BruceVC

I am always interested in whether people like Gaider and McComb really like each other. There must be loads of professional rivalry and even on a personal level I'm sure all these writers want to be known by the fans as the "best Fantasy RPG writer ever". They all are so talented but sometimes I assume there style gets dictated to by a Publisher?

I'm about 15 hours into Far Cry 3 and the game is brilliant. I love the way they have truly designed the whole open world and immersiveness of the game world. I find myself just wondering off and exploring or getting into a hang-glider and just flying. This really is a game thats worth the money you pay for it

Or he could get publishers to actually fund the old-school games he wants to make. Little Kid CEO in limo - "Brian, we'd like you to make Starflight 3" Brian Fargo - "Let me guess, you want it to be a linear first person shooter" Little Kid CEO - "Nope, make it just like Starflight 1 & 2, but with updated graphics and UI, oh and make it for PC, Mac, and Linux only." Brian Fargo - *jaw drops* Or, alternatively, and MUCH more realistically, when Wasteland 2 releases, and if it is well received and a success, he can stop playing us vs. them and just pitch it as "we made this really cool game using Kickstarter, now we want to make another". Or, he could just find something else to gripe about publishers. End of the day this is what I am hoping for. The result of KS is to convince some Publishers that there is a market of PC based CRPG. It would be great to have the enthusiasm and skills of the likes of Brian Fargo making the game how he wants but the financial backing of Ubisoft Oh Keyrock, you are funny "Brian Fargo - "Let me guess, you want it to be a linear first person shooter" Little Kid CEO - "Nope, make it just like Starflight 1 & 2, but with updated graphics and UI, oh and make it for PC, Mac, and Linux only." Brian Fargo - *jaw drops*

Reminds I have to force myself to finish that, think I'm at the Gollop chamber. Then I can free up that HD space. A day off for 'Human Rights Day' ? Bunch of slackers, tsk. You should at least celebrate it by doing something like handing out pamphlets for awareness or something. Reminds me of back home though, they're smart and give days off like candy Well we do have fantastic barbeque's and drink loads, so at least we put some effort in on this public holiday. And you know that a barbecue is hard work !!!

Doesn't sound as fun as going around and beating up a few deviants... Joking aside, my current host country doesn't exactly have a stellar human rights record. For fun, look up the referendum of 1967 (which later resulted in the aboriginal population being "reclassified" from 'Flora and Fauna' to 'Human Beings'). Yeah, the Australians also have a some somewhat checkered past when it comes historical treatment of the original inhabitants. Its the same as the Americans actually We do take this day seriously on certain levels and its a remembrance of the Sharpeville massacre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharpeville_Massacre

I like it, sign me up

Why are you mad at me explaining and clarifying my argument? I thought that's what forums were for? I didn't mean my posts to be aggressive or belittling. If that's how they came off, then I apologize. My bad. I have no intention of buying any console any time soon, regardless of whether they force always-online or not. No your post was perfectly polite and reasonable, no need to apologize. I share your sentiment, no Console games ever. PC games to the end !!!!

I was about to say "oh no yet another KS that I will feel obligated to support" but then I watched the video and I really like the way they have positioned what they need and what they have done so far. They have put loads of effort into the game, and the plot looks very interesting. So this seems like a worthy game to pledge to.

Its a public holiday in South Africa today, Human Rights Day, so I am going to go to gym shortly and then relax and play Far Cry 3

