Pidesco

The guy who plays Lee Adama is a pretty awful actor.

She's going to have a baby!

Haw haw!

Good choice of thread.

Don't forget Frantic, Working Girl, and Regarding Henry.

It's still dumb, though, that one sex scene makes a game AO worthy, while gallons of blood and cleaved limbs don't.

:happy0203:

Anyway there are plenty of sex scenes in movies that aren't meant to be just titillating. Irr

Works in making the characters feel like mini games instead of people. Mass Effect for 30

But what if the game requires to have full-frontal penetration in order to describe that the character's relationship is decadent and deprived, and not based on love and companionship? These things can't be written or described, they have to be shown. Or don't these matters on sexuality matter in North America/anywere? That would be a bit unimaginative, though. Not exactly heavy on the symbolism.

What, there aren't any dictionaries in Northern Europe? Regarding writing quality, I'd like to add that good writing in itself shouldn't be the main concern of game designers right now. First, they should be thinking about ways to integrate narratives into gameplay, so that the gameplay is dependent on the narrative and the narrative is dependent on the gameplay. Gameplay should make the player care more about the characters and the issues in the storyline. How can gameplay enhance empathy?

Just thinking about how BG2 came out here 3 months after it was released in the US makes me seethe.

Good point. But he does make the notion that games usually have as good writing as the consumers who buy them, thus the stigma of being immature themselves. That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy, though. Also, games with bad writing will never go away, anymore than bad movies or bad books are going to disappear. The question is about games being made to appeal to a more diverse audience than just the minimum common denominator, which seems to be the focus of almost every game these days. Making the gaming equivalent of Old Man and the Sea should be a commercially viable option. Fahrenheit, for example, was a game with "higher" goals than usual, but it still was only trying (and failing) to make the gaming equivalent of a good Hollywood blockbuster thriller.

You mean an actual sex scene or sexuality?

While he makes good points, I don't think treatment of sex in games is the problem but rather a symptom of the bigger issue. Which is that writing in games is generally dire, and would be considered incompetent in any other medium. Furthermore, when the writing is better than usual in games, a lot of times the story still lives in vacuum, without any real connection to the actual game other than serving as the proverbial carrot on the end of the stick. Games can't insert sex meaningfully into their narratives, if the narratives are generally meaningless to begin with.

Is NPC development in ME still tied to the player's level like in Bioware's previous games?

That sounds great Aries.

Lack of Nazis? What kind of complaint is that? It's not like there have been dozens Indy movies filled to the brim with Nazis. The same goes for your other complaints. Until a couple of weeks ago there were three Indy movies of which, two had Nazis, familiar Judeo-Christian mythos, and globe trotting adventure. And the Last Crusade had those mostly because Raiders was more successful than Temple, and Spielberg decided to play it safe and connect it as much as possible to the original. Note that The Last Crusade wasn't any better received than Temple. Finally, "OT"? When the hell did Indian Jones become a trilogy? It implies that there was some sort of continuity or master plan when there was none. PS.: I enjoyed The Last Crusade a great deal. Edit: @TrueNeutral: I agree that Raiders was far and away the best of all the Indy movies. What I don't agree is putting The Last Crusade in a pedestal in relation to Temple of Doom.

Explain yourself. You and Sand has been first persons ever to prefer Temple over Crusade as far as my experience shows. It is also the most critically slacked movie of three and no wonder Third one has Sean Connery as Indy's dad. That alone makes it better than stupid CGI-fest that was Temple of Doom It had a great balance between the high adventuring and the scariness, the three leads had great chemistry, the dinner scene balanced the tense conversations with the food comic relief really well, the bridge scene was awesomely tense, ditto for the room with the spikes, the humor was great, the beginning with Anything Goes and the poisoning was at least as good as Raiders' beginning. Finally, and I'm going out on a limb here, the reason why most people you know like The Last Crusade better than Temple of Doom is because it was the first Indy film most people your age saw in theaters. Feel free to lambast me if I'm completely wrong.

That chipset means your motherboard has a 478 Pentium socket which is a bit outdated. What's you CPU's clockspeed? What power supply do you currently own? EDIT: This is the best 478 socket processor available on Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16819116027

lolyes?

Temple of Doom is much better than The Last Crusade. @Sand: The failure in that logic is that while Bioware makes competent if uninspired games, Lucas has been part of some truly atrocious pieces of film making. Like Howard the Freaking Duck, or The Phantom Menace.

This talking about a trailer, and then never ever showing it is really not nice at all. I want to see more character models.

Yes, that may well be - but not everyone can afford to buy a new computer every 2