Gromnir

obscenity is not typical the issue. in Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim, the Court observed that “nude dancing is not without its First Amendment protections from official regulation.” however, most cities got zoning regulations. the State can place limits on otherwise protected speech as long as the limits is incidental or is tpm (time/place/manner) restrictions. for example, in spite o' protesters having the right to picket outside their place o' business on public sidewalks and streets, the government can limit nurses protesting in front o' hospitals if such protests violate previous established noise restrictions. similarly, while burning your draft card during the 70s were clear a form o' symbolic expression, such destruction o' the draft card were nevertheless prohibited as the law requiring a personage to maintain their card were an incidental limit on speech. am very much simplifying, but the typical burden the government must overcome when limiting protected speech is strict scrutiny, which requires a compelling government interest that is being achieved through the least restrictive means. strict scrutiny = government loss. keep in mind that expense or cost o' government limitations do not affect "least restrictive" aspect o' the test. tpm and incidental regulations is the way the government can limit speech w/o facing strict scrutiny... get intermediate scrutiny instead. so, State actors typical limit nude dancing through zoning restrictions or... required accessorizing. ... gets complicated (thank goodness, or Gromnir would be outta work) but what it means is that governments is frequent trying to find new ways to place limits on exotic dancing that do not violate the constitutional protection o' such dancing. Barnes v. Glen Theatre Inc is an amusing case. find a summary somewheres. the thing is, the 5-4 plurality offered little guidance for lower courts... which were good for folks such as Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

as some may know, Gromnir's business is Constitutional Law. in our field we is considered a brain surgeon, which don't mean that we is particular smart, but rather is an indication that we is highly specialized. am not just a Con Law guy, but rather a First Amendment Con Law guy. whatever you imagine regarding what Gromnir does, you is likely wrong. first o' all, we make little money doing the lawyer thing-- our money comes from real estate. second, our clients is typical the people you would consider crossing the street just to spit 'pon. we typical represent fringe religions (cults), gangs involved in illegal commercial endeavours, and strip club proprietors. our paying clients is not particular huggable. so what? the guys who run the exotic dancer business represent a considerable % o' our regular clientele, so we has learned more 'bout the trade than we might wish to. is also the reason that we do not frequent strip clubs. our moral compass is not what steers us away from strip clubs. if a woman wants to make money by taking off her clothes, then more power to her. unfortunately, the typical exotic dancer, even at high end clubs, is disproportionate likely to suffer from substance abuse problems. exotic dancers who has previous been victims o' some kinda sexual abuse is actual the norm rather than the exception, and such abuse is disturbingly likely to have been exacted by a family member. etc. every time we get a strip club case that lasts more than a couple weeks, we end up having to hear the statistics and the testimonials. like it or not, a large % o' exotic dancers is broken. am not interested in chicken and the egg debates. doesn't actual matter to us. that being said, the end result is that we cannot see exotic dancers w/o reflecting... and strip clubs enjoyment is predicated on the opposite o' any kinda serious internal reflection. ... 'course we got no problem lacing up our nike sneakers (shoes likely cobbled together by underaged labor in a se asian sweatshop) or turning on our computer (the components which would not exist w/o the effort o' exploited workers in sub saharan africa mining any number o' precious resources) so perhaps we is being a hypocrite. regardless, we can't enjoy our self (phrasing) at a strip club. is not that we thinks such clubs is inherent evil or somesuch nonsense and we sure do not pass judgement 'pon those who do enjoy the entertainments provided by exotic dancers. unfortunate, our job has kinda ruined the experience for us. go figure. HA! Good Fun!