The worst thing is that the futility of throwing lives away is also retroactive, i.e. in hindsight all the people who have died there effectively threw their lives away. It's a human tragedy that people might go into war with the most selfless of intents and make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, and yet the war taken as a whole is just a meaningless act of random aggression. In the end, the heroes will be forgotten and all that remains will at best be the memory of a pointless conflict. One can only hope that society back home will at least treat the veterans with respect. There are a lot of anti-war people who really try to portray the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of some sort of sinister affair where the US got advantages (oil, geopolitics, et.c.) by using military might, which could not be further from the actual reality. If you look at the situation now, you've got an Iraq which is BFF with Iran and an Afghanistan which is polarized against the US and potentially sliding back towards the Taliban. Meanwhile the conflicts have turned large parts of the Muslim world against the US and parts of the West increasing the risk for terrorist activities. I can totally visualize China and Russia sitting on the couch gloating as the public humiliation of the US in the Middle East continues, like if they're watching some awful episode of "Big Brother" or "Survivor". People have a tendency to believe that large and powerful nations are surely being governed/controlled by intelligent people whose plans might not immidiately be obvious to the common citizen, in the same way that people believe in gods or conspiracy theories. Really, the only thing I sense behind the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is misdirected, irresponsible bellicosity. "I hate Hindus and Muslims ever since 2001 when they put down the Twin Towers I've been beating them up" - could as well have been a quote by George W. Bush back in the days as far as his policies are concerned. And as always, the blood of heroes is cheap and plentiful when we wish it wasn't, and rare when you really need it. You make some good points and I don't believe in conspiracy theories , I do see the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq as not benefiting the USA and the West that much for the reasons you mentioned. But I will say this The invasion of Afghanistan was necessary. AL-Qeada was behind 9/11 and the Taliban were given the chance to hand Bin Laden over. Of course the long term planning once the Taliban were defeated wasn't done so now we have to question the future of Afghanistan once the Western coalition leaves. But I don't see the lives lost as wasted Iraq is a different story. We now know that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qeada and that there was misinformation given to Western leaders. I can see no benefit or good reason for the West or the region for the invasion These wars lead to a complete change to how the West now intervenes in military conflict. Western countries now wait for the UN security council to support military action. This is a good thing as it means there won't be unilateral decisions from the West. Obama came to power as a result of these wars. He has been a good force in changing how people see the USA. The USA is now much less likely to just attack any country that threatens it without good evidence. So I see this as a beneficial political change

If you want to see exactly what's causing the issue then enable Windows to create a dump file http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/174459-dump-files-configure-windows-create-bsod.html When it crashes this dump file show you what caused the problem.

I found her answers to be annoying, she refused to answer a direct question. But I suppose she is being told what not to say. In other words " don't openly support the UK claim to the Falklands" Its a brave new world under Obama. I suspect if the Republicans were in power they would be much more openly supportive of the UK but we have to take the bad with the good under Obama. I still think he is the right person to lead the USA, and one of the things his foreign policy has been is to be much less belligerent and careful not to upset other countries. But the UK doesn't need the USA on this, the Falklands will stay in there hands. They just need to manage the negative press from some. Its not like there will be an invasion from Argentina

A tax on tea, I might add. I notice that almost no bugger drinks tea any more. Good call, Bostonians. Good call. Tea is extremely popular in South Africa and I prefer it to coffee on any day

I just watched a poignant news story in the UK about a 23 year soldier in Afghanistan who was killed but has been awarded the Victoria Cross. http://news.sky.com/story/1065461/victoria-cross-award-for-l-cpl-james-ashworth I know thousands of soldiers have been killed but something touched me about this particular sacrifice he made trying to help his comrades. I guess part of it is the fact that the War in Afghanistan is ending and every death just seems futile. I also admire the type of person who at the age of 23 is really prepared to end his life to help his fellow soldiers. This is real heroism so I am sad but have huge admiration for what he did.

I found a typo... In all seriousness, though, Madae, I would say you have a ****tail of both the reasonable and the unreasonable going on right now. Maybe they're absolutely planning on "opening it back up," but they're just sooooo busy working on P:E right now, in an ever diligent fashion, that they are a little slow getting the fulfillment site up and setting up collector's edition pre-orders and such. Maybe you're simply being impatient, and you don't yet know it? I don't think it's fair to criticize the Kickstarter model -- the incentive-based, time-sensitive fundraiser, essentially -- just because you want a golden goose egg, and you want one now. That being said, it sucks really bad that your house flooded and you lost things that were dear to you, and it also sucks a bit that you wish Obsidian would just shutup and take your money right now (Fry meme, in case someone thought I was suggesting Madae was just being mean here) in exchange for some goods, yet they refuse to do so at the moment. However, they've got a lot going on. So, maybe cut 'em some slack? We didn't buy them as slaves by supporting their game, and, as uncool as your current predicament is, they don't inherently owe you anything. I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just trying to be the voice of reason here. Like I said, they probably should allow people such as yourself to buy in on some stuff, even if not quite with the exact same incentives as the initial backers (as was mentioned above, greater risk = greater reward. A lot of people didn't even know all the stuff they were going to get when they funded early, because some of the rewards weren't set 'til later). But, we don't have any proof that they're NOT planning/doing that as we speak. So, at this point, it just becomes impatience. The human urge to dispel unknowns and wait times alike. Nice post, yeah I was just teasing him

