think it's fair to point out deficiencies or problems with any system.

I'm suprised. Honestly, it boggles my mind. Normally I would think of Zero Punctuation as the sort of crap that really turns off a stuffed shirt like me, but I've discovered I'm a real fan of his reviews. I mean, like I check here every time I come to the forum and I'm even thinking of bookmarking his webpage. *gasp*

I think the second movie in a trilogy tends to review worse than either the first or third. The Two Towers was certainly the weakest movie in the Lord of the Rings. Because of that movie, and the terrible illness I had the night it released, I didn't go to the midnight release of The Return of the King, which was excellent. I like all three movies, but the second one was not as good as the other two.

Just relaying the gist of his post. I think Jaesun quoted it out of a blog.

In the hub, you can find a source of radx and radaway. When I went through the last time, on normal, I took like two or three rad x when I went into the glow and like 5 radaway along the way and I had no problems. Also, there are doctors around who can treat your radiation poisoning. I would stay away from radiation until you can afford radaway. I think, on my last run, I ended up only taking like 5 radaway the entire game, and maybe 4 radx.

He didn't have a solution. To be fair, he simply said that they were trying a mod that made stimpacks heal over time rather than instantaneously. Kind of like pots in Diablo. To be even more fair, he came clean and said some folks really didn't like it. I'm a firm believer that designers can train players to understand and live with different rules. They could implement any of the solutions I've seen so far and the players would adapt to them. However, they need to balance between the desire to add a level of complexity to combat with the irritation level of the player. Personally, I don't think spending much time on the stims is worth it. Of the suggested ideas, I like the stack limit for stims least and the heal over time idea best. They could also use the addiction/diminishing returns idea, I suppose. That's not my fave, but maybe easier to slip in under the radar. Weight would be okay, but I agree with Gromnir in that it won't stop the folks exploiting them in the first place. It can screw the casual gamer, sure, but it won't do a damned thing to me because, frankly, the things Gromnir says we can do as a workaround for stimpacks is what I already do for everything else with weight requirements. I think skills are a worse problem, frankly. Without even eeking every last skill point possible, I was able to max literally 1/2 of my skills in Fallout 3 by the end of the game. Personally, if I'm trying to balance the game, I might start with that one. I mean, yeah, I was trying to bump my skills just for the hell of it, but I could probably max half my skills in Fallout 3 even without going with a skill based build. I just wouldn't have as many in the 80s and 90s. Even without changing the fast travel system at all you can't travel during fights or from inside dungeons I don't understand. I didn't think you were one of the folks suggesting weight in the first place. I thought you were going for simply balancing the availability by reducing the numbers laying around and making the steady supply source expensive.

Naw, MC, brothels are a grim business just like gambling is a grim business. Yeah, you can legalize it and unionize it and even put it in Disney clothing, much like Las Vegas tried about a decade ago, but it's still a pretty seedy activity. I never noticed you were from Sin City before! I actually live in California, but I spend a lot of time in Las Vegas and Henderson. I'm originally from Las Vegas. Was born in Sunrise Hospital the day before they landed on the moon. Anyhow, the "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" motto pretty much sums up my case. haha Last I heard, all of the brothels were outside of clark county! Seriously, though, I really do think that gambling and prostitution tend to be 'grim,' but I suppose that it's a matter of perspective. I mean, like you say, there's prostitution and gambling in every state. The difference is that in Las Vegas there's at least some regulation. To be fair, however, gambling is probably even more destructive than brothels. If Vegas didn't have a steady influx of out of state visitors bringing in fresh cash, gambling would not have served the community well at all. That and gambling, legal or not, tends to draw some pretty shifty folks. But, I guess to come full circle so I can agree and disagree in the same post, people do what they do to make a living. From my chair, prostitution is a grave evil and seems like a horrible fate to befall any woman (or man). However, if that's what someone is doing to survive, and if she doesn't make bad money doing it, then she probably has a different perspective. I've ended up doing things that seemed abhorrent to me when I was younger. Once I ended up having to do it the first time, I just lived with it and it got to seem normal after a while. The happy go lucky brothel in Dragon's Age isn't even offensive to me. Yeah, it seems strange to have the animal in the brothel, but I don' really care. In the grand scheme of things, that's just not a big deal to me. As far as treating prostitution realistically in the game? I dunno. Frankly, I think I might rather see bad humor than ugly reality. I honestly don't know. ...But I'm going to get the game and therefore have the right to rant about the odd aspect or two. Hell, enjoying the game and then getting to come nitpic the things that bugged me is one of the real joys of video gaming.

Fallout 2 very soon. I was even thinking of biting the bullet and playing Fallout 1 again. I mean, it took me several days to finish it this last time, but I didn't play every day either. It's a great game and I'd like to celebrate my luck build with my staple, wise-cracking sharpshooter.

