JadedWolf

The rest is at the link. It gets.... super intense. From http://thoughtcatalog.com/leo-steven/2014/04/dear-girls-who-are-finally-ready-to-date-nice-guys-we-dont-want-you-anymore/ It's apparently real, just like that guy that is engaged to Twilight Sparkle and thus wants people to stop drawing MLP porn. That's an interesting link and post. For me the guy spends far too much time telling that women how fantastic he is now and how she missed out on a great opportunity. He claims he is normal and settled but I would argue hubris is his problem, he seems to revel in belittling her and makes some seriously personal attacks. Its obvious he has been carrying some baggage about his past treatment by her and hasn't moved on or is prepared to forget the past. So she should consider herself fortunate he rejected her He's not talking about a specific woman, though, as much as a sort of archetype of woman. It's sort of a rant about how he thinks in general there's a type of woman who wants to date bad guys when she's in her twenties, only to later switch to a nice guy to raise a family with when she's older - because while bad guys are fun, nice guys provide stability. But yeah, he sounds very bitter. I don't think he is such a nice guy as he thinks he is.

Sure. Captain America can beat the **** out of that Canadian **** Wolverine. Already been done to death. http://hero-envy.blogspot.nl/2013/02/captain-america-vs-wolverine.html

-Increases walking speed- Look, I am really sorry, but I don't have any change, okay?

I suppose the best reason for talking to strangers is the different and interesting responses you can get, you can learn new things about people that way. I think it really depends whether people are used to it. In some countries, people are a little more reserved. I remember going backpacking through England and Scotland with my brother when I was a teenager, and the completely new experience of sitting at random people's tables and having a chat with them. I am pretty sure if I tried that back home people would stare me away from their table with an evil gaze of death. We had some funny conversations. In Dover, some old geezers who were constantly sniffing tobacco made us a proposition for us to be their drug mules (because, everyone knows us Dutchies do nothing else but drugs all day). We met some Glaswegian girls, one of which was completely convinced that she had an internet relationship with an actor who had played in "Children of the Corn". This was in the early days of the internet, we didn't even have an email address yet, but we were pretty sure she was being duped - but try telling that to a starry-eyed teenager. And I remember this one girl in Glasgow who upon hearing that we had planned to go north loudly said, in thick Glaswegian accent, that up north they were nothing but a "bunch 'o sheep shaggers!" We couldn't stop laughing, the way she said it. I am not sure whether it was that people are more accepting towards such things at the other side of the sea, or whether it was because people open up more to a bunch of hippie backpacking tourists, but it was a great experience. That being said, when some stranger approaches me, my first thought is always a suspicious "I wonder what they want from me?"

Malc, this post highlights just how different you and I are ( which we already know ) I also do what that guy did, you do it because you are trying to give someone good advice. But it can be misunderstood and seen in a negative light....like when you said he was weird for suggesting you use honey. It reminds me of that joke where I ask a stranger to pay for my groceries in a supermarket line I would be fine with a friend saying something like that, but from a stranger... Well, I would think he should mind his own business. It sort of comes across as... "Hi, I don't know you, but I'd like to tell you what to do..."

Where do they get the cards from? If they are buying them, I am sure Nintendo doesn't mind the extra profit.

I really hope the game will include a key-up to highlight lootable items, like in BG2. I'm replaying Torment right now, and it is such a pain to have to mouseover every nook and cranny just to find the items your companion dropped when he just died.

Is that the explanation for why that end credits song on PST sounds like its from a different game? I'd always wondered about that. The credits track and a few others are actually by Richard Band, and had nothing to do with Mark Morgan. Another one of his tracks is the track played in the Smoldering Corpse Bar. Here is a list with all the tracks, by the way. You can see which composer did which track. http://planescape.outshine.com/index5b56.html?page=soundtrack

I give up, you seem to only see what you want to see, and brush aside anything that doesn't fit into your viewpoint. You can file me under your neat little box of "Europeans who don't know what the hell they are talking about and like the generalize about Americans." I hope you saw the irony in that statement.

Hmm, I must be unlucky then, since I've met a lot of United Statians who were very opinionated about "Europe" (as if it were a country, rather than a continent filled with many different countries, each with very distinct national identities) and its "socialism", its liberalism, and its general wickedness. And it's not even just the common man on the street. For example, apparently in my own country the elderly are wearing bracelets saying they don't want to die, out of fear of the deathsquads that are going about killing off the elderly. Oh, and 10 percent of our deaths are due to euthanasia. This is according to former presidential candidate Rick Santorum. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/euthanasia-in-the-netherlands-rick-santorums-bogus-statistics/2012/02/21/gIQAJaRbSR_blog.html this is just one reason why the internet is so dangerous to some folks. your opinion on Americans is based on what you has gleaned form your internet travels? HA! Good Fun! Rick Santorum only exists on the internet? And no, I don't base my opinion on Americans on what I "glean from my internet travels", because I don't have an opinion on all Americans. The U.S. is a pretty large place with a lot of different people, I don't pretend they are all the same, and that I can know all about all of them. I just wanted to correct the picture you painted of European know-it-alls in one corner, and modest Americans who wouldn't dare to say something about Europe in the other.

Hmm, I must be unlucky then, since I've met a lot of United Statians who were very opinionated about "Europe" (as if it were a country, rather than a continent filled with many different countries, each with very distinct national identities) and its "socialism", its liberalism, and its general wickedness. And it's not even just the common man on the street. For example, apparently in my own country the elderly are wearing bracelets saying they don't want to die, out of fear of the deathsquads that are going about killing off the elderly. Oh, and 10 percent of our deaths are due to euthanasia. This is according to former presidential candidate Rick Santorum. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/euthanasia-in-the-netherlands-rick-santorums-bogus-statistics/2012/02/21/gIQAJaRbSR_blog.html

His Obsidian forum persona is based on the half-Orc Gromnir, a character from Baldur's Gate 2 who would refer to himself in third person.

