metadigital

... who is heroically sacrificed in a selfless act of superior strategising that completes a dilemma successfully allowing the PC to conclude the

Wouldn't M$ have ponied up some lolly?

Okay, you can put your keyboard down, now, Mr Schu. I think we have an agreement in principle.

OH N035!1 Mutantation explosion! Cascade overload failure ... :cool:

... who is heroically sacrificed in a selfless act of superior strategising that completes a dilemma successfully allowing the PC to conclude the

Nope. Just well- (some might argue, successfully, over-) educated. :D

Yep, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

OH N0E5!!!1 They're onto me ... :ph34r:

I disagree that suits won't put bad dialogue into a game. It's on "the check-list" now, and suits don't actually play the games, so as long as it's there they don't care! Except if it makes the dialogue impracticably complex. How many people are going to bet for fully-voiced dialogue trees versus next generational graphics? That's the sort of complexity that would be necessary to add an actor's voice to thousands upon thousands of lines with slightly different variables. Permutations add up: four classes, three alignment choices and two actions for one character makes twenty four (four times three times two times one, or 4!) voice tracks for one dialogue. Multiply that by hundreds of dialogues and more options (say five classes and four alignment choices: lawful good, chaotic good, brute bully and sneaky evil), two actions, and you have 5!

Planning in advance doesn't work with teenagers, I've discovered ...

I can't rule out editing of the report, to make the perpetrator look worse ...

You can add your own special categories, y'know Eldar? And if you don't like a category, or it has a rank of zero, then there is no need to include it (which logically exxplains why there are special categories, no?).

You can talk. My Tyronean army is vacationing in Piedmont!

Zing!

Nothing wrong with elitism, per se. (Occassionally, and particularly in this case, I don't agree with the dictionary.com defintion: it is far too one-dimensionally perjorative. [Etymology: French

Um, I wasn't talking about you.

Ah, if you are referring to me, I was more irritated by the person who used the term as an "easy attack"; also the cumulative lack of something substantive to say made this seem all the more ironic. (I do have a member of my family who is mentally challenged, and the parallels are clearly visible.) The criminal was obviously trying to avoid the punishment based on a reverse-discrimination attack. "They can't punish me, who'll look after my children and brother?" It is precisely this type of example that must be set to prevent further incidents.

Ditto, and with the first line: Koreans eye silicon replacement I thought there was some sort of cosmetic eye surgery going on, especially WRT the urge of asians to add a crease into their eyelids (to look more occidental).

Numbers.

Um, for 1904 Spring, yes.

Oh yeah, rule nine. Now why did I think it was okay? Hmm. I originally thought this was true, then I rad something to change my mind, and now it makes sense again. Maybe it was rule eight? How quisquous!

... WAIT! 110 volts? This only works if you get in the bath first, then drop it in whilst it is connected to the main AC power supply.

No, we wouldn't have crap voice acting. (Nothing wrong with good voice acting, I can turn off the subtitles, if the situation warants it. Just very few situations warrant it.)

That's nice. Since you put it so eloquently though: "Exceptions prove the rule." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It was a balance to your sweeping generalisation, not a new proposition to establish the contra position. I was pointing out the flaw in your all-encompassing statement about how you listened to them all (with the concommitant implication that "most people listen to most of them"). Sure the background comments in Deus Ex are good. But think how bad they'd be if they weren't done right. Quality: good. Crap: bad.