Phosphor

The first IWD actually had a very good story that was unfortunately obscured by the large amounts of combat. It would have been a great story to base an RPG on rather than a combat-driven dungeon crawl.

I thought the concept was solid, but the execution flawed. With a concept like that, the player should have had options to join the outcast alliance, if only to take it over for themselves. It gave a story suited for a standard heroic fantasy campaign, but the style of the game and potential character builds didn't fit that mold. Given the way the plot played out, the story should have not been centred around an alliance of outcasts, which the player could empathise with, but a more generic or evil force.

Yeah, I fully realise that. My comment was in response to Ender saying "...straight on from the Incredibles trailer, all the way through the movie.".

I don't think it's necessarily good or bad either. I was just pointing out what I think is a key difference between the two studios. Personally I preferred the BIS approach, but I have hopes for Dragon Age.

I think the Umberhulk in question was in IWD1. Regarding the "dark" factor between BIS and Bio, BIS games had a grittier feel than the streamlined fantasy of Bioware. The BG games had a mix of both styles and it largely worked, but the IWDs, PS:T and Fallouts had more "guts" to them than what we've seen from Bioware (though there are parts of FO2 that make me wonder about the seriousness of the game). Bioware's games have more of the "shining hero" aspect, while BIS used more shades of gray in terms of morality. Both companies use a lot of humour that's quite indicative of long-time RPG players, and I think the style of humour is consistant between the companies.

I don't think the music was any more dominant than in the first one. And Shrek 2 did feature Tom Waits and Nick Cave, both in the seedy bar (loved the Unhappy Hour sign). I can't wait for The Incredibles.

I thought 2 was very clever, with great dialogue and a fantastic degree of detail and little "reference" points. The characters may not have been as well developed, but I thought the treatment of those characters was much sharper than in the original.

Methinks some people take Star Wars a mite too seriously. At any rate, regarding the "idiots at Bioware" comment.. Do you really think a Star Wars game would resonate with the general gaming audience if there was a lack of a "Darth" name? These name-recognition factors are pretty important in terms of marketing the game. I'd also think that if it cleared the ever-vigilant eye of LucasArts, then there's no real problem. The only people who would know about the "correct" history of the Darth title are a handful of overly-serious SW geeks (note I don't mean this as an insult). "Darth" is as much a part of popular Star Wars lore as a lightsaber and the Force. You have to include those things if the product is to meet with popular success.

Best movie I've seen this summer. Absolutely fabulous It's one of those rare cases where the sequel was better than the first movie, and Shrek was pretty damned fantastic. Looking forward to #3 if they can maintain that degree of quality.

Interesting article that again shows either the Conservatives have a hidden agenda or that the party is full of rogue MPs with their own agenda (the sort of MPs that Harper has said must follow the party line or be removed, and have not been removed; also the kind that are free to table a bill regarding removal or limiations of rights like abortion or gay rights). Tory MP's interview on Charter creates storm Last Updated Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:02:27 TORONTO - Liberal Leader Paul Martin lashed out at one of the Conservative party's most prominent MPs on Friday, saying Randy White's recent dismissal of the power of Canadian courts amounts to a wakeup call about the party's real intentions. At a news conference in Toronto, Martin called the British Columbia MP's position "a fundamental attack on one of the pillars of our democratic system" and called on Conservative Leader Stephen Harper to condemn White's position or admit that it does represent the views of the whole party. "It can't be ignored, not by me, not by Mr. Harper, not by Canadians." In a May 19 interview for a documentary on same-sex marriage by Alexis Mackintosh called Let No One Put Asunder, White speaks frankly about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and suggests many in his party feel as he does: "The heck with the courts, eh? You know, one of these days we in this country are going to stand up and say, 'The politicians make the laws and the courts do not.' The courts interpret that law. And if we don't like that interpretation, there's the notwithstanding clause in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which the Liberal government has never invoked and said they will not use. I believe we'll see that with us in the House of Commons because enough is enough of this stuff

Martin has made the mistake however of saying that it's "common sense" that whomever gets the most seats should lead, so if he's going to stick to his word, he may give victory to Harper even though neither has a majority. This wouldn't be fair to the Liberal party, it's supporters and voters though. Of course, I can't see the Conservatives holding together a minority government. Not sure about McKenzie, but Lester Pearson ran two successful back-to-back minority governments in the 1960s. And I believe it was Diefenbaker who won a minority and then swept to a majority victory, so there's certainly prescedents for a successful minorty Liberal government. The Liberals are going to have to clean up their corruption victorious or not, if they want to maintain support. They're on thin ice, and need to fix things in a major way. I agree with your assessment of a minority being good for the country. In these final days, things are looking interesting. Harper's been rather touchy, which is quite the contrast to his usual calm demeanour. Perhaps things aren't going as well as he thinks or wants. And it looks like Layton's prediction about the Alliance/PC merger being good for the NDP was right, they seem to be doing well right now.

