Gromnir

fixed HA! Good Fun!

... is a bit like hearing that a person has managed to fill a 1-gallon container with their own collected toenail clippings, or bellybutton lint. 'pon learning o' the exploits o' yet another edmund hillary, we experience a fleeting, morbid curiosity that impels us to ask why a person would bother to dedicate themselves to such a dubious goal, but then we happily dismiss the peculiar hobbyist's distraction du jour as representative o' the human condition's disturbingly common carnival side-show attraction quality. HA! Good Fun!

a sinatra gang and fergie suggesting that fo:nv will have more humor? clearly obsidian doesn't "get" fo. HA! Good Fun!

the first matrix had a kewl factor due as much to the aesthetic as the material. we loathe keanu reeves... and the story as a whole had that kinda ridiculous anime quality that keeps us from being able to appreciate Japanese sci-fi. nevertheless, matrix, at the time, looked amazing... and Larry Fishburn and Joe Pantloliano were excellent... as were Elrond. "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson." HA! Good Fun!

the last two decades has kinda been weak for sci-fi... at least as far as Gromnir is concerned. from late 60s (Planet of the Apes, 2001... to name a few) through the 70s (Clockwork Orange, Star Wars, Alien, Mad Max... and numerous others) and into the early 80s (Empire Strikes Back, Blade Runner, Terminator & Aliens) there were some absolute fantastic sci-fi films. sadly, we would have a hard time come up with even 5 sci-films we thought of as genuine fantastic since 1985... though it is nice that we finally got a decent star trek film. proviso: if we throw comic book superhero flicks into the mix as sci-fi, then we can add a few recent movies into the pot. Dark Knight and Iron Man were excellent. HA! Good Fun!

That is ridiculous. At a certain point people need to learn that some people are jerks. Being a jerk is not a crime. Attacking someone for being a jerk is. yes. good thinking. so the school administrator should do... what? give the assembled and agitated hispanic students a stern lecture; tell them that they is being unreasonable and that they should all grow up. is that the plan? after violence erupts, you may then suspend the hispanic students for their misbehavior. no doubt racial tensions will significantly decrease following the fight and subsequent suspensions. as angry as the parents is that their innocent and patriotic lambkins were treated unjustly by the school administration, one wonders how much more furious those parents woulda' been if their children had been injured during a fight. oh sure, maybe their son is suffering from some stitches and lost a tooth, but at least his First Amendment rights were protected. *chuckle* you is gonna have a difficult time finding a more ardent defender o' free speech than Gromnir, but we is also recognizing that the school administrator has got to consider student safety as paramount. we woulda' handled different, but am understanding that the first and natural reaction when preventing a fight is to blame the kid who were being the agitator. the kids with the bandannas and tee-shirts knew what they was doing. even though we woulda' done different, we complete understand the school reaction in a potentially volatile heat-of-the-moment scenario. @ boo "Alright. Explain please why wearing the US flag on cinco de mayo is agitation? " eh? read the article linked on the front page. the hispanic students felt that they were being intentionally "disrespected." you may honestly not see any reason for agitation, but do you honestly believe that the kids with the American flag garb were equally naive? whether you or Gromnir believes that hispanic agitation were reasonable is an interesting topic for debate, but how does our abstract arguments aid the the teacher or administrator who is attempting to prevent violence from erupting? once the likelihood o' violence becomes apparent, does the school not have a duty to intervene? as we stated already, we would not have attempted to force the students with the American flag tee shirts to remove their garb, but once the school went down that route they were kinda stuck... HA! Good Fun!

