Valsuelm

Note that I said:

Very interesting. Thanks for posting. I do hope they are able to snag Avellone as well as anyone else that contributed significantly to PST after he is done with PE. Or if somehow they were able to partner with Obsidian that would be even better. Fargo and the PE team are the only ones I have any faith in (in America anyways) to make a good CRPG. And that said, I do have a lot of faith. And that interview reminds me what a horrible company WoTC is. They, much like EA, destroy or poison most everything they touch. I wish Gygax and co. had been as good a business man as he was a game designer so TSR was still around.

And you think that there's been an explosion in gun sales because why? Fifteen years ago if I mentioned the idea that a new Revolution may be coming to your average crowd of people almost all of them would have looked at me like I was nuts. 'That will never happen here!' would be said and echoed. As a student of history I knew they were wrong, though I didn't necessarily think it would happen in my lifetime I knew that in time most certainly war would come to the shores of the U.S. and it would likely happen from within rather than from without.. Ten years ago, after the Patriot Act was passed (which included many provisions that many would have said 'would never happen here!'), when I did mention it as a possibility, people raised their eyebrows at me but a few acknowledged my points and said I hope not to which I replied 'So do I'. For the last five years or so I hear talk of it almost everywhere I go that a long political discussion about anything comes up, and I spend time with people from all walks of life. I don't bring it up, others do. And I've even been surprised at some of the people I've seen bring it up, as it's included people who will say that they themselves thought it would never happen here. You're in Canada. You still have a queen. She signed your bill of rights. I don't expect too many foreigners that are ok with the fact that they still have a monarch to understand. Make all the arguments you want that they are just figureheads, depending on where you live that's usually to varying degrees untrue (and definitely is where you are), and you're ignoring what puppets politicians can be and most often are for whoever bought them, be they royalty, CEO, or foreign government. If and when there is a revolution it will be because there is: 'taxation without representation', and in fact that's largely what we have in almost every nation in the western world. Yes, we have governments and representatives, but at the national levels most of them aren't truly representing their people. While the population in the U.S. has become more pacified and ignorant in the last few generations there is still a very strong connection to what and why this nation (the U.S.) was founded for many. And even for those whom there isn't, there's a clear understanding that their line in the sand (whatever it be) is getting closer and closer to being crossed. While at the same time those who don't pay attention at all or do so but only superficially are sticking their heads further and further in the sand. And Revolution or no.... there's a real lot of folks buying weapons thinking that some really bad poop is not too far around the corner. And as I said in another thread: Unless some miracle never before seen in recorded history happens bad bad things are coming both in the U.S. and throughout most of the rest of the western world.

I think one of the things that led to this more believeable atmosphere was the lower level characters - you were barely more competent than your average commoner to start and progressed rather slowly upwards not getting exceptionally more powerful until mid-game and even then it was entirely possible to stumble on an encounter that would eat you for lunch. By games end you were showing some true power but the length of the journey that took you there made that power more believable. In BG2 you started off at those powerful levels and went on to godlike ones - much less believeable - especially if you were not using a character you leveled yourself in BG1 and start off at level 8-9 right off the bat without the benefit of having grown to those levels - like being born a young adult with no basis for your knowledge or chartacter. It's one of the reasons I really prefer lower level campaigns - say level 1-mid teens if they are D&D type levels - which is why I am so excited about PE as thats the level of play they are talking about. Indeed. However if I recall correctly there has been talk (I forget where exactly) by at least one developer on these forums of having the leveling rate be faster than BG. The leveling rate in BG was near perfect. It certainly shouldn't have been any faster. BG2, while a great game had the leveling rate a bit fast imo. Something I really don't want to see is my character(s) being greater than level 1 less than an hour into the game, or level 3-5 after 2-3 hours of playing (as in NWN2). Having played many PnP campaigns over the last couple decades, I agree: in general the lower level campaigns are more fun for a variety or reasons. That's not to say that a high level campaign can't also be fun, but balancing them is quite a bit tougher as too often characters end up being just too powerful. One thing I really hope PE and it's sequel does is continue the story in a fashion such as BG1 > BG2 did. BG2 was a true sequel that saw companions and the main character return, to continue the next chapter of the story. My hopes are that PE2 also sees the main character as well as most (if not all) of the companions from PE1 return to continue the next chapter of the story. Edit: /salute from one upstate New Yorker to another.