benchmark for Gromnir is ps:t, but is not the romance story o' the protagonist that we thought were fantastic in that game. ravel's love for tno were distorted and hopeless and more genuine than any other crpg romance story we care to name. best crpg romance were ravel's love for tno. took most o' the game, were almost complete one-sided, had no sex scene, and concluded with mebbeth's wonderful post plane-hopping encounter. am not seeing how to do a decent tangential and optional side-quest romance. go through an entire romance story arc in a half dozen dialogue encounters? what a tragedy. romance ain't necessary for a good story, but if you are gonna include romance, you better make it central to the game story. game developers, understandable, wanna do multiple and optional romances in a crpg, 'cause choice is paramount. result: doom. "but let me assure you, this like any story worth telling... is all about a girl. that girl. the girl next door. mary jane watson." try and make a movie or game in which a romance with mary jane watson, gwen stacy and flash thompson is all possible 'til mid-point o' game (after which one is rushed into a predictable and puerile sex scene with said romance option) is not our notion o' good design or good romance. the problem for Gromnir regarding crpg romances is not that we hate romance. the problem is that we like romance. optional and tangential crpg romances is, by their very nature, flawed. fine. keep 'em optional so we need not endure such. you simple cannot give the requisite attention and depth to an optional and tangential side-quest romance to make it anything other than ridiculously rushed and immature. so either don't do 'em at all, or keep 'em optional so we need not suffer. nevertheless, the only way to do crpg romance any kinda justice, to have it worth exploring, is to make such romance integral and pivotal and essential. can't do half measure romance. solution: if you want decent crpg romance, the obvious way to include is to add such to games without making the game protagonist a romance protagonist. you can have a well-written romance in just 'bout any crpg just so long as the player is not part o' the romance. HA! Good Fun!

Loved Seven Samurai and The (original) Magnificent Seven. Hopefully Westerns are making a quasi comeback. am a fan o' both sevens... well, and seven too, but seven weren't a western. seven samurai were a kurosawa homage to westerns, so is unsurprising that the magnificent seven worked so well as a western. every few years we get a quasi-revival o' westerns. mighta' been the late roger ebert who observed that every american actor wants to play a cowboy and every english actor wants to play a gangster. denzel has actual done a pretty good turn as a gangster already, and he has done shakespeare. is perhaps 'bout time that he got a chance to play a cowboy. our anticipation for the new magnificent seven is colored by our preternatural cynicism, so is no slight 'pon the movie itself. aside-- is our opinion that tommy lee jones has been playing it as a cowboy in just about every film he has ever made, regardless o' whether or not he were in an actual western. no country for old men, while often getting the "neo-western" faux label, were clearly a western and tommy lee jones were fantastic in that film. no country is actual one o' our favorite westerns... evar. am doubting hollywood ever stops doing westerns... even after tommy lee jones finally dies. HA! Good Fun!

makes even less sense for the eagles when you consider how much guaranteed money they will now have invested in THREE quarterbacks, making it even less likely to be able to build a team around their new first round draft acquisition. even so, is a good move for the browns. feels unnatural to say, "good move for the browns." the real winner is manifested... and his chargers. laremy tunsil was not gonna be available at #3 if the titans had stayed at #1. the browns were obvious not sold on wentz as a qb, so the consensus #1 ol in the draft mighta' been gone w/o the browns-eagles trade. chargers is guaranteed to now have a chance to choose the #1 guy on their board, regardless o' whether that guy is tunsil or ramsey or whomever. great news for the chargers. HA! Good Fun!

Nah. You made a statement in your ignorance, that turned out to be technically right, just barely: a : more than one <several pleas> b : more than two but fewer than many <moved several inches> c chiefly dialect : being a great many http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/several "Several" writers. Not really, no. Just three, one of which did only additional (read: minor) work. And I didn't address the rest of your post because it's your typical contrarian hogwash that is rather devoid of substance: you said that the SW example was non-analogous (remember: your saying it is so doesn't make it so), and yet went on to claim that you wouldn't care if the narrative were good. But that's an irrelevant cop-out, because in this case the narrative isn't good. The onus is on her to prove that she can produce good writing. The rest of your counterexamples are also irrelevant as they pertain to original works, not sequels to well-established franchises, when the author is already under scrutiny for having attempted what a part of the original works' fanbase consider nothing but cashgrabs, or simply don't apply because there are no discernible political agendas affecting the final product. Another swing and another miss. Keep it up and you're going to pull a muscle. Again, whether you would be bothered or not is a cool story, but I couldn't care less. Your personal sensibilities and tolerance for arrogance are not a basis for anything, let alone the way other people should react to stuff. Talk about stupid and deluded. And no, I have nothing to get over. I didn't like Scott's statements. I didn't like the way they reacted to the controversy, banning people left and right and insulting critics. I didn't like that Oster asked for BD denizens to brigade themselves. So if they keep it up, I will simply not give them money in the future. Unlike you, who apparently have seen the need to give them money to make a point of some sort, I'm not losing any sleep over it. beat that horse to prove us right, eh? "several" in quotes and everything, eh? do a search o' previous page of thread for "several." six uses... all by #s. were not an essential point, but you were the one arguing it, incorrect, 'gainst yourself it seems. there were a few folks who got sod writing credits, but lord only knows why you would seize on such a point and fail at such in multiple posts. the rest? well, is becoming spam. maybe you should just try and get over it, yes? HA! Good Fun! ps we clear ain't worried 'bout phrasing

too bad kickstarters were after heinlein's time, 'cause if heinlein had ever suggested such a project and needed funding to get lotr rights, we would chipped in more than the $20 we spent on sod. heinlein "shoehorned" (HA!) his politics into all his novels... and he had terrible novels as well as great works. such a lotr project reminds us how much we enjoyed glory road. #s wanna quibble over a relative insignificant aspect o' a very long post... then can't accept when his correction is actual wrong? *chuckle* that "get over it" advice appears increasing useful. HA! Good Fun!

no real problem here that we can see. as you note, the sjw aspect is minor, which marginalizes whatever problem could possible exist. furthermore, observing that the inclusion o' new elements in an expansion to a game released in 1998 as problematic is a suspect proposition at best. is few franchises that do not evolve and change over a similar amount o' time. compare evolution o' james bond, battlestar galactica, star wars, etc. a developer locking self into decades removed values and influences would be foolish. "piggyback issues into a popular game series that weren't there beforehand," is clear not a problem for any number o' franchises. in fact, one suspects that failure to do so would constitute a much greater potential problem. and if one o' the many beamdog contributors threw in a "critique of fascism" on the scale o' the sjw elements described in sod, we doubt many would be concerned. if the addition o' new elements to the series amounts to "shoehorning," that is a problem, but the issue is one o' skill. but again, the problem, if it exists, would appear limited given the scope o' the sjw element actual added to sod. as for why we responded to #s, we made that clear. even underlined stuff as we know #s has a hard time keeping up with us at times. swing. we responded 'cause your star wars example were non analogous and 'cause, as we has said multiple times, we ain't surprised 'by the idiotic and overblown reaction, but we is disappointed. am also gonna suggest you take your own advice and "get over it." am not just talking 'bout sjw fixations neither. swing. aside: "Not even the political agenda, mind, but the high-and-mighty attitude, which is what has rubbed me the wrong way." phrasing. HA! Good Fun! ps and since #'s wants to quibble, there is an additional person who got writer credits on sod: liam esler. swing. miss. strike 3.

Source? https://archive.is/4HIow#selection-4325.1-4341.5 Everyone has a hidden agenda. Except me! - Michael Crichton Yeah... if only Scott were as entertaining a writer as Crichton was, though. Huh, that's pretty tame. "I like to create diverse characters" is hardly the same as "I'm going to cram my agenda down your throat!" But hey, to each their own. You're cherrypicking, but that's not even what she said. She also self-identifies as a SJW in the same post, and in this context, it's not a good thing. She's a Sarkeesian (of "disagreeing with me is harassment" fame) follower. But really, it's only "pretty tame" because you happen to agree with the agenda. I'm guessing that if some writer working on Star Wars VIII happened to be, say, a hardcore communist and defended his right to appropriate the IP to use as a soapbox for his political bull, you wouldn't be so cool with it. Because that's what happened - the stuff in the game is pretty tame indeed. She didn't really shove anything down anyone's throat that I could observe. From her statements, though, she clearly reserves the right to do so if she wanted. Are you surprised that people reacted badly? As far as I'm concerned, she's welcome to do all the "SJW games" she wants. She gets better at writing plots and characters and I might even buy some. not surprised. disappointed. again, throughout history, a considerable proportion o' entertainers has promoted some kinda agenda. *chuckle* a significant proportion o' entertainment has only been possible 'cause patrons has paid the bills for entertainers, and quite often those patrons got motivations other than a pure advocacy o' the artform. individual artists, free o' patron influence, is no less likely to have an agenda. again, we would be here prohibitive long if we tried listing artists and art that were promoting an agenda. is utmost naivety to be surprised that a beamdog writer is promoting an agenda o' her own through stories. complain that the beamdog writer's advocacy were crude and detracted from the narrative is a valid and reasonable complaint. is one reason we complete supported peter jackson dropping the Scouring of the Shire portion o' lotr from his movie trilogy. when writers is clumsy and inartful in promoting their agenda, we criticize. however, we do not simple reject a piece o' entertainment 'cause we dislike the entertainer's obvious agenda. we already mentioned the dallas buyer's club as an example, yes? dallas included more than a couple great performances, but we disliked the agenda. so? but perhaps we gotta embrace nerd culture a bit more to make a point in this place, eh? frank miller's politics is divisive, to say the least. http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/11/13/batman-artist-frank-miller-calls-occupy-wall-street-protesters-pond-scum/ frank miller has been unabashed 'bout injecting his politics into the narrative o' his stories... though is kinda amusing that before the internet were anything other than a mote in the corner o' al gore's eye, miller's personal political agenda were a relative non factor when discussing his stories. at the time of its publication, tdkr were judged on its own merits. ah, the good old days. is much harder to discuss tdkr or 300 in 2016 w/o having miller's politics become a pivotal concern. wanna discuss heinlein novels w/o addressing the authors' personal politics? go ahead, we dare you. am suspecting that it is gonna be difficult to find many folks who share heinlein's unique libertarian (borderline anarchist) politics, coupled with his advocacy o' a strong military and his clear patriotism. a free love advocate who made the terrorists his heroes in the moon is a harsh mistress, but who also were the first scifi author to have a novel on the recommended reading list at all three US military academies, were bound to offend many people. heck, God were the ultimate antagonist in heinlein's job: a comedy of justice. heinlein challenged his readers. heinlein were not afraid that his transparent political agenda had a tendency to offend. "if some writer working on Star Wars VIII happened to be, say, a hardcore communist and defended his right to appropriate the IP to use as a soapbox for his political bull," we wouldn't care one whit just so long as the narrative were good. heck, you actual observe that regardless o' the writer's claims, she did not actual "shove anything down anyone's throat." so, are we doing phrasing? anywho, 'ccording to #'s, there were no deepthroating o' the agenda and what sjw elements made it into the game were, "pretty tame." ... am not certain where is the justification in creating a negative review campaign 'cause o' a single beamdog writer's (of which there are a few) comments. we sure as heck do not reject entertainments just 'cause a contributor to the entertainment claimed that she had a right to inject sjw elements into the narrative. stoopid and delusional... and the real tragedy is that there appear to be more than a few stoopid and delusional fans, but as we observed from the start, we is not surprised. disappointed. HA! Good Fun! ps unlike bruce, Gromnir ain't an sjw. the tendency o' liberal media and hollywood to overcompensate in its efforts to protect the feelings o' every underrepresented race/gender/ethnic group makes our blood run cold. is likely folks are offended 'cause the george washington being portrayed in that amc tv show ain't a deaf latino woman... who engages in regular same sex encounters. we got no issue with challenging traditional roles, but frequent the results is so clumsy that the only rationale we see for having indulged such nonsense is appease the sjw nincompoops. am hardly a member o' the sjw army. even so, as we has said before, we hate lack o' fairness. beamdog and sod got treated unfair in spite o' our animosity towards most sjw advocacy. stoopid and delusional and unfair trumps our irritation with sjw overkill... and as the sjw elements in sod is admitted "tame" is hard to claim overkill.

good for the browns. bad for the world. am pretty sure that one o' the signs o' the apocalypse is Cleveland Browns making smarty personnel moves. 'course, am pretty sure that it is only a sign for the Church of All Worlds and most folks no longer grok Valentine Michael Smith. HA! Good Fun!

based on the food threads, you are a vegan the same way that Gromnir is an omnisexual, hippie, soccer fan who listens to jazz... and solves crime. back to the thread... the revelation that a person who creates entertainment has an agenda is... not. is not a revelation. directors, musicians, writers and actors who gots transparent political and personal agendas that they advance at every opportunity is not new. we could literal be here for hours listing the entertainments and the entertainers who unabashed has advanced their causes through their art and entertainment. furthermore, based on reviews from people who has actual played sod, people who observe that the sjw elements included in ssod is minor and hardly even noteworthy, to rail 'bout a beamdog's agenda pushing writer(s) and to use sod as an example o' the terribleness o' the politicization o' games seems more than a little misguided. "delusional" appears to fit quite nice. HA! Good Food!