1) am not arguing that the hispanic reaction were justified am not even gonna touch the justification issue, 'cause that is a whole different question. regardless of whether or not the hispanic student reaction were justified, am thinking it is obvious that the kids wearing American flag garb were trying to agitate their hispanic peers. jerks. 2) you is over-simplifying the immigration issue is not simply 'bout illegal immigration, but again, that ain't really the issue in the present context. legitimacy o' hispanic anger got 0 to do with whether or not these kids was being jerks. 3) "I dunno Grmonir, maybe what those kids did was right an necassary." so, they were kinda like modern day Rosa Parks? *chuckle* am thinking you is giving far too much credit to these kids. as we already stated, we not think there is anything objective wrong with wearing an American flag tee shirt on cinco de mayo. by the same token, if Gromnir were an administrator at that school, and we genuinely were concerned that violence might occur as a result o' the jerk-squads"patriotism," we woulda' done something to protect our students... all of our students. you think that it were necessary to start trouble at a school? why? keep in mind that we is talking 'bout kids. you really think it were necessary and appropriate to fight this kinda battle at a school? is not as if we is talking 'bout a political rally being held in a park somewhere... is a school, with kids in their teens. expecting the hispanic kids or the jerky kids to act like adults is unfair. demanding that these kids understand the Big Picture is also unfair. we got in more than a few fights in high school. in point o' fact, we got in lots o' fights. we attended an inner-city school in Chicago. more than half the fights we got involved in were race related... 'cause we dressed white and talked white at a school that were near all black. (the irony being that we got in fights when we were in south dakota and north dakota 'cause we were native American.) you know how many fights we has been involved in since we graduated high school (not counting breaking up fights when we worked at juvenile hall)? none. kids fight. sometimes kids feels like they must fight. legally and morally we expect adults to know better, and to find civilized ways o' resolving problems... but it is different with kids. we tell kids that violence ain't necessary, but if a high school student (particularly at some schools) allows himself to get punk'd... or if he "turns the other cheek" and gets labeled as a b!tch, then his life for as long as he is in school is probable gonna be a nightmare. maybe you thinks that the jerky kids were justified. maybe you thinks that what they did were "right." fine. however, you ain't gonna convince us that what they did was necessary. "So you say they were making a statement. Even if they were, was it not fully within the bounds of the law, and apart from the bandannas within the rules of the school?" clearly you is not listening. please review. you took issue with us labeling the pint-sized agitators as jerks. we responded by noting that we didn't see anything objective wrong with wearing American flag tees on cinco de mayo, but the kids were trying to agitate. try to agitate, particularly on a school campus where you know that the administration or teachers is gonna have to step in and defend you if a fight does break out is not only jerky, but possibly a chicken **** move as well. you know, perhaps you should get into law. some o' our peers also has a hard time distinguishing between what is legal and what is appropriate or moral or jerky. there is all kinds o' things that Gromnir can do that is legal that any reasonable person would still recognize as being the actions of a jerk. HA! Good Fun!

am tempted to use the eye-roll gif. so, you think it were pure coincidence that the group o' kids wore clothes bearing American flags on cinco de mayo... and these kids were no doubt complete surprised at the negative reaction such garb engendered in their peers. okie dokie. look, as we noted already, the hispanic kids shoulda' ignored. the jerky kids with the American flags were doing to be contrary, but that not mean that the hispanic kids should necessarily rise to take the bait. if you is doing to be contrary, is hard to act surprised and innocent when your target demo gets riled, no? is there anything objective wrong with wearing an American flag tee-shirt on cinco de mayo. heck no... hey, you know what is even More unfair? if a handful o' hispanic kids had worn clothes with the American flags emblazoned one 'em there might not have been any problem at all. the Irish example ain't really applicable is it? as you already noted, "the Irish don't complain." wear an American tee-shirt in Boston on St Paddy's day in 2010 and it is unlikely to bother anyone. 'course what if the political climate 'tween the U.S. and Irish immigrants were different... what if tensions 'tween US govt. and Irish immigrants were high and certain States were enacting legislation targeted directly at Irish immigrants? what if it we had a flashback to the 1800's, and even American born Irish folks were feeling (and sometimes treated) like second class citizens? compare to Irish doesn't work, because as you already noted, the Irish folks wouldn't be likely to get mad if boo and his pals wore American flags on St. Paddy's Day. agree or disagree with hispanic students being Justified in their displeasure at seeing a group o' kids wearing American flags on cinco de mayo? that is a different query. if you does to because you is hopeful that target group A gets cheesed, and your target goes ahead and gets angry... *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

dunno 'bout that. the market boyz (nortenos) is far more likely to shoot their southern california affiliated counterparts (surenos) than they is to shoot some punks looking to stir up trouble on a school campus. 'course, in salinas we doubt most kids would risk such a move as they would probably be assured o' receiving a serious beating later. am not certain what the current status o' the salinas peckerwoods is, but those clowns might do something foolish on cinco de mayo. as for the actual incident... honestly, am not really gonna fault how the school staff reacted in the heat of the moment. 'course the district couldn't back 'em up on this one. but depending on the atmosphere on campus, an immediate and seemingly over-the-top reaction mighta' actual been appropriate. the kids with the American flag tees were being jerks. 'course, if every jerk kid were suspended, our schools would not have such overcrowding issues. in an ideal world, these jerky kids shoulda' been ignored by their hispanic peers... but what does an administrator do if they see that the hispanics on campus is NOT prepared to ignore the jerks? what would Gromnir have done? given our background, we would not have demanded that the jerky kids remove their patriotic garb. however, we woulda' escorted the kids to the school office and then informed them that, for their safety, we could not send 'em back to class 'less they removed their colorful bits o' Americana. we would claim that we had overheard threats directed at the jerky kids... though of course we would be unable to identify which other specific students made the threats in a crowded lunch/brunch setting. we would call parents and inform them o' the situation... making sure that the parents understood that our only concern were the safety and well-being of their children. no demand to remove, but inform that given the potential safety concerns, we would not be sending back to class dressed as they were. HA! Good Fun!

