Amentep

It is what you have to deal with in that setting...which is why I'd never play it. Sounds the opposite of fun to me.

The populace population is popular to populate.

Hmmm, reading this made me remember I never finished 999...

I've gotten rid of a LOT of my game boxes and moved the discs to folders (exception being cartridges which are still in storage). I ran out of room for more boxes, for the most part. :|

Activision owns Arcanum AFAIK (via purchasing Sierra), so any game Obs did would be "Spiritual Sequel" only. Which wouldn't be bad, necessary, since I think Arcanum - while fun - did a lot of things that could be improved upon.

Its Obsidian, so I'm interested...but need to know much more about it.

I call them illustrated books using multiple panels per page and text to craft a story as opposed to picture books which has one illustration a page to illustrate the story; also there is clever use of design and panel-to-panel transitions to create story movement within the visual context. Usually after calling them this, people look at me funny.

LLL!

There's reference in the Ant-Man teaser to "The Accords"; I'd taken that to be some sort of governmental oversight to superheroes ala SHRA. The first trailer shows a large government document called "The Sokovia Accords". In the first teaser the implication is that the Accords bind Stark's hands in terms of dealing with Bucky, this makes me think that he has to bring them in. Because General Ross is there, I suspect that he's tasked with making sure all the heroes act according to the Accords or face further sanction. It may not be called the SHRA, but it has a lot of the same elements of it.

I think Winter Soldier under programming to take out a target with an explosion is going to be the substitution for Nitro vs. The New Warriors (who really weren't an amateur team - only two new members were on the team when Civil War happened from team who'd been in the previous ~100 issues). This will lead to the Superhero Registration Act. I think that will result in Cap siding with trying to help Bucky free his programing while Shellhead will want to bring him to justice to show the Registration Act works.

I think killing Raedric in favor of Kolsc is a pretty good example of a "good" decision coming back to haunt you. I mean, arguably the best outcome for Gilded Vale is siding with Raedric to kill Kolsc. Doesn't sparing Wirtan also come back to bite you in the ass later? Only if you drive him out of town, and he'll be all "But I'll die out there", so it's not really the benevolent thing to do. Mmm, I'm misremembering - I thought he was always with Gramrfel's group if he wasn't killed.

Yeah, I wonder what happened. I'm not a MMO player, but I know a few who were who thought some of the ideas they were trying to do could be really good if they panned out.

I think killing Raedric in favor of Kolsc is a pretty good example of a "good" decision coming back to haunt you. I mean, arguably the best outcome for Gilded Vale is siding with Raedric to kill Kolsc. Doesn't sparing Wirtan also come back to bite you in the ass later?

Point is the end isn't directly important to whether there is a God/gods/goddesses or not. The Engwithans found no evidence of god - but absences of evidence isn't evidence of absence. For all the player knows, there actually ARE gods out there beyond what the Engwithan's created. The Engwithans decided that no proof of god meant there was no god and that unless there were gods there would be eternal fighting between the people of Eora. And so they made entities with powers beyond those of mortals, to manifest and prove the gods existed and who they were. To order even chaos by putting it in a box attached to relevant gods. The resolution of the game is only regarding the discovery that the current beings worshiped by many on Eora are Engwithan creations (and as an aside, there is the debate whether that is still sufficient to consider them gods). Nothing in the game establishes that there aren't gods other than the Engwithan one, and so it could be that there is some distant pantheon in the setting.

Pretty much. Stats drive combat, player drives narrative. I'd argue "An RPG is a game where stats drive conflict resolution and where the narrative provides, and is reactive to, player choice" personally. But then again what I think of as an RPG in video game wouldn't cut the muster in the P&P world.

They wed military men so they can sit at home collecting on a fat check of military benefits. Poor soldiers! Tricked into wedding leggy blondes! If only I'd known, I would have listened to the military recruiters more.

Interesting, I'd never have connected the actor for the ads with his earlier roles. Actor Mark Goddard has a similar story about moving to Hollywood and not wanting to lose a job overstated his horse-handling ability which IIRC led to him being unable to stop and riding out of shot until someone could stop the horse.

We're hurtling towards a point where our entire civilization as we know it is going to collapse in a few decades. I get it, you're not concerned, you'll be dead by then, but could you please not mischaracterize the irresponsibility that is probably going to cost thousands, if not millions of lives in the future as "disagreeing with the Federal Government"? It is not illegal to be "wrong" in your beliefs. In the 1970s the media pushed that a new Ice Age was coming (because of a 30 year cooling trend). This in spite of the fact that most scientists were predicting a warming trend and not a new Ice Age. Neither the media nor the scientists were charged by the DOJ at the time. That said the question in the posted video seems to be pointed towards a suggestion of a RICO style conspiracy by Energy Companies to mislead and endanger the public ala "Big Tobacco", which isn't 100% analogous to being prosecuted for being "wrong" either.

Liked the return of SHIELD too. Exciting episode all around, I thought.

Unlike the FF remake, though, the KOTOR one isn't an official remake but a "mod" by fans.

The Constitution has provisions for how you change it, so that's not really applicable. I think - and GD can correct me if I'm wrong - that any change to the Constitution needs to come from the method the Constitution provides for change. Not because politicians or courts want to ignore the limits of their power. In this parallel universe, Bruce got all the bimbos, that's why we're tlaking to him. ...so cold and lonely....

Yeah, I admit part of why I didn't see it when it came out was that I was afraid the film was going to be preachy as mentioned. The trailers didn't make it clear that it wasn't, either, and that made me really nervous. Its not a perfect film - but it is fun and I hope it eventually finds its audience.

"The system" isn't fixable by the public at large - they have little to no say in how the Republican or Democratic party works. The issue isn't about the actual electoral system (wonky as it is) but a peculiarity of the Democratic Party nomination system ran by the party itself. Only the big wigs in the party can fix that. Hillary, being a big wig who could win because of it, is unlikely to see a reason to change it. I'd imagine that most people who are running for the job - even seasoned politicians - don't really understand what they're getting into, so it's all good. In theory those Constitutional checks and balances are supposed to keep even the worst candidate from being able to run things into the ground. If they're allowed to work the way they're supposed to. Exactly my point right here! The constitution of the Unites States specifically FORBIDS the Federal Government from interfering with the governance of the states except in the execution of the responsibilities assigned to the Federal Government by the Constitution. Social things like gay marriage is not among those. That he thinks he can is a problem! That he does so and gets away with it is a bigger problem! This ship sailed when the states allowed themselves to be ransomed so they could keep getting federal funds if and only if they instituted things like seat belt laws*, IMO. It set the stage (again IMO) for the Federal Government to feel that by hook or by crook it could force the states to do what it wanted. And most of the states went "we need this money" and went for it. *This shouldn't be taken as some sort of statement that I'm against seat belt laws. Always buckle up, mmmkay?

I played it a bit with a friend, and even then I've found it to be extremely unenjoyable. It's one of the games where I really thought not even a price tag of 2€ is worth it. I liked it single player when it was just Zombies. But then they added superzombie types (exploding zombies?) late in the first area and the second area (or second and third?) and it just lost all appeal to me.

Can't say that I've enjoyed much he's put out since at least LOEG: Black Dossier (which was really the first thing he'd done I'd read I didn't enjoy). Not sure I'd say he lost it as much as he's decided to go in creative directions that I'm not interested in following him to.