metadigital

... But we agree on hot lesbians, and that's a start! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't know of any demographic that doesn't like hot lesbians.

I don't see a problem. GL makes his movies, the books already exist, who is concerned? Worst case, the books represent an alternative universe. Big Deal. So a couple of authors' books are read by tens of people instead of hundreds, as in the case now. If they are smart, they'll secure the rights to novelise the new film. Twice the money for the same story. I also don't believe the diehard SW geeks are going to boycott a SW film just because it differs from a book plot written by someone else twenty years ago. And those that don't know the book plots (i.e. most of the billions of the potential audience) would be none the wiser. Summary: who cares? "

Well, we initially didn't know about the Power benefits; we were searching for meaning to our existence. Maybe Obsidian were just being deeper than I give them credit for: the answers we seek are gained from within, and those who we look to find them will be nothing but a disapointment in the end ... :D

If we are talking about good ideas for a new game, then I have to concur with these points (even though I quite liked Manaan). Neutral countries should be twice as dangerous as behind enemy lines. And there should be more of them, with as many allegiances as the Selkath judges. Bribery gets a lot of things done (people have to bribe others to look the other way in order for them to look the other way: it's a giant pyramid scheme.) Why are allies always allies? Why can't they change sides if they are bribed? Why can't there be more than just "us" and "them". My enemies enemy is my friend, and all that. (K2 tried this on Onderon, with very limited success.) Why no ethical dilemmas? Like save your party member or that planet of innocents ... or interrogations like Leia: "Tell us where your fleet is or we kill Carth." You get the idea. There is no need to have a "superman" PC. Just the right person in the wrong place at the wrong time (

Fixed.

... a lot like life, then. You can use spoiler tags; also you can talk about the first game with impunity. I wish you would, because this comment is too oblique for me ... The Krath Dargon gave you the black pearl. Kashyyk gave the Circlet of Saresh. Korriban gave the Solaris crystal. (Can't remember off hand what Manaan gave up ...) so greed-wise the spoils are about even. It was the boring attitude from Vrook et alia that gave me the squirts; at least they could have told you .

Who are you, Kevin McClorey ?

Mark Hamill played a private in the Sam Fuller WWII film called The Big Red One. His character's name was Griff. :D

The secret is to eat it while the meal is still hot. Once the meal cools, the chillis paradoxically taste hotter. I've had those shots of vodka marinated in chillis for months. Great for clearing nasal congestion.

I liked it for it's "philosophical mumbo jumbo" .. which is why I think the sequals are better, they do a better job in fleshing out the universe and idea of the film .. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmm, I thought the philosohpical merits of the sequels were far inferior to the original. The first film was pregnant with inspiration, which might have been expanded upon (or not): the hints merely made you ask questions -- which is all philosophy can do, really. The sequels seemed to be-labour the point; to be underlining the same concepts without adding anything. Might as well have had an echo, for all the good the twaddling on about philosophy did -- sort of pseudo-meta-philosophy. "Do we depend on the machines, or they us?" Huh? Horsefeathers. About as valid as the conversation the "Americans" have at dinner in Monty Python's Meaning of Life. The whole matrix concept swung on the existential axis that the world was truly an illusion, a virtual world created for some sinister purpose. A perfect geek conspiracy. The sequels were just action films. And that lame Neo-as-Christ ending, puh-leeze -- it screams "I don't know how to end the story".

Yeah, it was the Mary II that threw me. William (III) of Orange -- haven't heard that name since high school. I read Nathaniel's Nutmeg last year (or the year before) -- that was an eye-opener. (In my experience English speakers generally don't know much about the Dutch East Indies ... probably don't want to highlight the tragic performance wrt health, military, trade, politics and exploration. " )

I don't see how you stop being Revan just because you suddenly get some extra memories. It doesn't come out of the computer and change *you*, you are still the one playing the game, making the choices. What's the difference to being told at the beginning or the middle of the game? It's just a bit of backstory. When you asked your parents where you were born, did it change who you were when they told you? So far you are making zero sense.

That is a fundamental plot in a lot of Sci-Fi: e.g. Blade Runner and Total Recall.

Thanks.

I think a radical re-structuring is required to prevent a revolution. Micropayments, which would require a new technology: virtual money Virtual Money would be based on encryption of the IP; the (time-limited) key being given for a fee; using micro-payments (tiny fractions of pennies). It needs to be decentralized (no way are you going to have some Ministry of Free Information that oversees every transaction) and automatic. I have no problem paying for someone else's idea, as long as it is reasonable and convenient. Prohibition doesn't work. History proves that.

What's IE again?

Not at all. You are still you. And you are Revan. You just don't remember what happened before the start of the game. One day, when you are legally permitted to drink the liquor of the devil, you may come across a situation where someone doesn't remember what they did the night before, during a large imbibing session. Does this mean they wren't there? Does this mean that it wasn't them? Does this mean that it didn't happen? (These are philosophical dilemmas and your answers may vary.) I think most people would agree that despite the memory loss, Revan is Revan is you.

Nice Jar Jar impersonation, except I think he would have said "mesa shows"

Cool, I had to go searching for the info -- I saw it on tv a couple of years ago. I can't for the life of me remember who the Scottish monarch was, though: I thought it was Mary but she was executed in 1587 -- which was too early, wasn't it?

I think Tolkein was creating a story to implement the old Anglo Saxon language.

Yeah, you're forgetting a more recent invasion, in 1066. Lots of outrageous French language from those naughty Normans.

About Revan or the KotOR movie sentiment? :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You missed my last post <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, I ignored it to make a joke. I don't see why my good friend Rosbjerg's argument is any less valid than yours. I mean, it may deminish your memory of your K1 game, but you could argue the same with Deus Ex:IW, where you character from the first game has been hijacked from the narrative and you have to play someone else. Put it this way, you have been sent in a time machine back to just after Revan was captured and magically infused into Revan's mind -- but the transfer wasn't perfect and you haven't quite got full access to Revan's memory, or indeed yours prior to the transfer. (Both are restored before the end of the game.) You can play the game over and over again, changing as much or as little as you like. The fact that Revan destroys the Star Forge whether LS or DS is not historically significant oir unusual. How important to you why the Trojans let the Greeks Horse in through the city gates? Were they bribed or tricked? It doesn't stop the PC you play from being yours and doing precisely what you want Revan to do, whilst Revan is your to do with what you will ...

About Revan or the KotOR movie sentiment? :D

While I would like to discourage such conversations as they tend to reduce the conversation and all the participants to the lowest theme possible (which is ultimately clich

Why? Would playing a different gender somehow make me less secure in mine? (And Thank you for insinuating otherwise; I'll leave aside your obvious bigotry in assuming I'm male.) I tend to have characters based on people I know and admire, not just me. I think it is a lot stranger to assume that everyone in the universe is male, and that is better. I much prefer female company over males: they tend to have a wider and wiser selection of conversation topics. :cool: Or that you have such a limited imagination that something that is common in the real world is beyond your limits. Very strange.