Whooosh right over your head it seems went most everything I said. If you don't know and appreciate the difference between a judicial opinion (I suggested you read a few above) and whether or not you think apples or bananas taste better I give up on you. I'm wagering you've not read anything I suggested you read and wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't read 1984, Animal Farm, or a Brave New World though you refer to 1984 and dystopia at large. Heads up, by many people's estimations (including my own) we're a bit past 1984 in many respects at this point. If you haven't read all those books, I suggest you actually read them, as well as A Brave New World Revisited. If you don't understand the merits of reading the historical documents that contributed to almost every Constitution in the entire modern world such as the Articles of Confederation.... well, again, I give up on you. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Again, never once did I take issue with anything said or opined by Scalia (and again, that doesn't mean I wouldn't or would depending on the case), nor was I ever referring to the Heller v. District of Columbia case. I specifically mentioned Roberts (and Ginsburg as an aside to my point) to you as you used "even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court agrees with me" argument. Perhaps you are confused and think Scalia is the Chief Justice? He is not, Roberts is. And quite seriously, if you really did think that Scalia was the Chief Justice, please check yourself, as you're in way over your head. Frankly I feel like I'm arguing with someone who has only a rudimentary understanding and minimal knowledge base in regards to the subjects at hand, and chooses to be ignorant.

Remind me why the South African Constitution is rubbish? You need to be careful when you make blanket insults against a country that is based on your ignorance, it undermines your point and you come across as some kind of uninformed and emotional fanatic. I made no insult against an entire country. Anyone with half a brain in South Africa would realize and does realize what I said. I'm not going to do your reading for you. If you've read it as well as the originating documents I mentioned along with just a few other Constitutions in the world, it should be obvious to a junior high schooler unless they're truly naive. And that's if they don't get the banking clause or know what goes on in that nation. If you understand the implications of the central banking clause of that document as well as have a larger grasp of how the monetary system in the world works, and where the UN, IMF, World Bank came from you'd see the document for what it is. One could write a lot about that particular Constitution and how it's rubbish through and through. Sorry my comparison of the South African Constitution to that of the U.S.S.R. bothers you, but its 100% right on. Both Constitutions (as well as most Constitutions in the world) are little more than pieces of paper to placate the subjects of the nation, totally ignored by those who wrote them. Ever notice that a super large chunk of the world is a democracy now yet the people in most nations really truly don't have a say and never did? I'm guessing not.

Oh sweet sweet 5 1/4 inch. It's been a long time since I've gazed upon you....

If you're going to take issue with what I said, you really should read the South African Constitution, after you read ours of course, as well as the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papets, the Magna Carta, the Articles of Confederacy, and the Virginia Declaration of Rights. So you have a clue of the context of what I'm talking about. And when you read the South African Constitution, even if you don't understand what the significance of the central bank aspect of it, which will speak volumes to anyone who does, it should be amazingly obvious to you that it's not a better document in any way. Ginsburg's loyalty is not to her own nation, it's not a matter of just simply something she thinks. Her position means everything. Note that I said impeached, not charged criminally with treason. Her actions and thoughts are perfectly acceptable for someone who didn't swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution or is charged with sitting on the Highest Court. You'd understand the fundamental problem with what her thoughts are if you'd read some of her opinions such as the one I noted above. To put it another way to illustrate the significance of what she said. It is akin to saying that the U.S.S.R. had a better Constitution. You're free to think so as just a citizen of the U.S. Having someone whose sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution, especially someone in her position thinking this however is an entirely different matter. I didn't take issue with Scalia's argument. Not saying I wouldn't nor that I would, but it was not the purpose of anything I wrote. As for saying that's a bias news source... the author of the article really was just pointing out something that almost no one else was. And in regards to 'Obamacare'... 'Obamacare' itself has little to nothing to do with what I was writing about. The actual decision to uphold it and the opinions expressed in that decision is what I was referring to. I do not know how much you understand law, but the manner in which a law is upheld in a court can have far greater significance than the actual law itself. In the matter of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (the 'Obamacare' case), this likely to prove true. At the very least the is going to be a very ugly court battle in the future regarding the precedents set. And to quote one lawyer I spoke to the day the decision was released (who read the decision as I had) "This decision totally eclipses Obamacare as an issue. Holy f--- we're in trouble."