Actually, I like the two party system, but it doesn't really matter. We had a one party system for all intents and purpose in the early 1800s. The Federalists went under and everyone was a Republican (ol' skool, not newbie). The only problem was, while they were all most assuredly 'republican,' they weren't all 'Republicans' at heart. The tent got to be too big and it couldn't sustain itself. Since practically speaking everyone, including the Federalists, were republicans in ideology, the party fractures. We got the Democrats and Whigs. The Whigs fractured over slavery and other interests and we ended up with the Grand Old Party which is the newest party in the United States. I mean, there's a smattering of other parties, but the real power resides in the first two. Like I said, I'm all for the two party system. *shrug* I think there's more diversification in a multi-party system, but I also think it tends to be even more fractuous. ...And what the leet one said too.

Yeah, a lot of times, the candidate running as an independent is probably either the person too liberal or conservative to win the primary under one of the two established parties.

I was talking about the legislature in that sentence. However, the party doesn't put up the presidential candidate in the US. Believe me, since the country first adopted the constitution, the person who runs as a particular party's candidate has not always been the person the party officials want there. You simply must run as either a Republican or Democrat, but you don't even have to be active in either party to win the nomination. You just have to win the primary or caucus.

Hell, Left4Dead had unlimited pistol ammo and it's a straight shooter.

I liked it. I think it's probably the best Harry potter I've seen. They changed a lot of stuff from the books, though.

Ah, sorry, I was stuck on proximity. Yeah, I tend to think of ways to improve policy, but I guess that's mostly a theoretical proposition for me. lol There have been a lot of suggestions about changing the presidential elections to a strict popular vote, but it's tough to get all the mass of smaller states to agree because it would diminish their impact on the election.

Why? As long as they're legal and regulated to prevent abuse they're no different than any other business. I agree, they're doing pretty well in the Netherlands. ...And how would you know? hmmmmm? Anyhow, I think legalized prostitution has it's problems. Of course, prostitution is a problem at any rate. Coming from a state that literally has Brothels, I can't say that they're all that big of a problem. Yes, prostitution is a grim business, especially in a mock medieval world like DA, but they're not even presenting it as a grim, real life scenario. It's just a joke. Maybe a bad one, but it's still just a joke.

Yeah, but that kind of thing in a CRPG sounds kind of iffy to me personally. If they could manage to come up with a good procedural system, I'd be for it. Of course, if they came up with a system that good, then they wouldn't even have to script all of the dialogue, right? I think going for the Left4Dead method, as much as I enjoyed that game, would be a huge mistake. Frankly, now that I've had time to digest it, I think probably any change will probably suck. Just make sure there are enough stims for the main path and let folks horde them if they want. The biggest problem is with how stimpacks work, and we have 3 previous games on at least... what? two expansion packs to reinforce how they work? Yeah, they could have been used to make combat more tactical, but I think you're looking for players who enjoyed the original games and anything you do to 'fix' the problem will probably be worse than the problem itself. ...And it's just stupid to fault Fallout 3 for an overabundance of stimapacks. Hell, even the original Fallout had tons of 'em. I just got finished with another run last night and, let me tell you, there were plenty of stimpacks. Fallout 2 was even worse and probably no different than Fallout 3 in terms of the stimpacks. Change the skills and tinker with VATS a little. Don't monkey with the stimpacks. The skills in particular could use some work.

The constitution has served us very well. I mean, I know you tend to like off the cuff remarks, which is fair enough by me. However, comparing the electoral college with Chavez is simply ignorant. No offense intended. Sure, there are imperfections in the American system. A parliamentary system has its advantages. Certainly, a unicameral system also has advantages. Other nations have seen the US contitution and made what they view as positive changes. Some have even chosen to avoid our model altogether. That's all fair as well. Nevertheless, our antiquated system works. Our country is strong and, even accounting for our recent economic woes, continues to thrive. So, yeah, I'll take our good ol' antiquated sacred cow system. :haksthumbsup: By the way, our system has provisions for change. We can, and have, ammended the constitution. It's not like we have a completely static system. We simply have a system that requires a good deal of will and perseverance to change. I'm glad. As far as the winner takes all policy...? *shrug* Some states split the electoral votes down by popular vote within that state. I disagree with that solution because it only serves to weaken the importance of your state. I also disagree with the notion of a strict popular vote because that means constituents in high population density areas have more influence on the campaign than low population areas. The irony, of course, is that candidates only care about certain swing states, but I don't see how that's any worse than candidates who only care about Los Angeles, New York, and a handfull of other cities. The candidates are forced to cover far more of the map using the rules set out in the constitution. I don't think it's perfect, but I don't see how any of the European models would be an improvement. In particular, while I think there are problems built into our bicameral system, I am not a fan of parliamentary systems where the party has exceding influence over the candidate. Here in the US, the candidate does what it takes to be elected by the people. There are other places where a candidate has virtually no chance if he's not selected by the party to run on the ballot. Yeah, you have places in the US where the Democrats or the Republicans have a 'stranglehold,' but the party cannot keep the candidate off the ballot and, at any rate, the candidate can run as an independent and still win the election. The biggest issue, as far as I'm concerned, is that Western democracies share the insitutions of republican government. Free Press. Right to assemble and speak. Freedom to bear arms. Freedom to worship. Trial by jury. You might not like the electoral college, speaking as an outsider, but at least you should recognize that our essential freedoms are the same here as in Europe. Chavez is literally shutting down dissenting speech in his country. That's simply wrong, and the argument that because the current citizenry voted for him somehow sanctions his moves to forsake the instutions of democracy indefinitely is out and out appalling. Our processes might be different, but the nature of our freedoms is most assuredly by and large the same.