if you manage to get a few thousand o' your equal deluded friends to create a bs review campaign, and it appears that the lowest common denominator is buying into your nonsense, then for a game Gromnir were already planning to buy, we will likely once again forgo our traditional six month (or more) wait for any and all new games purchases as a way to express our rejection. purchase dollars is the only Real measure, and is amusing to us that hp already invalidated his expressed opinion by expressing your approval with dollars. so, knock yourself out, but am gonna chalk this up to predictable obdurate narcism more than a genuine attempt to get Gromnir to buy games we otherwise would not. *snort* new spells is bad? HA! Good Fun! ps as usual we cannot make heads or tails o' much o' junai complaint.

browns face a couple problems. first is getting value for their pick. there is an actual trade value chart for draft picks... no joke. pick #2 is worth 2600, and pick one in worth 3000. http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php potential franchise qbs are almost invariably overvalued by those who hold the pick, so getting value is tough.... which brings one to second problem: nobody wants to trade away a franchise qb. you can win in the nfl without a franchise qb, but it is tough. teams know that virtual all needs at other positions could be filled, but w/o a good qb, one is likely gonna be doomed to mediocrity. pass on a franchise qb is considered foolish. that being said, trade the pick makes sense to us. whoever plays qb for the browns next year is gonna be deserving a special kinda hazard pay. david carr, a promising qb who could make all the throws and were universal lauded by scouts and gms, were mauled in his first couple years in the league. am suspecting that regardless o' wentz's talent, he would suffer a historic bad season or two in cleveland before there were even a possibility o' the situation improving. considering that the guy is coming to the nfl from ndsu, the learning curve would be a bit steep. add insult to (inevitable) injury and have him lead the browns to guarantee failure is hardly an ideal way to groom a young qb. take the picks and drop down in the draft makes sense, but given the haul the titans received, the browns is gonna feel they deserve value similar as adjusted by the linked chart. am suspecting the browns ain't gonna get such value. consensus is that the rams gave too much to move. expect proportional stoopidity from another team could result in disappointment. am admitting that there is kinda a quality logjam after the top five guys + 2 qbs. the qbs is overrated, but such is the nature o' the nfl. tunsil and ramsey are consensus elite prospects. bosa would be in the same category as tunsil and ramsey, but he has enough off-field red flags to drop him into our borderline elites: jack, buckner and the aforementioned bosa. the next 7-8 guys is excellent prospects, but they all got some issue or two that keeps 'em from being instant starters who likely reach the pro bowl at some point in their career. and then there is the rest o' the first round guys who all got similar grades from most scouts... save for robert nkemdiche who is pretty much daring nfl teams to draft him every time he does an interview. other than the top 5 guys + 2 qbs, we wouldn't be shocked by any team that chooses need instead o' so-called best player available, 'cause after 5+2, the rest o' the first round has similar talent. this is gonna be one o' the few years wherein we don't wonder why such-n'-such team were so stoopid for choosing __________ with the __ pick. doesn't actual look as if it much matters after 5+2. 'course the remainder o' the draft will have plenty o' surprises to make up for a relative unbreakable first round. HA! Good Fun!