Gromnir sure seems to have some negative feelings toward Europeans.

All Morgan's jobs on the various Black Isle games were rushjobs. From an interview: Michael: There are rumors that you only had a couple of weeks to write the music for Planescape: Torment. Is that so? What was your time frame on Fallout and Fallout 2, and when did you start working on these projects? Mark Morgan: Yes, on all three games I began late in the process... Planescape: Torment was a quick turnaround as you suggest. I did it in about 2 weeks. I don’t know why, but the game was pretty much completed before they decided who was to do the music. On Fallout they had another composer to begin with, but for unknown reasons, Charles Deenen called me to work on it and it too was a fast turnaround. Composing time for Fallout 2 was also truncated. I believe the game was essentially complete by the time I became involved and they were in a hurry to get it out. http://www.game-ost.com/articles.php?id=24&action=view (Even so, I absolutely love the PS:T soundtrack)

I think Mark Morgan simply has a very distinct sound, which in my book is a good thing.

Music without gameplay really doesn't tell me much. The litmus test would be whether the music fits the atmosphere of a particular environment and the encounters within. For me, the best example of that is in Plancescape Torment, where the music fit so perfectly for every area and every encounter. Take this music: Every time I hear it I am almost physically there in Ravel's maze, as it conjurs up exactly the image of that weird razorvine maze that is Ravel's little pocket plane.

No, you are not the only one. The fact that we are going in such a direction that people can be monitored 24 hours a day -hell, soon everyone will be willingly wearing glasses that track every move they make- doesn't make things much better. When people can be so easily controlled, and the risk of any sort of uprising diminishes, it's much easier to completely discard the interests of those not in positions of power.

I would say most people don't have the time, the access to information or in some cases even the inclination to make well considered decisions on every issue that pops up. I don't think anyone expects them too, either. That's not to say they can't make well considered decisions on any important issue - but for a lot of issues government is simply going to have to make the decisions and then it will be on them to explain to people why it is good for them. I have to say the situation is made worse by today's press. People depend on the press too much to tell them how things are, while the press isn't interested so much in finding the truth these days as in the almighty dollar. All they want to do is to tell people what they want to hear, so that people will keep buying their newspaper or clicking their website. No one really wants to be told a problem is so complex that they have to read an entire library to properly understand it. They want things to be explained in a single paragraph, with lots of pictures. And that's even ignoring that some people behind these newspapers, t.v. channels and websites have their own private agenda. The real problem I have though with the findings of the report is that the interests of the wealthiest and the corporations are often completely at odds with the interests of the average Joe. Even if you have to conclude that average voters can't be asked to make every single political decision, they still should not be dictated by powerful groups that don't have the interests of society at heart, but only their own pockets.

Well, yes, if the only acceptable outcome to in this discussion for you is that I accept everything you say without question, and that if I do not accept this then it must be because I am either indoctrinated or ignorant and cannot be taught "the truth", then I do suppose there is no point in this discussion.

I feel that we are simply debating about a difference in definition of the word democracy here. In practice, every country that I would call a democracy has checks in place to protect liberties which are deemed essential to a healthy society. If your definition of democracy is a system where the government is chosen by a majority and after that it is able to do exactly what this majority dictates, even if it is to the detriment of liberties which are fundamental to society, then I struggle to think of a single country where such a democracy exists. I would say that these checks are an essential part of a well functioning democracy. Democracy, which you refer to as rule-by-mob, simply means a government consists of elected representatives of the people. Let's just take the wikipedia definition: "Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens participate equally—either directly or indirectly through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws." I see nothing in here that isn't the case for the U.S., but the part the authors of the report have a problem with is the "equally" part. Edit : Heh, didn't see the earlier posts. Well, I guess I've got a kick in the head with a steel-toed boot coming. Amusing, the constitution of my country doesn't guarantee the liberty to kick other people in the head when they disagree with you. Must be a missed opportunity. How about a dictionary definition? "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections" That's from Merriam Webster, I hope it is okay - or do people who take their definition of words from dictionaries also deserve random corporal punishment?

Corporate imperialism being endeared to communism? Fascism I definitely get, but I don't think corporations would like to see all their assets taken from them and being put in in the hands of the state... Communism is pretty much dead anyway (and please, no one try to make the case China is still a communist country, that's laughable).

Gromnir, I am not quite sure if I am understanding the gist of what you're trying to say correctly here, but are you implying that there can't be true free speech in a democracy because "the mob" would dictate that any contrary opinion should be silenced? And if that is indeed what you're saying, isn't that exactly what the separation of powers is for? A working judicial branch should prevent what you say is the "whim of the majority" to influence constitutional rights. As a non-United-Statian, I've always found it a bit puzzling though how over there the members of the Supreme Court are nominated by the president. That doesn't seem desirable to me if the aim is to have an independent judicial branch.

Hmm. Sounds exactly like the government in my country.

The BBC is featuring a piece about a report by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page on the influence citizens of the U.S. have on policy, based on income level. http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 In this report, the professors looked at answers to survey questions between 1981 and 2002 and broke down the answers according to income level. Then they looked at which income level had the most influence on policy decisions. http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf Abstract: "Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics – which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of interest group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism – offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented. A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues. Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism." They conclude that the system as is strongly favours the economical elite compared to the average citizen, and that while citizens of the U.S. "do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association and a widespread (if still contested) franchise [...] if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organisations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened."