metadigital

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.

Shakespeare was an actor. His plays are meant to be watched, not read. I agree his poetry is second to none, after all he's got his own sonnets! Overrated? How so? Aside from the lexicographical incestuousness of importance by citation; i.e. it is important because it has been so demonstrably visible over the intervening years (sort of like a idiomeritocracy); it is an influence of the first order to English writers and speakers, like the Bible and Dickens, there are a number of other outstanding merits. First of all, a modern tragedy didn't exist (sure the Greeks did it all the time, but not the English). All plays of the time had "hollywood endings" and usually included a dog and a juggler. It's a pity that the spoken English has moved so far in the last four hundred years, I heard some scholars read some Shakespeare in the original accents, for example, and a lot of the lines rhymed! All that "rambling" is poetic flourishing, yes, but it isn't meaningless. True, a typical play is upwards of four hours long, so it is quite possible it was meant to be tailored for each audience, too. It's pretty impressive that a character-based joke still stands after all this time: Shakespeare knew us better than most writers today do. His (assuming it was one man) main gift was the way to use language. There aren't many thousands of different words in his texts (some are archaic, yes, but that is due to language evolution, not his choice), he gave us a different way to look at language: "uncle me no uncle" (The Tragedy of King Richard the Second, Act II, scene iii) ) is innovative because he is using a noun as a verb, something that hadn't been done up until then. The other great thing about the body of work is that there is so much depth that you can re-read it again and again, and every time you are able to glean more and different meanings from it (and not because of the barrier with turn-of-the-sixteenth-century language, either) due to the exceptionally clever use of metaphor and allegory. (I can give you an alternative contemporary interpretation for a speech that I'll bet you have never heard ... it's a bit rude, though.) The biggest complain is down to the medium (i.e. a language not readily available to the modern audience), not the content.

Actually the PC is the worst platform for publishers to make their money back. As yo your first point, it is impossible to say with hindsight. But let's analyze each component, logically. I have recently played System Shock 2 for the first time, and the graphics are incredibly dated, yet I enjoyed the game for it's story. Additionally, there is no way I will go back and play a crappy game that had revolutionary graphics for 1993. So graphics are not an impediment to a great game reagardless of age, and they do not impel future players to revisit an ordinary game with advanced graphics for the time. Secondly, I disagree that reading is becoming pass

That's kind of a ridiculous leap of logic, Meta. Obviously the subtitles remained on because of precisely those incidents when it was alien language. But I was talking as a whole when I had the choice between speech in the English language, or text written in English, I prefer voice acting in my games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah, I was just messing with ya, n00bi3. I can name

I would just like to go on record saying that I hate it. Agreed heartily. The alien bits were incredibly irritating. That's not even full VO though, that's just soundclips. The repetitive alien clips would have been solved if Bioware had implemented 'true' full VO rather than just throwing in a couple irritating bits of gibberish. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A bit difficult to do that when the dialogue is gibberish in the first place, as Eru eloquently illustrates: I skipped every one. Actually, a lot of films do precisely that if they are on a budget. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I would vote for poor films not being made in the first place. If it has a numeral suffix, then it automatically fails the test.

To be honest, no. Although I shouldn't be completely absolute. In 99% of the cases, I'd rather have speech than text. However, there probably would be exceptions. I think it might also have to do with setting. I just can't see a game set in the Star Wars universe with subtitles only. On the whole though, I prefer my games and movies to have speech rather than text. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you saying that you don't use subtitles and that you understand Wookiee and Rodian and every other half-arsed gibberish that bubbled out of the empty space between GL's ears when he sneezed? We'd better give you a cape, for you are Super-Fanboy.

Still no word from Kaftan. I'll update the first post shortly.

Ok, that's different, then. That makes it 3:3 stand-off between Tyr and Tri, so no-one moves.

Except that F ENG was supported by F Bre, and F Bel's support was cut by A Pic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah, absolutely correct. (Good spotting of my deliberate mistake to see if anyone was watching.) Sorry, I was just checking my working then to make sure I hadn't missed anything else ... So that means there is a stand-off between: ENGLAND F NTH - ENG and FRANCE F ENG (because it is not moving into the NTH) because GERMANY F Bel (support cut: Rule 13)

Corrections AUSTRIA These are illegal move orders: A Ser S A Tri - Tyr A Bud S A Tri - Tyr page 8 of the manual: Simple Support ... A unit does not have to be adjacent to the unit it is supporting. However, it must be next to the province into which it is giving support and must be able to legally move there itself. So the result is a 3:2 win for ITALY A Tyr - Tri If there is no retreat submitted for AUSTRIA A Tri, then it is disbanded. FRANCE F ENG S RUSSIAN F Nwy - NTH Rule 11: A dislodged unit, even with support, has no effect on the province that dislodged it. (page 23) If there is no retreat order for FRANCE F ENG, then it is disbanded to make way for: ENGLAND F NTH - ENG supported by GERMANY F Bel

Check your post, people: moves are out and time for a reckoning. 1903 Winter adjustments are due 12:00UTC tomorrow, Wednesday [7th September]

Yeah! Which one of them is she? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The green one on the left looks like a Rastafarian Twi'Lek, and the one on the right looks like (Doctor Who's) Leila ...

Go on, Schubert!

Well, what it lacks in quality is made up for in quantity. Cumulative effort for T3H Win!

We've heard about the lightsabre duel ... but the Princess Leia (slavegirl?) outfit sounds more interesting ...

William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (Act III, Scene i, verses 56-89) Me too. :cool:

Sounds like both Steve and I could play this game with relish ..!

In a perfect world, yes. If we have to choose (why? ) between well written and deep plots, stories and dialogue, and voice acting, then it's a lay-down Mis

You are revelling in the absense of Eldar, aren't you. Still, that's probably what makes Drew Barrymore atractive: her charismatic-like dirty-do-anything aura ...