Cantousent

PS:T and American McGee's Alice. I didn't expect much out of either and I still play both.

Yes. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry, but Volourn is correct. Great amounts of text alone doesnt make a game the greatest achievement. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry, but it's not the quantity of the text that makes PS:T great. It's the quality.

head permanently wedged up his own arse.... hahaha. Do you people stay awake at night thinking up this stuff?!? At any rate, PS:T is the greatest achievement in a CRPG to date.

I'm intrigued. If you were attacked by wondering monsters, presumably you'd get a distraction bonus. Depending, of course, what they were wondering about. For example, an orc wondering about what he was having for lunch might only attract a -1 distraction penalty on his attack roll. OTOH, let us imagine an evil fighter henchman seriously wondering about why that ugly barbarian has been promoted above him by his evil wizard boss might get a whopping -4. The possibilities are endless. If I were Evil Dungeon Overlord I'd put up notices to warn monsters not to wonder whilst on patrol. Lastly, gelatinous cubes and rust monsters aren't smart enough to wonder about anything much and do not attract a distraction penalty. Cheers MC <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hahahahaha! Monte strikes again! I especially like the evil henchman wondering about his promotion and the the gelatinous cube. Maybe the cube would wonder why he's not a gelatinous glob or some such. Anyhow, I can see making the players search for a couple of hours to figure out the enigmatic sign only to let them know, in the end, that it tells the monsters not to wonder... and to stay off the grass.

Hell, forget the nukes. I've always found that the computer players were always more than willing to declare war on me no matter what. I've only played Civ 3 at Monarch and higher, but there are some things that I find frustrating. First of all, as my numbered friend says, the emphasis for a successful late game must be early expansion. Did I say must? I mean MUST! I've heard of folks taking a small area in the middle game and winning in the late game. On the other hand, I've never seen it and I simply won't believe that the human player can accomplish this at higher difficulty levels. Something else that chaps my hide, and I think someone referenced this earlier, is that you can get into the mid game and find out that, even if you have a relatively large land area, you don't have some vital resource. Oil, Aluminum, etc. That puts even more emphasis on early expansion as you're not only trying to make up for the computer players' production and food advantage, you're trying to obtain resources and deny the same resources to the computer who, in the mid game, will use the resources to destroy you out of hand. Like I said, I want a challenging game, but the higher levels of Civ 3 are there for bragging rights only. Even so, I think I might pull out the game and play a few more games. Maybe I was overly harsh in my assessment. At any rate, if a game is frustrating, it's no great sin to lower the difficulty. Unless you only play so you can boast of your Civ playing skills.

I rather miss SP's presence, even if his constant attacks on P:ST get a little irritating. Hell, he could come complain a little bit, though.

The term literature is a shifty label. After all, the idea that P:ST is literature depends a lot on perspective. Personally, I think it does count as the beginings of true literature in a computer game. Since then, there have been some games that have stretched the envelope. Hell, there's at least one game that I don't doubt was based, in concept, on the P:ST model. The question is, if Shakespeare had written his works on toilet paper, would they be any less worthy? P:ST might not be Shakespeare. *Shrug* It might not even be literature. ...But it holds a promise that other games seek to fulfill. You might not like P:ST, but you might yet still enjoy the impact it has had on game design.

I admit that I might have shed a tear when Aragorn tells the hobits that they bow to no one. In fact, I know I still shed a tear or two when I read that section of the books. In the books, Sam jump up and says something along the lines of "all the dreams of my life have come true" and begins weeping tears of joy, and relief, and exhaustion, and, perhaps, grief, for the victory was not without loss.

I was just using it as a hyperbolic example. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I understood that. ...Or at least I'd assumed that. Actually, if anythying, I agree with you. If you want nothing but ugliness in your campaign, you should be able to include it yourself. Campaign books should give hints and pointers for creating a setting and one dedicated solely to a setting that makes Fallout look like fantasyland just has absolutely no appeal to me. Still, Dega is right concerning the statements about WotC and mature content.

There's always the danger that, because we know hype creates a false expectation and gives rise to false praise, that we will turn against something we would otherwise have enjoyed. I don't make the claim that your feelings for the film are derived out of hype any more than I suggest that any particular person praises the film because of the hype. Still, it is undoubtedly true that some folks bought into the hype and some folks rebelled against it. Nothing turns more folks away from a particular work than success. After all, if the unwashed masses enjoy a film, then there must certainly be something wrong with it. I'm happy to prove myself part of the unwashed masses (although quite well washed) by admitting I loved the films. My favorite was probably the Return of the King, even though I admit I thought Theodin's speech was the best of the film. I wanted to think better of Aragorn's rousing address, but it just fell short by quite a bit in comparison. My least favorite film was the Two Towers. While it's a tough call between Fellowship and Return for my favorite, there's no doubt that I enjoyed the Two Towers least. *shrug* I still thought it was a great flick. Maybe a little much of the last action elf.

Lionheart is getting a bad rap. I don't understand how folks can call Lionheart the most disappointing with games like MOO3 and PoR2 in the running. Unless, of course, they've never played MoO3 or PoR2.

I can't find the same size sink. I have a feeling I'm going to have to do some more major renovations, which means learning how I go about doing it in the first place. Unless you guys have some advice...

PoR2. I was so angry, but not so much because the game sucked. The game did suck. It sucked so bad, it was a vacuum. The real problem, though: they took the name of my beloved gold box game and besmirched its good name.

I have to cut a new hole for the sink. Really, if it weren't for the wonderful neighborhood, I would hate this house.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were.... I'd bet that Hades reads a lot of reviews.

It does. I was disappointed with Hearts of Iron. It was especially bad when compared to Europa Universalis II.

I don't rejoice at any person passing, although I do understand that there are people without whom the world is a better place.

We have a tile counter, but I'm a bit leary of trying to do anything about it at the moment. What I am determined to do, however, is to install a stainless steel sink.

http://www.lambiek.net/eisner.htm For those who love comics, this is a sad loss indeed.

Hey, I voted wrong! I voted for Pepsi, but the truth I don't even like sodas. Beer, now.... mmmmMMMMM Beer.

To be fair, I understand that Civ 4 will be an entirely new model. That's something that the developers couldn't claim for Alpha Centauri. We'll see how it plays, but I'm waiting until I hear from some friends before I buy this one.

For a fact, the AI cheats in all of the Civ games. In Civ 3, the game is really bad. I remember breaking into civ one and two and looking to see what happens at higher levels. It costs less food to grow. The production values for units and buildings are less. The happiness factor is almost entirely mitigated. Civ 3, though... Well, it's a game designed entirely around the bragging rights for folks who like to boast about how hard the game is.

Nope, Civ 1 is best. Civ 2 was great, but making me pay for my barracks really sucked! rat bastards!

Civ 1 is the best of the best.

First of all, I agree. My fireplace was painted an off-white color. The entire top of the brick mantlepiece has a different finish. It's smoother, so I removed the paint in little time and it has virtually no paint in the nooks and crannies. The two formost bricks on either side have the same finish. So, if you look from the right or left, you see two very smooth, clean bricks. The rest of the bricks have a rougher finish. They're beautiful. Different shades of red and dark colored brick placed in no particular pattern. Oddly enough, I agree, I managed to get almost all of the paint out of the nooks and crannies, but the remaining paint does create a nice effect. As for off-white v black? At least black doesn't so gleefully show soot marks that refuse to come clean. I would love to see pictures of your powder blue ceiling and black fireplace!