What the... Par for the course for any psychotropic. They wreak incredible damage on the mind and body in the long run, and the vast majority of the time they just mask whatever issue(s) it was that had person A in 'need' of them to begin with. Note that 'need' here is akin to someone who 'needs' opium. There is little difference between the guy on the street corner peddling illicit drug Y to person Z who wants to escape life for awhile, than there is from the guy in the white coat peddling his goods. That said, sometimes it is good to attempt to escape life for awhile if it's become a hell. A permanent vacation in the form of spending the rest of your life in a bottle or on drug X from your problem(s) is a horrendous idea as you've not really fixed your problems but taken on a new one that will eclipse the old. The most hopeless drug addicts are the ones who think they don't have a problem and believe what they're told when they're told they 'need' a drug. The long term consequences for themselves and those around them are rarely less than and often greater than the guy who takes to the needle.

There's a number of reasons. You can sum most of them up with the word: Corruption. Some of them: 'Mental Health' has a bit to do with it. 15 years ago few insurance companies covered 'mental health' under their general plans. Much like most still don't cover dentistry. A variety of things changed this and now just about all if not all insurance plans out there cover 'mental health'. There are an ever increasing number of people going to folks in the 'mental health' field, and they are not cheap. Nor are the drugs they dish out like candy. 'Having a bad day? Would you like some Zoloft?' Quite seriously that's how easy it is in many a psychiatrists office to either score (if you're looking for it, which many are) or be given (if you're not) these drugs. I know more than few people who play the system to get their drugs, and I also know more than a few people who have been given drugs they never really even wanted. Who picks up the bill? People who pay insurance premiums if insurance picks it up, or taxpayers if medicare/caid/etc picks up the tab. There is also a TON of fraud and price gouging in the health care industry from top to bottom. And there's a lot of top. The administration departments in your average hospital are very top heavy with extremely overpaid incompetents. And then there's just your good ole variety price gouging on the part of the insurance company. Much like skyrocketing gas prices after Katrina.... something totally not based on any reality but a circumstances a big company can take advantage of to fib and jack up prices for bigger profits. Then you have an ever expanding idea of what the 'health care industry' should be providing for you. Not too long ago for example you weren't getting abortions (the non life threatening kind, which is most of them), contraceptives, sex changes, various cosmetic surgeries, or other various elective things such as Viagra under insurance plans either. Increasingly you are finding that you are, and in some cases because of some law some idiots somewhere passed. And last, but not even remotely least is the ever increasing addiction/belief that you need 'medicine' to cure every ailment (real or perceived) under the sun by your average American. Got the sniffles? Run to the store and get medicine X. It didn't go away in a few days? Heed the BS on that medicine's label and go to your doctor for some prescription drugs. Get some real rest, and eat healthy? 'Huh? That won't cure it!?' says your average Joe these days. well actually sir average brainwashed Joe... most of the time it will. And most of the time you'd never have gotten sick in the first place if you were living a healthy life to begin with. What's a healthy life? Exercise, rest, little to no drugs or alcohol, no processed foods, all natural foods, etc. I could write a lot more.... but there's a synopsis.

