Dark?Light Side differences

[Lord Tarondor]

Sure I can -- it was correctly used. The same 'ideology/idealogy' -- the ideology that if you dislike it, you cannot participate which is concept and a manner of thinking -- an ideology yields the following scenario: [insert scenario] which I believe is wrong.

[Lord Tarondor]

No, I was replying to your response to my post in which a simple spelling error occurred; since I did not see it since it was a simple one, I thought you meant ideology was not a variation of idealogy or vice versa.

[Yst]

Speling corections as an ad hominem aproach two intarnet argumentatoin? A path too the dark sied this is.

[Jellybelly]

What the hell are you talking about? To use an imagined and hypothitical scenario as an example to illustrate a point, or even argue with, is not by any means an IDEOLOGY. I have given a definition of the word, you supplied one, and there is no link between the term and the way you're using it.

 

And, you cannot have an "a" in there. There is no such thing as an "ideAology" or "ideAlogy".

[Lord Tarondor]

The idealogy is not the scenario -- the idealogy is 'If you do not like it, you cannot argue or involve yourself.' You can use hypothetical situations or hyperboles to convey an idealogy but it does not change it.

 

I used the scenario -- 95% of people who dislike prequels -- to show how it can be wrong: those people can get involved with Star Wars and since this has Star Wars forums and not just KotOR, I can be here without need for questioning.

 

 

Dictionary.com

 

2 entries found for idealogy.

Main Entry: idealogical, idealogy

variant of IDEOLOGICAL, IDEOLOGY

 

 

I suppose you'll start criticising me if I start spelling traveling, travelling, criticizing, criticising and so forth; you obviously meant I could not use an 'A', which is untrue -- I made a simple mistake in adding an o after it, but otherwise, it is perfectly fine.

[Jellybelly]

The idealogy is not the scenario -- the idealogy is 'If you do not like it, you cannot argue or involve yourself.'

That's not an ideology either.

 

However, you must realize that I do not question your right to be here.

[Lord Tarondor]

Yes it is an idealogy --it is a concept or manner of thinking that is widely held -- a cultural one, in fact, amongst Americans. It is comparable to if you do not vote, you cannot complain.

 

The first defintion describes it as a body of concepts concerning our lives and or our culture -- Star Wars can certainly be its own culture in this instance, but I won't even use it. The concept -- the general idea derived from specific instances or occurrences -- is that if you do not like the thing, you cannot complain or involve yourself in any discussion of it, similiar to if you do not vote, you cannot complain. I used a situation that isn't true and isn't supposed to be, to show how unfair such a concept and idealogy is.

 

Furthermore, I said the person was probably amongst the 'common-sense' wielding individuals, another comment that shows additionally what I meant, and that is that.

[JamieKirby]

I like anything starwars....well except Force Commander, i thought that game sucked. :/

 

I think Lucasarts are running out of ways to make games without screwing up the timeline. lol

 

Well, lets all hope they do a better job next time instead of rushing a game that imo would have rocked big time, so that it doesn't clash with a game that imo sucked bigtime.

 

but i won't hold my breath

[Lord Tarondor]

LucasArts isn't to be blamed -- the developer is just as guility, if not moreso. LucasArts is currently in a transition phase from seperate, mostly themselves involved decisions and situations to being right next door to LucasFilms.

 

I mean, simply, that George Lucas is moving all his divisions together, and the cutting of the KotOR'3 team and the shortening of development time were apart of those cuts. Besides, as I've said before, Blizzard Entertainment and Sony Online Entertainment are both capable of cranking out expansion packs to their original games within 6-12 months. Expounding, they create tons of new levels, tons of new systems and items, and sometimes tons of new characters and vehicles that work with the original.

 

Obsidian Entertainment was given a game that already had an engine, already had most things readied and they gave us a half-assed plot, a half-assed dialogue tree, half-assed quests, half-assed characters, and just about a half-assed game in general. They added few things and even those few things were just mimics of things already added (IE certain Force Feat graphics). The game is so buggy, its a wonder if they spent anytime testing it at all. This is not the fault of LucasArts -- this is just a rookie compiled team (with vets, of course) that got carried away with a story they should have known they couldn't crank out with their time allotment.

 

Hell, Avelone, in each interview, talks about how his teams took three damn years just to compile storylines and so forth and so I don't know; for what we got in one -- I'm not impressed.

[Althanis]

I think you're an idiot Lord. But apart from that you're right about the quality of the game. The graphics are very lame and extremely boring, running around the same bare coridors over and over is tiring.

 

Interplay did basically the same thing with their sequel to fallout, but it had as good a story and didn't come very long after the original, so it was still a lot of fun to play. KOTRII sucks badly in terms on the graphics, it took so long to come out after the original that it's engine is out of date.

 

And then there's the unfinished ending. I'm glad I didn't buy the game.

[metadigital]

LucasArts isn't to be blamed -- the developer is just as guility, if not moreso. LucasArts is currently in a transition phase from seperate, mostly themselves involved decisions and situations to being right next door to LucasFilms.

 

I mean, simply, that George Lucas is moving all his divisions together, and the cutting of the KotOR'3 team and the shortening of development time were apart of those cuts. Besides, as I've said before, Blizzard Entertainment and Sony Online Entertainment are both capable of cranking out expansion packs to their original games within 6-12 months. Expounding, they create tons of new levels, tons of new systems and items, and sometimes tons of new characters and vehicles that work with the original.

 

Obsidian Entertainment was given a game that already had an engine, already had most things readied and they gave us a half-assed plot, a half-assed dialogue tree, half-assed quests, half-assed characters, and just about a half-assed game in general. They added few things and even those few things were just mimics of things already added (IE certain Force Feat graphics). The game is so buggy, its a wonder if they spent anytime testing it at all. This is not the fault of LucasArts -- this is just a rookie compiled team (with vets, of course) that got carried away with a story they should have known they couldn't crank out with their time allotment.

 

Hell, Avelone, in each interview, talks about how his teams took three damn years just to compile storylines and so forth and so I don't know; for what we got in one -- I'm not impressed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmm, perhaps you have a point pointing the finger of blame equally at Obsidian -- I had given them the benefit of the doubt as they are basically Black Isle, and Balder's Gate was an excellent CRPG (or should that be ERPG? .

 

I can't believe people are excitedly talking about the patch (I'll bet London Bridge to a brick it won't have any content) and a sequel (I would rather poke my eyes out with a rusty speculum than play another disapointing game like KotOR 2 ... ).