oops HA! Good Fun!

linky discuss HA! Good Fun!

is difficult to identify sarcasm in some message board posts. HA! Good Fun! All I'm saying is that a certain religion can and is regularly ridiculed pretty much without consequences while another reacts violently at the slightest provocation. I'm not actually contesting their violence, I'm contesting the spinelessness with which western politicians and media approach the issue as though it will correct itself on its own. A state's purpose is to protect its citizens first and foremost, not suck up to an aggressive and bullying policy of another religion/state/civilization. Especially in the absurd situation where that state (pick any major EU country) has superior military and economic might and has no need or obligation whatsoever to even consider the view of, in this case - the Islamic world. Eg: If we want to make cartoons of your prophet, we will because its allowed in our society. You can protest of course, but if you threaten death on one of our citizens who acted within the bounds of law, that is tantamount to a declaration of war. Equivalent measures have to be taken, and if the EU grew a spine and reacted properly these sort of things would not happen again. Which was the point all along. If they, say, stopped all trade with the appropriate countries for an indefinite time, as a punishment for the destruction of valuable Danish goods we'd have a much clearer situation. ok, so you were serious. ... am thinking that you is underestimating the number o' times American media "put Christ in a comical light." sure, you not see too often in major newspapers or news services 'cause such outlets is also concerned with keeping their customers, but lampooning Christ is not near as rare as maybe you think. HA! Good Fun!

how is there a "correct" here? there was something about the original games which gave me this "devotion" and reeled me in. those things, for the most part, are absent from Bethesda's version. those things (some more tangible and easily defined/explained than others) are things i want to return. that's as complex as the issue gets. it's not about right/wrong objectively speaking. 'least not from my perspective. there is indeed "correct." sure, is no "correct" when you are discussing matters of taste. you liked fo... is not possible for Gromnir to find fault in your like/dislike o' fo. 'course not all issues discussed on these board is simple matters o' taste. were fo1 jnpcs well-developed? were fo1 skills balanced? did twink sudden do 180 when josh pointed out that fo1 hand holding were more extreme? etc. some fo:nv issues discussed is not matters o' taste. there is "correct." adoration o' fo is not wrong. is many game developers that admire fo and maybe even enjoyed it more than does twink. there may be some developers that got into the biz Because o' their fascination and enjoyment o' fo. am well aware that immediate following the release o' fo2, there were numerous black isle developers that were eagerly anticipating the opportunity to work on another fo game... and they were greatly disappointed that black isle/interplay never managed to finish such a game. is loads o' folks in the industry (and possibly more than a couple at obsidian) who thinks fo were one o' the bestest crpgs evar. but so what? appreciate fo not mean you gotta defend fo design. is possible to like fo IN SPITE of some poor design, and there ain't nothing wrong with admitting that cain and co. didn't do everything right. there is "correct." being an fo apologist not make you incorrect. apologist label is nothing more than a way to explain certain inconsistencies... and a recognition that there is point beyond which rational argument is pointless. for example, Gromnir is a Robert De Niro apologist-- we purposely didn't watch Rocky and Bullwinkle or Righteous Kill as we didn't wanna have to confront the possibility that De Niro could give a bad performance. HA! Good Fun!

is difficult to identify sarcasm in some message board posts. HA! Good Fun!

