metadigital

I saw it because Terry Gilliam is worth listening to; I like his take on reality and perception. I liked the little details all through the film (like the duck herder getting mad at Damon bolting his horse through his gaggle), but I founf the characters to be very unsuccessfully drawn. Nothing wrong with the acting nor directing, but I couldn't give a toss whether they lived or died at the end of the film. Which is a shame. Monica acted to her ability, which isn't much beyond speaking the lines, but then again she isn't paid to speak ...

Catholics only just started praying in English, y'know; up until I turned up (no connection) they used to read everything in Latin. I was talking about pre-WW2 society, where Catholics were violently against inter-denominational marriages (not sure about Protestants, they normally were just contrary for the sake of it, so they probably encouraged it!) You are also forgeting Ireland, I take it. And how about the Shia and Sunni Muslims? Sometimes the smallest differences make the most acerbic arguments. Just what I'd expect from someone that can see no logical flaw with reconciling God as a trinity. "

You mean to say that the Xbox 360 has region coding, and will also prevent backwards-compatibility, as well? What a heap of over-marketed, inbuilt-obsolescent crap.

Next time I'm there I might. Actually, I haven't got enough minutes in my lifespan to waste any on trash like that.

Short answer: No. Long answer: No, it's crap.

How can you not vote for psychics? They made me do it!

The most common one is what to raise the kids as. If you actually believe your fighting for their immortal souls it's bound to be a heated battle. Theres dating and theres dating <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My father's parents were mixed religions: he a protestant, she a Irish Catholic. My father used to gleefully tell the story of when his father threw the local priest out of their home when the "holy man" decreed that they were not married in the eyes of God. My partner is Catholic. I enjoy giving her grief about it (stupid guilt-driven religions: whenever she tries to motivate me with guilt I just laugh and say "It doesn't work on me

All the great theologians have wrestled with these issues. I would recommend studying further; just because you cannot reconcile these concepts now doesn't preclude you from doing so when you are older (read

Sorry Launch, buy I wanted the answer from the 2 actual women on this forum, not any women spawned from a man's subconsious. sorry <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um, Blank, Launch is a woman. You should learn to differentiate between humour and reality in comments posted on a foum. Launchie only posted one (humorous) comment about being located inside the psyche of Kaftan (not as painful as it sounds), and you seem to have decided that means she is not really a young female university student, but a figment of a young male university student's mind. Which is entirely wrong. Completely. Utterly. Irrevocably. Irrefutably. Irrefragibly. Ineluctably. Wrong. And bad. Bad AND wrong.

Stand up for yourself! If someone creates a review, then they are the next to receive one.

I agree with this completely. Perhaps it's less a complaint about length as the fact that one often can't determine how much one is going to like a given game without buying it first. And once bought, you can't (usually) return them for the full price (or any price). Where I live, you typically can't even exchange for a different game, only for another copy of the same game. I understand the reasons behind this but that doesn't mean I like it. Demos are supposed to help with this, but I often find them lacking since I prefer my opinion of games to be based on more than one or two 'maps' or the tutorial levels - there's many games where I intially didn't like it but then ended up loving it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There is a retailer in the UK that lets customers return games within ten days for a full refund. (I nearly took EQ back, but I calculated the opportunity cost and decided against it.)

I leik this.

I have my own name as a domain, so I don't need to google my name ... "

I'll wait for you lemmings to buy it and play it. If Hades gives it a not-terrible score, then I'll buy it.

Whoa, whoa - easy there Meta! Who said anything about "buying"? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> (Hold me back! Hold me back!) I cannot confirm nor deny that I endorse "not purchasing" a terrible magazine.

Man, I just played the tutorial and I lost about half a day! I was just testing out the playability of it (obviously passed the test!), so I didn't spend loads of time reading the manual or even scanning the tech tree, I just played "by ear". That game is sooooooooooooo sneaky, I don't even realise that I'm playing it (just one more turn; just one). I have taken the DVD out of my drive and put it back in the cover and put it away, lest I be tempted to "have a quick game". Some initial observations: Turns take normal amount of time; all the bananas that complained about the turns taking too long obviously have never played Civ before (or have Alzheimers); the time after a turn finishes is full of the other players completing their turns. Graphics look fantastic. My jimmy jango it is a complex game. This is good because it means an unimaginable amount of replays ahead. This is bad for the same reason. I liked the limiting options (size of map, number of oponents, etc) as illustrated in the tutorial: I can well believe it is possible to have a "quick" game. I (mostly) like the improvements to the structure of the game law; the fact that Wonders have been watered-down and multiplied makes for an interesting battle of strategies: I can well see that "Golden Ages" and pet technologies for a particular Civ will be pitted against the others, best against best. This is really interesting. Mr Nimoy did phone in some of his performance; I can tell when he is saying something if he believes in it, or not. This game is dangerous. ("Snacks are good in small quantities.")

Don't all jump to it at once.

Nah, alignment is too poorly defined as a consequence of it being misunderstood in the first place. There is plenty of scope for two lawful good characters to be fighting each other, for example: if an evil potentate makes a bad law, then the lawful good sherrif either: follows the law, because that's what she does, or protects the innocent, because that's what she does. Therefore, two characters of the same alignment can quite easily interpret the same situation differently and still be within their alignment. I know option A seems more lawful, and option B seems more good, but I could also argue that A is lawful-neutral, and B is neutral-good. (Assuming for the purposes of this example that the sherrif couldn't change the law; a Kobayashi Maru, is better to test ethical boundaries.) The crux is the semantics of "law": does lawful mean "obey laws of society", like democracy, or does it mean "obey the laws of God", like a theocracy?

Kaftan, bide your time. Then volunteer to take the ground on a *new* gaming experience ... Cthulhu. "

Sort of a decent social control programme, really ... all they need to do is work out how to transmit a real virus through the computer network ...

Does that help in TOMBS ?

No thankyou. But nice to see you again, Eddo. We need some more surreal topics ...

I am just installing the game now ... ... so I mayn't see you all for a little while ...

Which game?