Amentep

I'm probably not the market for the card game (although I liked Culdcept, the only console card game thingy I've ever played), but I hope its good and finds its audience (and, of course, that something that maybe more to my interest is forthcoming).

Which - if it works as I understand it does - is a huge "screw you" to people who don't play their games with internet connections. Mind you I guess that's kind of expected in today's gaming environment.

I dunno, I'll need to see more. As an action RPG fan, that footage doesn't win me over or repulse me.

It's a year and a half old, but... I remember that quote now that I read it, as I thought at the time I'd want to see what PoE was like before buying written sourcebooks. BUT...maybe this is what its all about.

I'd be happy if they just got the quote right - IIRC it is supposed to be properly translated "And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

AFAIK they can't use the D20 system rules as its prohibited in the Open Gaming License; so the game would have to have its own rule system (presuming that they couldn't also license the D20 rules independent of the Pathfinder setting but that seems like a lot of rules...)

Fatale is very good.

Since I've started Sacred 3, I've also fired up Sacred 2 which I've been playing off-and-on for some time. Now I need to remember what my Dryad was doing (or start over, but that might be a nightmare).

I don't believe Risen was part of the original post question. Right now unless I get around to Risen 2 and it blows my socks off or if there are great reviews, right now I have no plans of getting Risen 3.

WL2 DAI PoE Assuming that they stick to the release dates I think they'll have. Mind you I'm certainly playing a lot more than those three games this fall. And if WL2, DAI and PoE landed on my doorstep tomorrow - besides being confused over how they were delivered months before release in some cases and also, in fact, when I got a doorstep - I'd be playing PoE.

Get a wall size flat screen tv and you can have ads on your wall now.

Maybe SAVAGE WORLDS, mixing the REALMS OF CTHULHU rules (from Reality Blurs) with Pinnacle's own RIPPERS line? I've not played the Savage World stuff (do like Deadlands in earlier versions, just have picked up the SW version) but know some fans who swear by it, and I think that may be the easiest way to approximate what you want (Call of Cthulhu would require some adjustments to fit in the Victorian lit characters, I think)

I've been going through the Cadfael ITV series w/ Derek Jacobi

I'm not going to watch an hour long video of a game I'm currently playing so can't address whatever points are made there, but anyone expecting SACRED 3 to be anything like SACRED or SACRED 2 wasn't paying any attention to the bankruptcy of Ascaron, purchase of the IP by Deep Silver and the development of the game by Keen.

So you would say that you are ok with mediocrity and banality in video games? Its perfectly possible to enjoy a game despite nitpickable areas. But then, in the end, what I care about is whether the story and the gameplay are strong enough together to propel me through the game. But then I also watch stuff like PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THE INCREDIBLE MELTING MAN for fun, so the ability for something to make logical sense and to be entertaining are never something I consider to be intrinsically linked, anyhow. I understand most people can't seem to watch this stuff without the MS3K people talking over the movies, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised to find game players who decide that they've got to be the video game equivalent to MS3K either.

So I've been playing Sacred 3. Divorcing myself from the expectations of the series (ie Diablo 2-esque ability tree combat in an open world and a weird sense of humor) the game is so far kind of fun. I can see logically why they've done certain things (the level design and general look feel an awful lot like Diablo III) and they still try to send you all over Ancaria (only this time, in discrete missions with some side missions instead of the open world with rampaging hordes...walking around). The sense of humor seems a little too broad though, whereas the humor in Sacred 1 and 2 seemed very...unique (or perhaps just German? ). There are still skill trees and some degree of character planning (but the system allows you to change on the fly by "unbuying" skill trees and development paths - presumably to make it easier to partner online). I'd have preferred an Ascaron Sacred 3 (and indeed I'm looking forward to Unbended from some of the former Ascaron team) but so far, for what it is its not a bad action RPG title.

Uhm no. Per the head of Larian themselves Divinity: Original Sin had a budget of around 5 million euro's which is more than 6 million US dollars. Obsidian had a budget of about 4.5 million USD. So Larian had at least a million more to play with, combined with the fact that they had their own in house engine to use which saved tons of time and resources which equates directly to money saved for other parts of the game. Wasteland 2's graphics looking good is a matter of opinion so there is nothing wrong disagreeing with me. That said I think the UI is painfully bad, the environment art is okay, but the character models are flat awful and look straight out of year 2002. You're a bit wrong. You're counting Larian's budget with Early Access on steam vs POE with no Early Access. If you compare KS vs KS then POE had double the amount. When POE is available at Steam Early Access you can be sure as hell it will make more than D:OS. They recently updated UI. It changed a lot from when I first tried beta. It's better now. Not the most beautiful but it works and is thematically fitting. Char models do look bad indeed. Larian had already funded D:OS and was quite clear the kickstarter was to adding stuff to a game they were already committed to funding and completing - as I recall. The money D:OS raised on Kickstarter was about 19% of the total budget indicated by Larian. Pillars wouldn't exist if the Kickstarter had failed; it is entirely funded from the fans as far as we've been told (I believe Feargus indicated Obs would absorb any overages if they existed on the game).