not really, no. but in hoping the next game is improved, you usually discuss the issues you have with the previous games, correct? so i talk about the things which Fallout 1 or 2 did to make me fans of the series, and what Fallout 3 did to make me not a fan of Bethesda's direction. not too hard to understand, even though devils advocates or Bethesda apologists like playing this card. it simply isn't true. the issues i tend to have with Fallout 1 or 2 get brought up, but just not as often as there not only weren't as many...but certainly not as game-breaking for me. It's pointless tring to explain it. Once you've been branded a "FO Defender" or a "Bethesda Basher" people stop reading what you're saying and simply attach whatever meanings they want to your post. I still make my posts re: Fallout 1/2/3 and Bethesda but I don't bother going back and forth with people about them. Absolutely an exercise in futility. woe is you. to be labeled as a fo apologist (different than defender) you gotta show an obtuseness and a resistance reason similar to vol's comments concerning nwn or dragon age... or boo speaking of bg2. of course the fo apologist is not a absolute label but a helpful guide; aids in explaining bizarre inconsistencies and sudden reversals. very helpful. nevertheless, just as we does not dismiss every vol comment, we does not instantly ignore the response o' the average fo apologist... 'cause much as it is true that being paranoid don't mean "they" ain't out to get you, a slavish devotion to cain or the imagined fo ideal does not preclude the possibility that the fo apologist might be correct. HA! Good Fun!

we never realized that Ruth's hands were so mannish. HA! Good Fun!

1) He was a murderously effective melee combatant. 2) People like dogs. 3) He was sufficiently vague that people were able to mentally ascribe to him characteristics of actual dogs they knew and loved. witty dialogue and character growth not makes your list? dogmeat were comparable to hk-47... the original kotor incarnation. neither character existed beyond the surface level attributes, and both were disproportionately popular. hk-47 were, in point o' fact, a one-trick-pony. Gaider admitted that he got tired o' writing hk-47... added that assassin-bot encounter on korriban as kinda a personal penance. the psychotic robot had his "meat-bag" shtick. dogmeat had... his doginess? flat and static characters can be fun, but is hard to claim that they is well-developed, and if flat and static is describing your Best character, then something is serious wrong. am suspecting that for folks like slowtrain and twink, the genuine difference 'tween the poorly developed jnpcs of fo1 and the limited reactivity to player choice in fo3 were that the posters in this thread liked fo1 and didn't like fo3 as much. there is an understandable tendency to dismiss the shortcomings or mistakes of those works a person enjoyed. just as folks defend tolkien's prose style if they were fans o' lotr, the defenders o' fo1 have a difficult time finding fault with cain's game. HA! Good Fun!

I don't know if calling it a weakness is fair though. IIRC, Tim Cain was very clear that Fallout was considered a solo PC game with joinable characters who would tag along for a short time. The design goal was to have the pc start the game alone and finish the game alone. It's probably more a credit to the designers that the jnpcs turned out to be so popular rather than a mark of weakness. you are joking, no? trying to re-imagine fo jnpcs as a strength or deserving of applause is going a bit far. also, the fact that you start and finish alone is somehow necessitating that the characters be underdeveloped? why? the "best" fo jnpc were a friggin' dog. a Dog? spin however you may wish and you still end up with relative poorly written and under developed characters that added little more to the game than what were evident from their stats page... and maybe (frequently) they tried to shoot you during combat. writing as a whole were not the strength o' fo... which is fine. a sandbox game not necessarily need engaging characters and well-developed plot to be fun. is arguable that the more you develop a coherent critical path plot, the less freedom you is allowing the player, but that still ain't an excuse for failing to develop characters. there has got to be a reason to wanna continue playing in the sandbox, and the presence o' intriguing characters can only bolster overall game enjoyment. don't need 'em? fine, don't add... but if you is gonna introduce such characters and give 'em stories, there ain't no excuse for leaving 'em... lame. HA! Good Fun!

you realize that you is increasing the seemingly necessary luck factor? *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

Here, let me put it this way: even if we assume such a ban would be ineffectual (btw it wouldn't), how could it possibly hurt? Whoa, cool, irrelevant cases. The fact that I have established is that the Supreme Court can and has overridden the rights of the populace in the interests of the ruling class, especially in times of war. Coincidentally, the Holocaust occurred during a time of war. how can it hurt? is not a serious question, is it? btw, you still have not answered our query 'bout the legal rationale and mechanic utilized to ban nazi participation. (honestly... look the info up instead o' spouting the senseless party line. this is a situation where you could learn something, and if we simple give you the answer you will do your typical nonsensical rhetorical reply. Look It Up... figure out how the Germans ban nazi participation.) as for irrelevant cases... HA! is only irrelevant 'cuse you don't know 'em or didn't bother to look 'em up... though is kinda embarrassing if you is not familiar with most of 'em. regardless, you still not seem to get that you is sabotaging your own argument by suggesting that govt. can't be trusted in any event. HA! Good Fun!