Yeah. Soon it's going to be the Conservatives and likely some merger with the Liberals and NDP (that's my guess, anyways, nothing official has been mentioned about it, but I think the outcome of this election is going to kickstart the process). I think strategic voting plays a bit part as well in the issue. People vote against someone rather than for (I'm guilty of this), and so two main parties manifest and the smaller ones vanish or merge with the larger parties. I think a Liberal-NDP merger could result in a very appealing party, and would definately threaten the Conservatives.

Michael Moore and Ralph Nader have commented on the Canadian election over the past couple of days, warning against voting Conservative. Both make excellent and astute points, and in true Canadian fashion people are outraged that non-Canadians, and more specifically Americans dare comment on our business.. As though we never comment on the US. Perhaps they're upset because the Americans make better observations about the election than many Canadian commentators make. Canadians gripe about being ignored and then when somebody pays attention we tell them to bugger off.. Sheesh. Nader's comments Moore's comments

If the Liberals win a minority government, do you think they'll have a chance of holding together by making deals with the NDP and/or Bloc? I tend to think that while this election will certainly be close, it is more in Martin's favour as the Conservatives have to win at least 155 seats in order to take over. As long as they come in under that, the Liberals will have a minority and the chance to make it work with the other parties. Now, if they cannot hold it together and Harper is asked if he can form a government, I don't see him getting much support from the other parties. Maybe from the Bloc if they're feeling opportunistic, but certainly not from the NDP. Could be interesting.

Actually, I really enjoyed the Akira comic series and the movie that came out based on the comics. That was good stuff.

Alongside the fact that those are not Star Wars elements, they by no means make a game dark or mature. Rather the opposite, really. Hot-button topics like swearing and sex usually serve to make a game more immature when included just for the sake of being "edgey". A game can be perfectly mature without resorting to default curses and trite taboos. Elements like you describe are only useful when they suit the setting and world of the game, and then only when seamlessly merged with that world and don't jump out as though to say "Look at me! I'm controversial!". I see no reason to assume that a hypothetical remake of Wasteland by Obsidian would be "Disneyfied" in any way, simply because of what KOTOR will or will not contain. That sort of arguing is extremely ineffectual and lacks any sense of being informed. Edit: As for KOTOR2 being "death to creativity", you're just being daft. First you want a remake of Wasteland, and then condemn Obsidian for making a sequel to an enormously successful cRPG. Yeah, Bioware are doing an "original" game, a fantasy game - we'll see how original and creative it is upon release. I'm willing to bet that KOTOR2 will be more interesting than Dragon Age, simply by merit of the development team's abilities.

I understand your comments, Taks, and while I disagree with them, I see your point. I'm trying to look at a things-could-be-better scenario, and while the current solutions aren't perfect (different rights, a flawed environmental improvement system), I see it as a step in the right direction and a foundation upon which to hopefully build something functional. It's at least a move ahead, I think. These measures are only going to be effective if they are improved upon, however. Kyoto isn't going to make anything better if it's not refined, and hate crimes will only build resentment, but they do create awareness and can perhaps point towards something better than what we have now. So that's why I support the concepts. I see Harper is campaigning this week on a "message of hope" in Ontario after doing some damage control (once again having to say something said by a Conservative MP is not party policy, when he's said it himself - the issue of non-supported bilingualism) and having to step back his attacks on Martin and the problem of child porn. The Conservative platform-of-the-week is "hope and change", again, no real platform just a nice sounding phrase. The NDP seem to be mulling over a partnership with the Liberals, should the Liberals win a minority government. Interesting. Could be beneficial for both parties.

I don't like mangos. Nor manga for that matter. Magma is kinda cool though. Maybe the manga should be thrown into the magma with the mangos.