Wow, some good points there, cron.

I actually liked Valkyrie with many of the same points. Cruise does have that intense look down pat, though. One of the problems with the American accent is that it somehow makes him seem less German. I know I know, crazy right? But as an American watching the film, all of the other Germans are running around with brit accents and this one guy has an American accent. You think, "doesn't anyone notice he sounds strange?" If Tom Cruise can't do a passable English accent, then he must have missed a class at the acting academy. Still thought he did a good job in the role though.

DISCLAIMER: This is a long rant about power builds. It's probably a bit dry and certainly long winded. Read at your peril or simply ignore the wall of text. "Why not conside what armor we'll get during the game?" One reason I might consider at this point is that the games tend to be somewhat modular in that you can play one game and perhaps switch your character around to another. MotB pretty much ends the NWN2 main character line, but that doesn't mean folks don't want to import and play their character in either custom mods or possible future games. If those games don't allow you to keep your gear, then you've lost something you considered when you came up with your build. I don't really have a stake in that particular argument, but I do have some views on character builds in general that bears on gear and other specific events in the game. Any game. First of all, a pen and paper power build should consider what will make your character most powerful under the most circumstances. In computer games, that's a hard line to follow because the game is a static environment. The DM can't see where things are headed and ammend his campaign to fit a changing party dynamic. Even so, CRPG designers should be careful not render any legitimate player build ineffective by denying gear or weighing the monster list with immunities. IWD2 failed in this regard because it did not include what I considered an appropriate amount of arcane spell scrolls. There were enough for mage, but only if the player were careful in looking for them. Similarly, MotB failed in regards to crit immune creatures, although there are ways around such crit immunity in the game. Characters should have steady access sufficient resources to take advantage of the main strengths of their class(es). For example, fighters and paladins should have a variety of weapons, shields, and armor available to outfit themselves and should be able to count on magical variants to come available as they progress through the game. That does not mean that all choices of magical school or weapon specialization must be equally represented, as long as the player can outfit his mage or warrior to suit his particular build. Spells aren't so much an issue now that mages choose spells as part of the level up process. A power build should not be dependent on advanced knowledge of the content. I should not know that I will find a particular sword or armor at a specific place in the game. That's not power-gaming, that's cheating. I don't mind cheating. I use advanced knowledge of games I've played all the time. However, don't call it a power build. Call it cheating. We can all cheat together with honor if we don't call it clever to say whodunnit when we skipped to the end of the book first. However, taking advantage of titles and other clues is perfectly legit. For example, if I'm going to play "Against the Giants," I should be able to expect to fight a good number of giants in the game. I'm not cheating. I'm just taking advantage of the evidence at hand. The design team should also avoid misleading the player in the early game. I shouldn't expect to play "The Fight in the Underdark" ony to discover that the vast majority of the game is played above ground. It's okay if players smack themselves in the head and say, "I wish I would have taken feat x instead of feat y." That's okay, because it's easy to see something mid-game that makes you reconsider your past choices. However, the player should not say to himself, "I chose feat x instead of feat y and now I'm not sure if I can finish the game." Pen and paper is a lot more forgiving in this regard since a good DM can make up the difference. Computer games should not include complete dead ends. Yes, make the player suffer for ingame decisions, but don't let him play a mage if 95% of the monsters are magic immune. That's not clever. It's stupid. All that said, some character builds are simply better than others and some builds are better in certain situations. That's perfectly legit. Your power build for NWN is different from your power build in MotB. However, all power builds will generally fare well in the vast majority of situations because what makes them a power build isn't dependent on the other guy does or can do. Their prowess derives from what they can do themselves. You really don't need to have a particular power build to beat any of the NWNx games I've played. There's a lot of room to make mistakes or even to make goofy choices for the hell of it. However, you can make some terrible choices that make the game much harder at certain points. That's really a problem with playing DnD without a DM anyhow. As long as you aren't completely ignorant of the rules, you'll probably do well enough in any of the games. I've played a lot of MotB and I've beaten the game wtih some seriously gimpy assed characters. However, back to Kel's post, I sometimes make a character specifically because I know what's coming up in a particular game. It's fun. I've done that a lot if I know that there's a scroll with a particular spell on it coming up. I'll choose different spells since I know I'll get a free one (usually fireball).

Democracy without democratic institutions is pointless. By tearing down the institutions of democracy, primary of which is a free press, Chavez is destroying the democratic process without which democracy itself is dead. The people voted for Chavez and he is popular among them from all accounts. However, the people aren't just voting away their personal freedom by supporting Chavez. They're voting away their neighbors' freedom as well as the liberty of future generations. People should have a right to choose their leader, but that leader should not have the right to take away their choice, which is what Chavez is currently doing in Venezuela. One group of people should never be allowed to vote away the rights of their descendants. One man, one vote, one time does not equal democracy.