Nope, but as I have said, this review has informed me on all of the issues, which I was worried about, and previous reviews, despite being solid, did not talked about all of them. And I know, from his posts, that he had similar oppinion about some of the bull**** which Beamdog might have put in the game, so if he does think that it was way overblown, I might find that after playing the game as well. Of course, only when the price hits the sweet spot for me. Not gonna pay full price on this, because I have my reasons and oppinions as well ;-) there is any number o' fan and profeshnul (HA!) reviews that has already observed that the reaction to the sjw element o' sod were overblown. the fact that you believe #s and not the dozens o' other folks who made similar observations is not surprising... and am not actual being critical when we say that. reviews is largely pointless unless you have some kinda appreciation for the reviewer's pov. long time ago, Gromnir used desslock as a decent measure 'cause whether or not we quibbled with him over aspects o' his reviews, it were near guaranteed that if desslock liked a game, so too would Gromnir. right or wrong o' a reviewer is largely besides the point, and the resulting numerical review scores is silly. find a reviewer that has similar opinions as you got is what matters... 'least that is what matters to Gromnir. example: we saw hiro p's comments where he were irritated 'bout sod adding new spells and some o' his other quibbles and we knew right then and there that we could ignore his review o' sod, 'cause we sure as hell would expect new features, including spells, in a bg expansion. is MANY people before #s review that identified how overblown were the reaction to the sjw element, and folks telling Gromnir that a new release from beamdog is buggy is kinda like giving us a heads up that the sun will rise tomorrow. from the gameplay videos released we had a decent grasp o' how sod would play even before we read reviews. most other numbers observations we will ignore as we find little common ground regarding his remaining concerns. the writing in bg were... bad. the joinable companions, as we noted earlier in the thread, were woeful underdeveloped in bg, so being annoyed by beamdog changing o' companions struck us as an asinine complaint. am also thinking folks got a serious overblown recollection o' the writing in bg and totsc. considering that sod is a freaking expansion o' bg, we didn't expect much improvement o' the writing as 'tween bg/totsc and sod, which meant we expect little. from what we could see, sod were being sold as a nostalgic bg EXPANSION that looked as if it played more like iwd than bg. most reputable reviews we read confirmed what we had seen and heard previous to the game's release. most folks who we knew who actual played the expansion were finding the sjw agenda as being a tangential non-issue in actual gameplay. therefore, we found the ubiquitous attacks o' beamdog as unfair. mamoulian needed #s to convince him o' what Gromnir already believed regarding the overblown aspect o' the so-called sjw agenda? fine. mamoulian is actual using reviews the way, the only way that Gromnir would recommend. find a reviewer with whom you is sympatico. metacritic scores and the vast majority o' reviews is gonna be utterly useless to the average reader. find the reviewer whose opinions resonate. even so, it kinda looks like the lol is on mamoulian, eh? HA! Good Fun!

cover? yes. am knowing The Band is a bit too hillbilly for the locals, but we like their cover o' atlantic city. HA! Good Fun!

another fantastic cover... though am not sure if it actual counts as a cover. is so many versions o' the song that to call "cover" o' such an old folk song is meaningless. am actual not sure o' the folk song's origin, but am betting it predates guthrie and leadbelly. HA! Good Fun!

Guys you mustn't be anti-Romance, Romance adds a more realistic level of character interaction and makes characters generally more memorable Also isn't Romance optional? Romance? Never said anything about romance. This will be the first IE game I drop. Mainly because of the developers' overbearing arrogance, snickering attitude and slight disdain for the whole thing. It's as if they're too old for this stuff, and can't be bothered to take it seriously anymore. I was chastised a year ago on the PoE boards for praising Trent and his EE series. Obsidian fanbois told me he was a hack cashing in on the IE series. You know what? They were right. I know my $20 won't be missed as they'll probably cash in on this travesty anyway. If only they lost a bit on this, they'd realize they can't take a dump on the customers and still make money. It's not a big deal. I was hoping for a little IE snack, instead I am to be schooled in liberalism by leftist US activists who suddenly feel the Scandinavian Bern. Someone once called me a socialist nincompoop. I must say I find it a bit amusing to hear him support some bra-burning socialist. Maybe he has a heart after all. complain o' bad writing? fine. converse, complain that you is being "schooled in liberalism by leftist US (kanadian?) activists" is the behavior o' a nincompoop. dallas buyer's club complete distorts facts and is most unsubtle 'bout its agenda, no? walk outta that movie seeing fda as the bad guys is complete understandable as the movie is mostly a pseudoscience indulgence on par with the claims that immunizations is a cause o' autism. even so, dallas buyer's were a well acted and entertaining movie. 'course we would be here all day listing the novels, movies, music and other forms o' entertainment that unapologetically school the audience, but two obvious examples is worth listening to. or our favorite stones song am gonna avoid being so gauche as to include bob dylan or pink floyd. hell, even comics is unapologetic and transparently political. marvel's civil war? watchmen and tdkr is 'bout as subtle as nukes that figure so prominent in both titles. quite often Gromnir rejects the agenda while being able to appreciate the art. as we noted already in this thread, Fallout subjected the audience to frequent and unapologetic schooling. am personal unable to indulge in the kinda hypocrisy that would allow us to embrace Fallout's US activist writers while vilifying the Kanadians at beamdog. unfair. our politics aside, we loathe manifest lack o' fair play. shady played and completed sod, and while we do not share his fascination with vampires or his dislike o' poe, we has some respect for his game opinions. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/85798-baldurs-gate-siege-of-dragonspear-released/?p=1796963 http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/85798-baldurs-gate-siege-of-dragonspear-released/?p=1797529 so, the sjw elements that has so many in a twist were largely missed by shady? is likely that the reason he missed is 'cause such elements is minor, no? shady sands seems like an intelligent guy to us. if he missed the insulting leftist schooling, am suspecting it ain't a particular noteworthy element. that being said, we agree that if such obviously limited elements is shoe-horned into the game and do not improve the game or the narrative, then such stuff is a flaw, albeit a seeming minor flaw given their scope. we see most complainers o' the sjw elements in sod, a game we has not yet played, a game that many o' the complainers has not yet played, as being most unfair. and again, we don't like unfair. have always been against unfair, even when the victim o' the lack o' fair play is a nincompoop. HA! Good Fun!