Anticipation? Exploiting the market? Some provisions of it are already in effect. One of the biggies, the mandate that says you need to purchase insurance doesn't go into effect until 2014 (even though many of the more corrupt states are already mandating it amongst some of their populace (ie: New York and college students)), but some the rest of it, such as the increase in age for required coverage of dependents is already in effect. Also, despite the myth believed by many who supported it, 'Obamacare' is not a blow to the evil insurance companies. Many insurance companies were very much in support of that bill and lobbied for it as they well knew it would increase their profits. You didn't hear about that much in the main stream media though.

Liar. ARs and other semi-autos make great ranch rifles, target rifles, and hunting rifles. Even Field & Stream is in on this trend. Give it a rest, already. You have no credibility when you issue asinine statements like the one I quoted. You're the one who stated that the guns in question had less stopping power and were worse for hunting than pistols and rifles. Which is what I was getting at, and even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court agrees with me (see the tiff with gromnir a few pages back over his decision in DC v Heller) Having the current chief justice of the Supreme Court agree with you is not something I'd advertise. The man is evil and corrupt to the core. He is not an authority on law, he bends the law to the wills of the people who bought and paid for him. So much so that he's redefined words to mean things they've never before meant in the history of English. Nevermind Ginsburg's 60+ pages of near gibberish (seriously, go read what this woman wrote and be amazed such intellect is on the Supreme Court let alone any court), Roberts opinion was the very dangerous one, that sets a precedent to give the Federal government the legal power to take any freedom it wishes away via 'tax' and 'mandate' (words Roberts redefined). Ginsburg, is a woman by the way that thinks the South African Constitution is better than the Constitution of the U.S., something that should have seen her impeached on grounds of treason (go read the tripe of a document that is the South African Constitution and realize just what traitors we have in the SCOTUS). 100 years ago she would have, but these days our legislative branch is so full of incompetents as well as it's own bunch of traitors and the American people so polarized that such a thing as holding someone accountable to their oath of office isn't even on the radar. Whether or not you were for or against 'Obamacare', I highly recommend reading the actual decisions of the justices in the National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius case. This is something the main stream media obviously didn't do (in this case and just about every other, they don't do much investigating anymore than most other people do). They were too busy bowing to the wills of those who own them and stoking the false left v. right paradigm of thinking fire. Facts, reality, and consequences be damned. You will discover if you read it that the arguments for it by Roberts are possibly the most contrived evil to ever be perpetrated in a ruling at the Supreme Court level. Even if 'Obamacare' was this super benevolent awesome thing of all good, the arguments he uses for it are evil to the core and set a precedent that undermines everything fought for in the American Revolution. If Wickard v. Filburn set the precedent that the Federal government can do almost anything it wants and get away with it, the opinion by Roberts takes the 'almost' out of the equation. The opinion to uphold 'Obamacare' as it was written is going to come back to haunt everyone, even those who supported the bill. And on that note, I'll wager that 99%+ of it's supporters never read even a tangible fraction of it. It's a pretty evil bill up there with the Patriot Act. Most of it has nothing to do with health care. In other news in regards to the main topic of this thread, at least one reporter out there is asking the pertinent question: http://www.wnd.com/2...hook-reporting/ If you really want to see fewer tragedies such as Columbine or Sandy Hook, the answers are complicated and are societal on a level that they won't be fixed any time soon. But if there's one thing that contributed to these tragedies outside of the will of a twisted person, it's not the guns, it's the drugs.

