213374U

Yeah, but he'd still be your friend. My point exactly. ^_^

You just described me :ph34r: Heh. It sucks to be 'I like you, but as a friend'-ed. One of my new year resolutions is to be a total jerk so no girl will want to be my friend. I think that actually might increase my odds of getting some. "

w00t! Minoan nazis And I like Hitler the fruit-lover. But rules are rules...

Yeah, I don't do the kind of crazy crap they do in the Sims like going to work or cleaning the place. Man that must be draining.

Um, yeah. I try to perform my basic physiological functions whenever possible. If that ain't a life, nothing is. :D

In RL half of the world has nuclear and/or biological arsenals. I don't use nukes in mutual assured destruction scenarios, only when I'm the only one who has them. That's why it's stupid of the AI to declare war on such inferior conditions. About the AI cheating, well... read this. There are somethings not listed there such as the AI knowing how useful a certain resource is to you when bargaining, trade worth adjustments, etc. Suffice to say that the AI cheats. An awful lot.

My best cheating AI moment was when I was allied against the babylonians with the Americans and the americans were way behind in tech level. So I decided to share so they'd have a better chance. Well as soon as I gave them the new tech, all their units in the field upgraded. And so did the Babylonians. Anyway, I thought Civ3 was fun, but at later years when you have a large empire its really hard to play. Um, the units were upgraded in the field? Such blatant cheating really substracts from the game experience, if you ask me. But, alas it seems the only way to make the game challenging once you figure out how to win. And about late eras, well, I don't really have a hard time playing. I have a hard time wiping the other civs from the map, but that's what space race and diplomatic victories are for. I think however that early expansion has been placed too much emphasis on. It's really hard to keep an advantage over the AIs without building a thousand cities in the BCs. You can get the cultural and space race victories easily with few cities but in a small territory you will usually be hard pressed for resources. I often end up invading some fool to take their resources... but that's a whole mess. War is no longer an easy way to win unless conducted very early. And why the hell does every worm in the map declare war on me when I nuke someone back to stone age? I mean, I would understand it if they established trade embargoes and signed MPPs, but declaring war on the guy with a thousand nukes? What gives?

Damn good sim, if you can be bothered to learn to play it. Oddly enough, winning in it involves careful planning and tactics, and fast reflexes aren't the deciding factor. And playing the co-op missions is a blast. (w00t)

Really, I don't see the need to turn a gaming discussion into one about politics. It's such a cliche.

Unwarranted sarcasm won't help you make friends around here... "

But what would be the difference between a mad person and a normal person, if the mad person had the option of choosing normal responses in conversations..? Um, usually you can't tell a psycho from a normal person just by doing some small talk with them, unfortunately. It would be nice to be able to play normal and then suffer outbursts of random lunacy, or when talking to certain characters, or when put under pressure. I don't know, I'm no specialist in madness. Anything's better than that loon talk they did.

The one and only. ^_^

So far it looks like another instance of a great game ruined by an overwhelming amount of bugs.

Unfortunately they confused Malkavian madness with plain idiocy, IMO. I mean, there are a whole lot of different kinds of mental illness but, I don't think any of them involves talking like a 16th century buffoon. I'd much rather play a total paranoid or sociopath Malk. The fact that the ridiculous dialogue is actually forced on you (no apparently normal dialogue options whatsoever) doesn't help much, either. The conversation with the stop sign was a nice touch, though. ^_^

I don't know if it was overrated, all I know is I didn't get hooked to the story enough to finish it. But, since Hades thinks it's good, there must be something to it.

Well, technically FOT isn't a RPG. Its only resemblance to 1&2 is the setting. I enjoyed FOT quite a lot but still I don't compare it to FO and FO2... they are different genres. Anyway, can you become a pr0n star in BG? 'Nuff said. :cool:

Yep. That's the same crap they pulled with Darth Bandy's armor in K1. I'd rather not have those items in the game than have them like that.

True. However vampiric flirting isn't about love or sex. It's about manipulation and power, and vampires are usually into both.

I hear you. One would think that being neighbors and all we would do better at understanding each other. Ah, the bitter irony...

I think that is true for console ROMs, but I don't think it applies to PC games. Pretty absurd rule anyway.

Two different issues here. I enjoyed the game very much, but then again, I would have enjoyed it too if it had lacked textures somewhere, sounds or whatever. The game lacked (or suffered from very lousy) QA, and that's a part of the development process. It's not I don't think the game was worth my money. But if I buy it, I might be promoting a model of game development I don't quite like.

Well, it's a matter of opinion it seems. I don't deny that BL was of an excellent quality and possibly the best of 2004, but I'm just not going to support lousy QA by buying that product. If you don't care about that, it's your call.

Damn shame that the best RPG of 2004 isn't polished enough to pay for it. I don't want to think about the worst RPG. :ph34r:

:'(