is unlikely hurl and val would ever be on the same boat... 'cause val would no doubt refuse a berth on what is obviously a cia front meant to ship weapons, drugs and human slaves to _________, with the military-industrial complex using its control o' the media to camouflage hurl's ship o' fools from public view... but you would know all o' this if you would just read the Constitution. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna break our rule 'bout not buying a game earlier than 6 months after release. we will purchase sod. am not gonna play sod for another five months, but the utter insanity we has seen regarding feedback for this game has convinced us that it is worth $20 to fundamental reject the fear o' "leftist propaganda" being inserted into the bg series. in addition, rarely has we seen a title subjected to such inane technical quibbles. also, the rose-hued recollections o' the quality o' bg writing is enough to make us vomit a little. for all we know sod might be utter crap, though most folks we know who has actual played and completed the expansion seemed to enjoy themselves. nevertheless, regardless o' sod quality, am gonna purchase. am not purchasing to support beamdog but rather to reject endemic and persistent stoopidity. HA! Good Fun!

equip. save. reload. HA! Good Fun!

can't be as bad as the decade o' emotional crushing the sharks visited 'pon their fans from 2001-2011. am suspecting only a 1990s buffalo bills fan could understand that kinda pain. HA! Good Fun!

great and unexpected covers are a special delight. am a leadbelly fan who is not particular o' nirvana possible best cover for us is am such a fan 'cause the original were HA! Good Fun!

pets are personal property. there are scenarios in which personal property has value different than market value, but such stuff is limited. start by discussing "sentimental value" and you are doomed. pictures and various heirlooms may be given value by the courts when they have no actual market value, but please observe that such values given to photos and the like is gonna be less than would be typical cost to actual replace a dog. we are talking very small values 'cause is 'posed to fill in the gap wherein the destroyed property has 0 market value. courts has wisely avoided attaching value to companionship of pets as that is the role o' the legislature. perhaps legislatures should attach value beyond market, but that is a whole different issue than is being argued by mostest folks. is not the role o' the courts to invent new law. however, before you go out and lobby your Congressman to change laws regarding pet value, please consider the adverse impact on the average pet owner. in the end, is gonna be the consumer who bears the actual costs you seek to impose 'pon vets and kennel operators. regardless, the law is well established in the courts, so go pester your legislators. oh, and one more thing... HA! Good Fun!

peaches HA! Good Fun!

am thinking jacobs had more upside (*groan*) than henry. college and the nfl is different. the alabama ol consistent opened holes according to playbook. henry didn't need much o' a hole to exploit for big runs-- he was a great college rb. am not underestimating how great were henry. only took henry a little daylight. unfortunately, in the nfl, a rb typical needs be far more aware than in college, 'cause chances are that hole #1 is not gonna be available. also, being aware that a cutback lane has sudden opened is wasted in the nfl if the rb does not have at least good acceleration from change o' direction. film o' henry highlights a particular flaw regarding acceleration outta a cut. far too many negative plays at the college level. a great college qb can thrive despite only decent accuracy if he has good athleticism and great awareness. that great college qb will fail in the nfl. time and time again we see that if the shortcoming is accuracy, the college superstar fails in the nfl regardless o' other qualities. similarly, a nfl rb needs to be able to make at least one good cut. not need to be barry sanders or gale sayers. one cut. if the rb cannot accelerate outta the cut, he is doomed to being a situational back... at best. am seeing henry as an nfl bust. HA! God Fun!