I haven't read all the official / political documents as a common person that I am, but there are at least 3 claims that are really common here: 1 - 2) Historic and legal rights: Based on a) the legacy from Spain, b) resettlement from Argentina while the isles were abandoned and the c) expulsion/problems that came later when the British arrived again. 3) Geographical rights: The islands are not only near Argentina but in fact they are part from its continental shelf, so they are literally in Argentinian territory by most treaty's. (+ its has given many complicated problems with the sea regulations) Ofc they are far more complicated and detailed than that but that's the reason why the conflict still exists. The fun thing about this all is that I don't like nationalism, it blinds people and makes people feel superior to others. But if a give my opinion in this kind of debates its cause this is greater than Argentina or The United Kingdom, its about law and justice: how we make our relations with other country's / people and respect them. Don't be mistaken, if tomorrow I see some kind of convincing proof of ownership I would totally defend the British. Its just, that this time I don't think they have the upper legal (*) and moral ground. (*) PS: I feel this needs to be made clearer: Falklands are occupied with UK people from 1833, its only logical to conclude that people who was born in British ambient, culture, with British parents, grandparents etc... and are having a good way of live wont feel like suddenly having a strange urge to be from Argentina. The referendum is just a political propaganda so the people don't think about what was really wrong at the beginning. PS2: Yes, I play lawfull good characters xD Good post But don't you think the interest that Argentina has in reclaiming these island has anything to do with the oil that has been discovered there?

I think the important thing about physically attractive people is trying to discern the motivations behind why she is made that way. Sometimes we can fall into tropes doing that too (the Ice Queen for example), but I was a big fan of Isabella because her design is basically to illicit the "she's a sex object" perspective, and even her superficial interactions leads one to conclude just the same. But I find her motivations interesting. She isn't there just to have sex with the male, and is frankly mostly just a woman that is comfortable with her sexuality and enjoys making other people feel a bit uncomfortable because of it. But peel back some of the layers and you get someone that is a bit deeper. I know some think it's still a bit cliched (which is fair enough) as to what her layers are, but I enjoyed it. Same with the types like Annah and Fall-From-Grace as well (although FFG is probably a bit more predictable of a counterpoint to the standard succubus). Excellent examples, as I mentioned numerous times Isabella for me was smoking hot. Yes she personified certain things that many people feel objectified women yet she also was an important and invaluable member of my party. She had realistic and worthy objectives in life, she wanted her own ship and she wanted to captain it. So for me she had many levels to her and wasn't just some sexual object that Bioware threw into the game.