I like your observations. However I disagree that the PE world should have less crazies. I'd argue that most adults on modern earth are completely nuts. Give earthlings swords & sorcery and they will make the Sword Coast peoples look like a nice collection of well balanced, logically thinking, calm and reasonable individuals. Whose parents would let their kid play out in the woods with Dire wolves? Lots, and I wouldn't necessarily fault them for it. Different folks have different values as well as perceptions of danger. The girl might have been out without permission too: did you never go anywhere you parents forbade you? Or maybe she just came from a family that hoped she wouldn't come back, or didn't know about the Dire wolves. Who knows.... use the imagination. Keep in mind too that each area map of BG represented a place of interest. You had to travel to them and random encounters sometimes happened along the way. Presumably the girl lived not far from the map you find her on, but the house she lived in was uninteresting when the party traveled by it (if they did). There were X hours of traveling between each area, and each area only took a few minutes to walk through. That means the vast majority of the Sword Coast was populated by peoples uninteresting and encounters uninteresting enough to put on a map. I also very much preferred that map and exploration of BG1 to BG2 or any of the other Infinity games. Baldur's Gate did the world map exploration better than any RPG game I've played before or since. It most closely represented what one would find in a good pen and paper game. It allowed you to explore, finding random interesting things that had nothing to do with the main plot, or maybe did. It fleshed out the world. It allowed backstory. It didn't hold your hand much either (like most modern games... ie: *(?@)! the 'quest compass' and the ridiculous symbols over quest givers and enders heads, *bleep* them hard). You're spot on about the geographic feature complaints too. I'm 100% alright with little variety in geography if our tale isn't spanning a globe. And heck, maybe our tale takes place on a planet with only one major geographic feature: ie: Dune.

The thread was about a movie, that specifically deals with themes that some would consider romance. It didn't get lead there, it started there.

Um... I want to be able to go to the bathroom, grab a sandwich, answer the door, answer the phone, etc, and not have to worry about my Ironman game coming to an end because of some pause limit. Pause should be indefinite.

A resounding No! to 'finishing moves'. They add nothing substantial to a game such as what PE will be, and are fundamentally unrealistic eye candy and a waste of a hotkey, If we were talking about a console fighting game such as Mortal Combat sure, maybe let's have em. We're not. Critical hits are the way to go. A variety of death animations would be nice, as would maybe critically hit monsters being 'chunked' ala the Infinity games. Having special abilities only to be used to 'finish off' a target is not. Not only is it a waste of a keybind, but it really wouldn't feel right in a game such as this. There are reasons some of us don't hold Dragon Age in as high regard as we do the IE games (the story was good the way the gameplay had issues), and serious yuck to Skyrim all around, 'Finishing moves' while not the major reason is a part of it. I'd take unaltered IE combat over DA:O or especially Skyrim combat any day.

While there are similarities, every relationship is dynamic and different. For you it may have been immaturity, for others describing the same thing it very well may not have been or be. For many who consider all of "Distance and how it affects relationships, living in the past, being able to let go, being hopelesly in love." to be immature, they've adopted a sour grapes attitude towards something unfulfilled, and I'd argue that they've taken a path even worse than any immaturity in terms of denying themselves opportunity as they've become jaded. Whether that's you or not I don't know. Only you or an honest and wise someone who knows you well or knew you well at the time could say if you were immature. To say those feelings and experiences is immaturity by everyone who experiences them though, is an unjust narrow view. In regards to the film, a problem the main characters all had in common was lack of communication. None of them fully expressed how they felt and consequently something important to them was unresolved. More often than not things truly are not better left unsaid. A lot of people don't express themselves fully to those they care about, and not doing that ends up haunting them on many a level. The fear of rejection can indeed ultimately lead to greater devastation than actually being rejected. Again, every relationship is different, for all the similarities they may have.

There is an English translation of the book after all: http://www.amazon.com/5-Centimeters-Second-Makoto-Shinkai/dp/1932234969/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1357216884&sr=8-2&keywords=5+centimeters+per+second

Seriously? I actually just watched 5 cm/sec. It'd been awhile since I'd seen some good animation and I wasn't disappointed. The animation was amazing and the story was well written, it was deep though could have been a bit more fleshed out. My understanding is that it is elsewhere but sadly I don't read Japanese. I came here to thank you and you're calling me an 'infidel'? Those AMV's do not do any justice to the movie's atmosphere. The music from the movie itself does that. And it was scored as well as it was drawn. Had I thought those AMVs were an indication of the movie's atmosphere I'd not have watched it. Thankfully I can turn down horrendous remakes of good music badly paired with great animation by some emokid somewhere to be watched by emokids everywhere (what most AMVs are) and just see if something looks like it's worth watching. http://youtu.be/IG_FY3v0uWk To anyone who hasn't seen the movie: If you're a fan of good animation (something nearly extinct in the west) as well as like a good poignant story delicately handled about something not much talked about in society I recommend the film. If you've got a heart you'll likely appreciate Five Centimeters per Second. Anyways Trashman... Thanks, and don't do drugs.

