metadigital

No! Battle Beyond the Stars with Nestor and Gelt ...

How about a white tee-shirt with the History Channel logo with the ex-Nazi-jacket-with-German-historical-medals rakishly akimbo on top ... carefully styled so as not to obscure the History Channel logo completely ...

I don't think you get to transform at will. (Or Wilma.) At least it's better to be a Masterspray than a Universal Receiver ...

Of course you know that the Qur

So that's where spam originates from. I hope that PC isn't still connected to the internet.

The Ultima series rocked my world. I remember Akalabeth, Ultima I, ][, ]I[, IV ... not sure about V and VI, but I seem to remember VII. Huge. Amazing. (Those bloody marks and cards from U3 had to be on every character's hand to get into the last area, so if you missed any characters, down to the bottom of the ugliest dungeons you go!)

I'm not sure whether you are arguing for or against the Exile, but to state my opinion: I liked the narrative potential of K2. It was a deeper and more complex plot, with rich gradients of ethical hue and potentially riveting replay value. Unfortunately this potential was completely squandered with a very poor implementation. I liked Kreia's character: although I thought she was more neutral than evil and I was quite disapointed how the end made a lot of assumptions and corralled my role play into a single ending; alignment, gender, critical plot interaction and party status notwithstanding. I would be happy to see another K2, with the proviso that it was based on a cogent plot and the potential depth was fully realised. New character, Revan or Exile: I don't give a flying kick at a donut.

I can tell you catagorically that Flatland did not have any reference to the above.

And let's hope the SETI programme is successful at finding extraterrestrial intelligent life, because there's bugger all down here.

Well, that is a very commendable theory, but I can quote Buddhist scripture and suggest that all life, even earthworms and bacteria are sacred life (strict Buddhists do not take medications for common infections!). I have a more utilitarian approach, but I wouldn't classify myself as mercenary. I was under the impression that the only viable stem cells were from embryos (although cord blood and prepuce from circumcision might prove useful as well). Remember that cloning technology, once it is matured, should allow us to use very few precious ingredients. And I would also trust that we will soon be able to create stem cells. (The advances are pretty amazing at the moment; dentists are almost at the commercial stage of growing custom teeth replacements!) Well, we have to make a decision, because even not making a decision is in fact a decision (to condemn the embryos to oblivion and the sufferers to wait for alternatives). I choose the most good: the least worst outcome.

Here here. I couldn't watch past the first few minutes. (The original series was bonza, though! I watched all of them one long weekend ... along with all the films in the Rocky and Dirty Harry series, too.)

BUZZZZZZZZZZZZ! Nope, but thanks for trying! Why do you want to have an "official" gneder? Are you that insecure that you need an external frame of reference? Just play and be happy. You should be content to be a small, important cog in the wheel of galactic history; no need to be the axel on which it spins!

Yes I concur (and call me anything except "Hey you!", well, maybe not "Mavis" ... ), although I would also say I don't want the other extreme, either: choice for the sake of it. It is all really dependent on the plot; the narrative is the crucial linchpin for all the other ingredients to work and any flaws with the story will be magnified out to the peripheries, like NPC interaction and plot progression.

Why does it have to be an either-or proposition reagarding character creation and engaging plot? I just don't see it. The plot flaws in K2 were there not because of complex PC creation (the three classes and six different heads don't matter, just the two alignments and genders) but because not enough time was spent on the writing and editing before the actual game development began. It's a pretty tragic situation when we have to trade off alignment and gender differences with acceptable plots; it is an RPG, after all.

Cheese? POTA? Have I stumbled into the non sequitur thread by mistake?

It's that big venus-fly-trappy-doohickey-with-the-teeth-and-tentacles in the sand that everyone (nearly including our heroes) get swallowed in at the fight on Jaba's barge in Return of the Jedi. Nope to #2. Unless they changed it, they're only restoring the HK Factory, but not the planet. The planet is a complete mess at this point, and they'd basically have to rewrite the entire quest. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Y'know, I have a sneaking suspicion that you might be close to identifying a possible issue I might have overlooked when I recalled what was said on that particular topic.

There are two other vendors on Dantooine. Also don't forget to check out the looted lightsabres for their colour gems. Nope. They are two distinct colours (by name, at least). And the bronze is a perceptible shade darker, to me.

Instead of the Ebon Hawk it might be the Sanguine Shark ...

They look like extras from CHiPs.

1. It is very obvious that Revan has no set gender (or alignment). Check the Databank (unfortunately I cannot preset the search to "Revan" for you.) 1.a I don't care what children think about this game. 2. I do care if these same children belligerently try to "prove" a patently incorrect and bigoted proposition within my earshot, because I will not be an accomplice by my silence.

I just skimmed it, actually. So with this person's interpretation, Revan is DSM. It's interesting that my main point was skipped by everyone:

1. No, I don't find it inhumane at all. You may believe as fervently as you wish that life begins the moment two gametes unite in the fallopian tube; a lot of people do not share this conviction. (I suggest you look up the origin of the word onanism, because even the Roman Catholic Church, for example, has not always regarded the moment of conception as the beginning of life. (It used to be regarded as life only after forty days.) 2. That is a terrible, emotive analogy; it is the main reason why people of extreme views (like the earnestly faithful) are completely unable to use rhetoric to their advantage. They have a complete lack of empathy for those people who have a differnt pov! Just for your own erudition, there are RIGHT NOW more embryos in storage than can EVER be permitted to grow into human form: there just isn't enough years left in the Earth's lifespan. Our sun will go Red Giant before they all get their three-score-and-ten. Let's view the dilemma from a different pov. There exists a lot of people now and in the future who will have short, painful and limited lives based on injury, illness and disease. With research on some proto-lifeforms, it will be possible (I believe -- ) to remedy these mishaps and ailments. You are faced with a defined, real and quantitative amount of human suffering versus the wish to save some others who haven't been born yet. Finally, I obviously can't speak for any other people, whether alive, dead or not-yet-born, but I am a signed up organ donor and I would gladly trade a non-existence to help ease someone else's real suffering -- would you? And what do you think the spirits of others would do, even those proto-lifeforms, should they be given the choice? Because you are making a decision on their behalf just as much as your opponents are.

... Hey, know what? I'd be willing to bet you're some flavor of Protestant. Guess what happened to Protestants when they started being Protestants? They got burned, and not just by Spain, though that's the example I'll use since it's the easiest to follow. ... "Oh, but we've come farther than that! That couldn't happen anymore!" No, it couldn't. Not the burning, anyway. But the rest certainly could. Hell, it does. I gave you the example of the Kentucky judge just a few pages back. You want to claim that allowing religion a place in the power structure of a government would not lead to any persecution of dissenters, but you've got - and I'm going to make this bold - the entire history of religion arguing against you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And Queen Elizabeth I's regal predecessor and half-sister, Mary didn't earn the epithet "Bloody" because she liked to drink. I will say that there have been a couple of governments that have shown unusual tolerance: the Venetian Republic, the Iberian Muslim Royalty and the rulers of Jerusalem before the Crusades -- and also including Saladin. It is not a foregone conclusion that a religious state will not be tolerant. But with any democracy, there needs to be clear and codified checks and balances to prevent the WASP-centric bias from accidentally and truculently trampling on minorities' rights. (Shirley Jackson wrote some evocative essays of the dispossed, like those in her compendium of short stories in -- and including -- The Lottery.)

Ronald McDonald Ham Burglar

No I don't! IT WSAN'T MY FAULT. THE 570OP1D F0RU3 C4N'T M4N4G3 3Y 1EE7N355!!!11!!1!1!!