She is certainly presenting it from a particular point of view. Sidetracking this away from Anita's video specifically: I was chatting with a friend/co-worker today about this a bit as well, and we find it interesting. I remember someone calling for "mature" themes in DA3, such as rape. I responded with a statement that I think it'd be interesting if the male PC got raped and the player was powerless to do anything about it. The response I got was that that was clearly just being contrary to serve feminist agenda. On the one hand this has effectively painted himself into a corner. Threat of rape can only be "genuine" if it satisfies conditions he feels is "natural" and "realistic." Deviating from this expectation undermines any attempt at it being presented as mature, because he felt it'd just come off as forced to try to be different. There's two problems here: First: the only acceptable way to present this is for the woman to be the victim. I find this perspective to be somewhat telling and perhaps intrinsic to systemic/institutional ideas, which I don't think fairly line up with reality. That he outright rejects the notion that a deviation from this is a bit unsettling to me, as it reinforces my perspective that there seems to be an issue with men feeling this is the only way to present something in a "mature" way. Second: the realization that he's actually right. Take Damsel in Distress and reverse it, and you'll often get people going "they're just reversing the trope to try to prove a point." Change Double Dragon so it's some guy getting kidnapped and it's "they went away from the girl because of feminist pressures." This can be a bit unsettling itself because it gives the idea that genuine attempts to just present a scenario without any gender role implications will automatically have gender role implications assigned to them by their audience (i.e. I feel you believe Anita is demonstrating this somewhat, herself. Which is a fair criticism). So we run into a problem of "We can't have a man rescue a girl, because it's Damsel in Distress and has sexist implications." But having "woman rescuing man" gets dismissed as "they've just tried to reverse the Damsel in Distress trope." I think Mass Effect did a good job with the Virmire survivor, as one was a male, the other was a female, and both are equally valid options regardless of Shepard's sex. Though there were criticisms that one of the choices (and only one at any given time) was a potential love interest (I personally think this makes the choice more interesting. Does Shepard let his affection influence his decision?). Not all games will be able to have situations like this, however. It's certainly not an easy resolution. It seems as though ideally the best way is for these events to simply no longer be considered issues. That's easier said than done, and likely would require some level of "affirmative action" to ensure that the distribution of games that have specifically "man rescues woman" set in proportion to respective permutations, it'll be something we think about less. If there was an even 50/50 split of games that had women rescuing men in Mario's time, Anita's entire justification in using Mario as an example would be completely undermined. The issue, I feel, is that it is very pervasive, which Anita obviously feels is a problem for appropriate representation and the socializing effects it can have. (As an example, on this very forum I remember a thread where someone felt that pink was an intrinsically feminine colour and that women were biologically predisposed to find it more appealing.... This perspective I do not agree with at all and went on giant ramble responses for that as well. Perhaps had his experiences growing up been different, he'd have been less likely to assume it was something biological rather than social - or perhaps not since we can't turn back time to verify ) Cheers! Allan You make some good and thought provoking points. I do see loads of hypocrisy in certain discussions around topics you mentioned. Some people do ask for "mature" topics like rape in games but of course they are not talking about the rape of men. This one of the reasons I like Bioware games, they offer a balanced option for both straight and gay games. I do feel there is still an element of sexism in certain games and when developers do try to address this they are accused of pandering to the feminist crowd. So its a lose lose situation in many cases Saying that I have no issues with appreciating the beauty of the female body and I not going to say I don't find certain virtual characters in my many games attractive in the context of the game and a RPG. Sometimes we are made to feel guilty when we say "I like to have Romance\Sex" in my games. The argument I hear is that its "weird to want sex with pixel created people" and "get a girlfriend in RL, an RPG is not about relationships" I don't presume to tell people what should constitute there RPG experience, its different for all of us. But I will say this, almost all beauty we are exposed to in this world is "not real". News presenters, magazine models, movie stars and even strippers operate in a semi-world of fantasy. Photo shop and make-up is used to enhance aesthetics, and this is all part of what we like to see. Its what sells and its what society expects. When was the last time you saw an ugly Sky News presenter? So I have no issue with seeing beauty in female game characters. Also ladies shouldn't be judged because they happen to be intelligent and beautiful. I can guarantee you that International News Presenters, like Sky, are very happy in there jobs. Finally that video Oner posted about the game I do find sexist and insulting to women. For me it objectifies the leading character as a stripper only with her actions and its target is clearly a segment of the market who want to see women like that. Thats fine if the developers want to do that but they need to understand they will receive criticism and I won't support games like that as its one dimensional and doesn't have enough depth

I did respond Remember I said my jokes are sometimes misunderstood, I'll resend my PM to you. Its strange but on the previous website I use to frequent people told me I had a weird style of posting. I never really understood what they meant. I have a policy when it comes to my posts, " everything I need to say on the Internet am I prepared to say that to the persons face in RL" I stand by that, I very seldom feel the need to insult people unless they are really rude and I try to treat everyone with respect. I do joke sometimes, but then my jokes should be obvious. I do not Troll, I feel Trolling is waste of intellectual discussion. People do sometimes mistake my jokes with Trolling. Of course like everyone in this world I get annoyed by some comments like bigotry but I really enjoy interesting debates around possibly controversial comments like religion or politics

Absolutely, I have played both and enjoyed both but NWN2 is vastly superior

The referendum results were unequivocal. The islands need to stay in British hands, I know oil has been found there now and so both countries will want them but IMO Argentina is using this debate for political opportunism.

"giving me a lollipop because I just finished the 100th page" The way you made your point cracked me up

I am not particularly fond of achievements either, I find them pointless and vacuous. So hopefully they don't implement them

Interesting beast, we could probably expand on how to integrate it into a game

Hi Monte Don't forget to mention we want Chainmail bikini's in PE in the next Romance\Sex thread