And nominated for WINTER'S BONE and AMERICAN HUSTLE

Wolf of Wall Street The Lego Movie I'd suggest both are extremely good at what they do, and will stand the test of time. Wolf of Wall Street is a 2013 film, released in December and nominated for 5 Academy Awards for the 2013 year. For my part I saw THE MUMMY RESSURRECTED (2014) - I do tend to enjoy any mummy film (its a character flaw) but this was one of the weaker efforts. I don't mind low budget films (and this is probably a microbudget film - the trek through the Egyptian dessert looked like someone hiking in the High Sierras) but I don't understand why so many low-budget scripts decide to pad their time out with pointless inter-character bickering instead of some other kind of character building. Add in some lame direction (we shouldn't know, for example, so early the motives of the dad character; also why so many two angle talking head shots?) and IMO the leads being more wooden than the supporting cast (never a good sign) and there's not much to recommend here (unless, like me, you have a soft spot for Mummy films). Then I watched TARGET EARTH (1954) - low budget sci-fi film about a small group of luckless individuals who miss the evacuation of a city and are stuck hiding from oversized robots destroying any human they find. Fun with Richard Denning, Kathleen Crowley, Richard Reeves and Virginia Grey (all familiar to old time movie/tv viewers - amid many other credit Crowly had a re-occurring role on MAVERICK, Grey on WAGON TRAIN, Reeves a perinnial gangster on THE ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN and Denning in other B-Movies (THE CREATURE WITH THE ATOM BRAIN and TV Shows (Mr and Mrs North, Michael Shayne, Hawaii 5-O). The film also has genre vet Whit Bissell in it (this time as a scientist as opposed to his usual military roles). Not the earliest role I've seen him in (that'd be THE CRIME DOCTOR'S DIARY from 1949). Overall movie was good if you like low-budget 50s sci-fi films.

To be fair, when PHENOMENA was released in the US (as CREEPERS) it was hacked to pieces (losing 20 minutes) and was, generally speaking, a mess. That said, I don't recall the CREEPERS cut being about an ancient evil (although I've only seen it once so maybe my memory is faulty on this point). The film is about a girl (Connely) with psychic powers to control/communicate with insects helping a paralized entomologist (Donald Pleasence) who has been trying to help track down a mysterious serial killer for the police with his knowledge of insect life cycles. The edits that I'm aware of mostly cut gore (it is an Italian giallo film) and two major dialogue sequences. Luckily most of the modern versions of the film are direct from the Italian version (which is very much superior and - in my opinion - Agento's best film).

Finished Tuned for Murder (I'd guessed wrong on who the ultimate villain was). Now reading The Smiling Dogs. So far we have politicians being driven crazy by visions of a short man with bright red skin leading a bright green dachshund lead by a chain of daisies. And the dog is smiling. Also something about mineral springs in Montana and at least three murders and two attempted murders. No clue how its all going to connect up yet.

There are a few, but I'd also look at, say, the Amish in America for example. Its a parallel society that has decided for itself what it needs within the confines of a much larger culture.

But understand, you've defined poverty and non-poverty, and declared that your version of poverty is bad. But the definition is still yours, not theirs. During the 40s and 50s there was a big movement to bring money and erase the blight of poverty from the Appalachia area of the US. But most of the people who grew up there never really knew they were "poor" until the government came and pointed out that getting water in a well and pooping in a hole was bad compared to tap water and an indoor toilet. And that's not to say they were stupid and just didn't realize that there were other meats to choose from than squirrel and opossum* for dinner. They had a different life than people in Washington, in New York or in Chicago had. And because they had a different life they expected different things out of it. Not better/worse but different. Understand that the "average indigent South African" at this point may not be a separate society within your society but a part of your society, and therefore remains culturally similar in expectations, if disenfranchised within the larger society. What we're talking about is more akin to if you went to, lets say, North Sentinel Island with a huge armed force and telling the Sentinelese that they're living in poverty and you're bringing them a better way of life and killing those who don't accept your way. Or going into an Orc encampment and killing them all and looting their bodies because they've been attacking people who wander on their lands. *for one thing, there were turtles, raccons and chipmonks.

Why are they less fortunate? Because they don't live like you do? The idea that - in generalities - you can "improve" the lives of "less fortunate" you're already assuming that your way of life is correct and those who don't live that life need your interference to be enlightened to your righteousness. Not sure what you mean here; Ebola hasn't really spread far from its sources (as far as we understand them) because of the way it transmits from animals to humans; a hemoragic fever like the hantavirus that is spread by air in rat droppings is much more mobile. Once in humans, we have a better understanding of how to prevent transmission there as well. With regarding WHO and Ebola though, I don't think anyone would argue that there aren't ways to educate people about public health to the benefit of all populations. Heck, even trying to stop the mentality where people with HIV would rape virgins with the idea that it'd cure aids isn't really the issue. To pull this to goblins and orcs, the cultures of the adventurers rarely have them lecturing orcs on disease tranmission, but more likely having them stick a knife in them and loot their corpses. In D&D IIRC Orcs don't even have a good diety to follow, so they're paper enemies, with no complexity supposed to represent the "evils" of the uncivilized there only to destroy the "good" culture, so thus must be destroyed first. Now far be it from me to say they need to be more than 2 dimensional, but I recognize that people can rightly see the problem built around a "cowboy and indians" ethos.

To me, I interpret what ashtonw is saying to be that tribal cultures in sci-fi/fantasy are often seen as backward subhumans in need of the enlightenment from (or eradication by) the main culture. Its a reinforcement of the type of cultural imperialism that says it is okay to play colonial and bring civilization to the savages because its for their betterment to be forced to follow your culture than their own. Mind you just as problematic is the Noble Savage view of primitive culture; in this scenario they should be embraced and emulated -- if not joined - because they have held on to an inherent "honesty" lost in modern culture. This view can eradicate an existing culture just as easily as the other...