Well, the M200 was designed for soft targets but take a few minutes to read up on its specs, it ridiculous what can be done with the complete system. Hell, even the host of Futureweapons was able to put 3 of 6 round into a human size target at 2530 yards! the biggest obstacle, until recently, were actually the ammo. cartridges have effective ranges too. max current is something like 2400 meters, which is considerably better than previous cartridges. in any event, it is our understanding that the reason the U.S. military doesn't even bother tracking accuracy beyond 1500 meters (the approximate max range o' the weapon the British corporal utilized?) is 'cause genuine battlefield conditions make shooting at such distances a matter of luck, as much, if not more than skill. max range is based on ideal wind and temp conditions and at sea level. once again keep in mind that the Canadian and British gentlemen were not using a cheytac intervention... no military currently does. *shrug* as noted above, the Canadian gentleman, a fellow by the name o' Furlong, couldn't replicate his feat under similar conditions. a hole in one. cheers. applause, but is not an accurate measure o' skill if you cannot do again... not that such is a criticism, 'cause nobody with similar weapons has pulled off same trick twice. HA! Good Fun!

the best you got is pointing out spelling errors? *sigh* some folks not know when to quit... though these continued faux pas of yours does make it easier to disregard your input. revised opinions after the fact and missing quotes that is the target o' your response as 'posed to the material you actual quoted. if you thinks the larp is amusing, you can probably only imagine what some o' us thinks o' your responses. keeps the grammar and spelling tips coming though. "Having some more unique content for them sounds good, just as long as they don't turn into the classic story-based RPG partymembers too much (where they feel pretty much integral to experiencing the game in a good way)." party-mates are static. as such they is a better vehicle for advancing a crpg story than is the protagonist, who must almost necessarily be left vague and ill-defined so as to accommodate various playing styles. 'course you could dispense with joinable npcs altogether and simply advance story through narration and dialogues with non-party npcs, but that is wasting a very effective opportunity. the black isle/obsidian folks managed ok w/o jnpcs when they developed iwd. nevertheless, forgoing jnpc development would seem to be a waste of obsidian talent. nevertheless, we will be satisfied as long as they don't have the jnpcs engage in tedious exposition or cliche navel-gazing. 'course not everybody thinks that the critical path story is genuine important in a fo game. makes a sand box and fill it with interesting characters and side-stories? is a valid approach. HA! Good Fun! ps we prefer developed party mates and we not have some kinda notions 'bout the propriety o' adding them to fo. a weakness o' fo were its poorly developed jnpcs... am not gonna try an re-imagine as a strength.

the Olympic medalist must replicate his feet of skill many times, regardless of the event. these distance records is never repeated. maybe this is some kinda misplaced patriotism that makes you fight so hard to defend. *shrug* lord knows we ain't claiming that the average guy at the range could pull off such a shot. what we is saying is that these wacky distance shots that the sniper is unable to reproduce under far less demanding conditions, is hardly indicative of some kinda high achievement among snipers. am not comparing to average guy at the range. if is a one in 1,000 shot for a sniper it is probably a 1 in 100,000 shot for freddie windershins from chelsea. again, if Tiger Woods sinks a hole in one on a par 4 we ooh and ahh like the rest of you... but we do not point to that single shot as being representative of his skill as a golfer. even for Tiger such a thing is a 1 in a thousand shot. HA! Good Fun!

i already addressed the actual issue. *giggle* uh, sure. ... gotta deja vu of your spork nonsense. "if the players screw up with their roll, bad for them, if they're screwed up because a weak enemy had a critical or they screw up the super-powerful-boss because he rolled 1 on his save throw, well, guess I'll just change that little number... innocent.gif" yeah, that is the typical dm/gm response... and is kinda like a crpg reload. most of us has allowed such similar second chances. doubt it = bad dm. game engines is rarely so gracious, but possibility o' infinite reloads negates the need for a helping hand. HA! Good Fun!

the three-in-a-row is not analogous for the reasons discussed above... come back on three different days is what would be difficult 'cause of having to account for different wind, temp, etc. if shot 1 hits, or is near enough to hit that your spotter can help, then immediately subsequent long range shots becomes far easier... but at the distances being described, the likelihood of shot 1 being anywhere in the neighborhood o' the target is so damned unlikely. at such distances it is not uncommon for a highly skilled sniper to miss targets by many meters... which makes it almost impossible for the sniper or spoter to correct subsequent shots. HA! Good Fun!