I think that high-income earners paying more in taxes is a more even distribution, as it's more balanced towards income. Wealthy families and individuals often pay less in income tax due to a high volume of tax-exempt investments such as RRSPs and such, while lower income people do not, and 100% of their income is taxable. With the new health premiums in Ontario, it's the mid-range earners that are getting hit the hardest, with the payments only increasing a couple of hundred dollars per extra 10s or 100s of thousands of dollars for the higher income people. I'm not much of a capitalist. Sure, I'd love to have a lot of money for the convenience, but I'm not a financially ambitious sort of person. The frantic high-pressure scramble to accumulate wealth is just not appealing to me, and the desire is simply not in me. And I don't think I should be punished for that, and that's rather what it feels like when the mid-range earners are hit with the lion's share of taxes. Yeah, the NDP are quite small and actually lost official party status in the last election. They hold more seats in Saskatchewan and the east coast, but out west and in Ontario they're pretty small. Unfortunately, they're getting chewed up in our system which is fast becoming a two-party system akin to the US. He hated Bush, I think. He got on really well with Clinton, but as soon as Bush took over, things went sour. Can't really blame him, either. Martin has attempted to restore relations, but Bush seems to hold a grudge and has offered a rather chilly shoulder. Social programs are a funny thing. Canada is very demanding of social programs, arts spending, environment and so on, so you'd think the NDP would do well. But people don't vote for them (I think people are overly concerned with looking bad if they vote for a losing party, which is why Harper's current strategy is saying "We're going to win anyways, you might as well vote for us."). Social programs can easily get out of control, and while I support them, I think there needs to be more private support of them as well. The thing with Canada is, we have a small population so there's not a ton of money to go around, and a lot of money gets spent on infrastructure (since it's such a huge country), and even there things are in a bad way (the trans-Canada highway is reportedly an embarrassment for example). Anyways. Social programs are important, but can easily go out of control. As for homosexuals and rights, I don't think it's an issue of having rights spelled out differently, it's simply an issue of having the same rights. The right to marry, the right to not get beat up, harrassed or killed because of who you are, stuff like that. The Conservatives would like to remove attacks on gays from the list of hate crimes. But something has to be done about greenhouse gasses, global warming and the sorry state of environmental care. Maybe Kyoto isn't the best answer (and I agree it's got problems), but it's at least a start, or at least a show of support for the environment. Yes, the economy is important, but so is the environment. Why? Not sure if he was invited. Though he did have to get back to Canada to campaign for the election. Well, Canada/US relations can't be any worse than they are now.

The thing that irks me about Martin's off-shore registering is that he did that while Finance Minister. He sat there drafting federal budgets that often required cuts and reductions, while his multi-million dollar company wasn't paying a cent towards Canadian taxes. It's extremely two-faced and rather insulting, really. He expected us to pay into the country, but he didn't have to with that company? At any rate, it's the lesser of evils in this election. Heck, the sponsorship scandal is as well, at least to me. Yeah, it was a crappy thing to do but I also don't believe it had Martin's approval. As for McGuinty breaking his promises, I'm willing to be somewhat forgiving since the PC's were quite deceptive with the state of the province's money. The Liberals didn't have a clear impression of what the finances were like. However, if things don't improve under McGuinty I'll be pretty irked. If people could only have their vote count by knowing what they were voting for, the Conservatives wouldn't stand a chance, considering they don't really have a platform aside from some cleverly worded platitudes and less-than-clever smears against Martin.

Martin tried to patch up Canada-US relations, but was pretty much brushed off by Bush. I don't think Bush is anymore interested in good relations than Chretien was. Of course the production line that Mulroney started is still going, it makes money for the government, they're not about to stop it. Just like Chretien never repealed the GST, despite numerous promises to do so - it makes too much money for Ottawa's coffers. I don't believe we're terribly screwed if the Liberals win, at least no more so than what we're used to. We'll be more screwed if the Conservatives win. I think that if Martin stays in, and Kerry wins the US, things will be a lot better for North America in general, and maybe finally we can move forward into the era we are actually in instead of scrambling backwards into the ultra-conservative past.

Five years? Heck, if the Conservatives win they'll be selling off water and timber to the US in less time than that, and at bargain prices. Oh, and Americans need not worry about any language barriers with French Canada when taking their water, as bilingualism will no longer be officially supported by government. They'll be required to deal with you in good ol' Americanized English.

Yep, this election is a vote against situation, not a vote for. It's a continuing trend as well which is inevitably going to lead us into a US style two-party system, since it probably won't be too long before the NDP merge with the Liberals. Martin has got a bad rap from the Chretien years, but he's not exactly blameless (don't forget Canada Steamship Lines, his multi-million dollar shipping business that is registered off-shore and so exempt from Canadian taxes). I do think he is sincere about wanting to clean up after Chretien, though. He clearly did not like Chretien, and I think it's clear now why. So far, Martin hasn't had much of a chance to do anything, he's been on the defensive since day one. What baffles and angers me is that people cannot seem to see through Harper; his entire campaign has been to smear Martin and keep people angry. When you step back and really look at Harper and the Conservatives, there's nothing but shallow, right-wing mandates there. They're counting heavily on two things to win this election; that people will be mad at the Liberals over the sponsorship scandal, and that Ontarians will be angry at the Liberal provincial budget. The budget should be a non-issue. If the Conservatives win, the budget isn't going to vanish, rather things will be worse for Ontario in the realm of health care. We'll be double-hit with the budget premiums and with the Conservative's for-profit health system. So those who wish to use provincially-funded medical services will be paying for low-grade care (since all the good doctors will go into the for-profit sector), or get hit with premiums plus the payments for private care. At any rate, I want Martin to have a fair chance at getting things cleaned up, and I want Harper to lose. So I'm voting Liberal. Again.

The WTC was definately a target, and there were supposed to be more planes as well, but the hijackers took what they could get.