Next time link the movie please and not AMVs with meh music. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Centimeters_Per_Second

Wer lesen kann ist klar im Vorteil. Entschuldigen Sie mich bitte. Und mein Deutsch is sehr rostig, so auf Englisch. I misread Austria as Australia. Doesn't change too much what I wrote though, except that your debt is even worse than Australia's and you have the added fun of the EU to contend with.

Hear hear, a rare case where an American can stare straight into it's impending doom and not dismiss it as nonsense. Indeed. Don't think for a moment Australia won't follow suit however. Per capita your nation is about where the U.S. was ten years ago debt wise. Almost every western nation is staring into the abyss as they've been taking candy from the central banking devils for generations. Just about every nation also seriously lacks any kind of quality leadership to avoid the abyss. Many people don't even understand the problem. More are LaDiDa so long as their personal life is going well enough. Ignorance is not bliss when the time comes to pay the devils their due or karma comes knocking. The only thing it really buys you is lack of understanding why. Barring some miracle never before seen in recorded history, bad bad things are coming.

Great game indeed. I started with Hack myself and then moved on to Nethack. No other video game has had me revisit it every other year or so for around 25 years. I still check the Dev site every so often hoping there will be a new version even though it's been almost ten years since the last one. Nethack is the shiz. I'm thinking my next foray may be in Slash'em.

A Monster Lore skill wouldn't be a bad idea at all. Other games (Palladium in particular) employ many Lore skills. If a character has such a skill there is a chance he will know of a Monster's weakness. Alternatively or in addition combat experience with particular Monster types may yield info such as weaknesses on a given creature. The actions should be entirely determined by the player and nothing should be automatic. The information however from such a skill would indeed be useful and a nice addition to the game methinks.

I'd have to agree with your father on the first two of his points. We've been to a lot of parties and also held a lot of parties and never been in a situation where we had to get wine after guests have arrived. It shows that you're not well organised and running things by the seat of your pants. If we arrived at a party and the host had to go out and get wine after guests arrived, We'd be thinking 'what have they been doing all day to be getting wine now?' Your father probably felt uncomfortable having to leave the gathering to get wine with your wife which probably annoyed him and felt obligated to say yes, especially since he doesn't get along with your wife. He can't say No because he's family, hence obligated to say yes. If I had to leave a gathering and get alcohol with a host because they didn't pick it up earlier in the day, I'd probably be thinking, 'what else have they forgotten for dinner?'. The third point about the winery being nothing special? Don't know the winery so can't comment. Although having been to a few wineries, they don't really mean much to me. So while it may be of no consequence to you about the wine, for others it can be a bad start to the night. But this is a family dinner. I can see your point if Hurlshot was entertaining royalty or something, but family, imo, should be relaxed and fun. I don't see a thing wrong with going out to get something after the company's arrived. But late than never I say! Better late than never indeed but Hiro Protagonist II is right. His father has some legitimate complaints and that's just hearing Hurl's side. As Malcador says, his father's side as well from his mouth would be ideal for the purposes of resolving the questions in this thread. Also, just because a winery has been around a long time doesn't mean it's any good. ie: Franzia and Carlo Rossi (as well as most of the rest of E & J Gallo's portfolio) are generally not on any wine connoisseur's map of good wineries but they've been around quite some time. So has McDonald's and most would agree they don't make even medium quality burgers let alone great ones. That said, when it comes to a lot of things, beauty/taste is in the eye/mouth of the beholder. One man's garbage is another man's treasure. And that said, there's a big difference between a steak'em and a fillet mignon, and there's just as big a difference in qualities among the various types of wines. Not all Chardonnay/Cab/Merlot/Pinot/etc. are created equal.