Messages

 Wish you would have set up a donation bank or something for this I would have given atleast $100 to help make it happen. This would have so much potential to become a moment of renaissance for a near-extinct genre if it was organized in a good venue, had all the notable guests doing speeches/debating, had good advertisement for a hopefully huge turnout. I'll make you a promise Mods: i am going to start playing the lottery. And if I win I will hook you up with 1 million dollars to organize this

Edit: Also, I wouldnt realistically expect that you would be able to get all the big names to show up in person in London no matter how many resources you had. But these days with neat inventions like Skype you could probably easily secure a live public webcam interview with people like Ron Gilbert which would, to me, be just as good as the real thing.

Never did figure it out.

Ah, the good old days...






I've been here for more than 10 years and yet never completed a single game.

* Gilbet V7000a cries.

Many people think Im a permanoob who has never made a game and after a decade still  lacks even the most basic understanding of AGS... but thats not true. For the past decade Ive actually been making what could quite possibly be the greatest 2d game ever made. I had to heavily modify the AGS system itself so that I could create a 4500-room game with over 1250 different scripted characters and 3000+ inventory items. It also has amazing artwork unlike anything ever seen. When will this game be coming out? Eventually. Its still a work in progress.

Hah but in seriousness the closest I ever got to making a 'real' AGS game was this one RotN game where Davy Jones returns from the future as a T-800 (Terminator) to protect Mika or something like that. It was pretty ridiculous, kinda wished I had finished it.

I think, we cheat more like for fun and adrenaline. It's also great for improving relationship between you and your classmates.

Do you go to a school for terminal morons or something?

Well if you want to start an actual debate on the topic, some psychologists will say that cheating is actually very integral in  student development during the high school years as it prepares you for a business-competitive environment (job/workplace). Essentially they would argue cheating is a form of grouping. But I dont think that was referring to standardized tests and such :/

Give it a few years and we'll be putting "AGS" as a qualification in college applications.

Yahtzee Croshaw. I immediately got a massive wave of nostalgia from my days as an immature forum troll on these forums. Then I remembered all the Yahtzee drama from the OOOOLLLD forums back in the day. Not sure if someone already posted this ill try to get scans for you within a few hours.

/applaud

First time I have ever seen someone successfully bash Switzerland. Didn't think it was possible.

Rename Subject to: Drug Apologists Anonymous

Plato had some interesting perspective in Book 5 of the Republic.

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.6.v.html

"You are quite right, he replied, in maintaining the general inferiority of the female sex: although many women are in many things superior to many men, yet on the whole what you say is true.

And if so, my friend, I said, there is no special faculty of administration in a state which a woman has because she is a woman, or which a man has by virtue of his sex, but the gifts of nature are alike diffused in both; all the pursuits of men are the pursuits of women also, but in all of them a woman is inferior to a man.

Very true.
Then are we to impose all our enactments on men and none of them on women?

That will never do.
One woman has a gift of healing, another not; one is a musician, and another has no music in her nature?

Very true.
And one woman has a turn for gymnastic and military exercises, and another is unwarlike and hates gymnastics?

Certainly.
And one woman is a philosopher, and another is an enemy of philosophy; one has spirit, and another is without spirit?

That is also true.
Then one woman will have the temper of a guardian, and another not. Was not the selection of the male guardians determined by differences of this sort?

Yes.
Men and women alike possess the qualities which make a guardian; they differ only in their comparative strength or weakness. "

Probably was Turks :p

[right now]

Well, I guess it's a point of view thing, as in, where you get your news from. As much as I know, the one that was responsible of poisoning Litvienko +sp was found guilty, and is to be charged sooner or later, that in Russia too. Then about the cold war II. I've been following Putin's actions quite closely, as that is what I study, foreign politics. Anyway, to my knowledge, Putin has opened some few air force bases that excisted when the Soviet union was around. Also, they have invested into new armory and things that go with. In Finland, it seems, that the main reason for this would be the US plan for a missile base in Czech and in Poland, basically, I've never heard it was anything against the UK. As far as I see it, Russia is gaining its position as the second, or the parallel hegemony, after the fall of the soviet union this being due to the great progress of the russian economy. So far they've also put back in air the old planes they had around 80's. In my opinion, Russia is gaining back their position as the other great power in the world, but they're challenging the US, not the UK.

After it's short, messy experiment with democracy, Russia under Putin has become an authoritarian police state. (This, coincidentally, is the topic of this week's The Economist cover story. Read it here.) In the medium-to-long term, that's very bad news for the rest of the world.

Actually, scratch that. It's bad news right now. Whether it's the country's attempt to seize the North Pole, cyber-war attacks against Estonia, gas embargos (or threats of same) against Georgia, Armenia, and much of Eastern Europe, fantastical assassinations in foreign capitals, or bombs dropped on Georgia, Russia is showing its teeth and revealing itself as an aggressive rogue nation.

It's not the Cold War II, but I fear that Russia is a bigger threat to world peace than Iran, China, North Korea, or any of the other usual suspects.

And that is lesson 1 of Political Party Hacks 101, class. AMERICA is a bigger threat to world peace than Iran, China, North Korea, and Russia.

Fuck me, anytime a Slavic nation tries to do anything beneficial to themselves they are the next fucking antichrist and are "rogue" nations, needing to be destroyed. When the "west" does it, it's a "noble cause" and the holiest fucking thing since Christ was born. No difference in Nazi Germany and modern West's views on the Slavic people.

Sorry, we Greeks are not old calendarists and therefore I refuse to join the party. The only people who are still old calendarists here are the extreme orthodox christians.

Erm... I know there is no way a Greek is about to pass up a chance to party.

Another excuse for us to party.

[but don't extrapolate this one case to all of American history or to all its people.]

Unfortunately we're just as capable of choosing bad leadership as any other country, so I don't see how this makes us any worse when compared to the rest of the world.

There are reasons why Bush was elected to power, but those are quite aside from the fact that he's subsequently abused that power to further his own agenda. Darth already explained why people ended up supporting the invasion of Iraq, and if you're going to conclude from that that we're war-mongering imperialists, then I'm going to have to disagree with you.

I'm not saying that most Americans are war-mongering imperialists. But I am saying that most of the officials you elected into office over the last six years are. Therefore, why should you be absolved when such elected officials are supposed to represent your interests? Isn't that the fundamental theory underpinning democracy?

And I'm not just talking Bush, I'm including both Congress and the Senate. Luckily, I feel a glimmer of hope over the next year with the new Congress and Senate, plus a United States that wants a new direction in Iraq.

I wouldn't begrudge any country a moment of national solidarity after an incident of unfathomable tragedy.

I'm all for national solidarity if it make you happy. What I disagree with is the US bullying other nations into fighting as cause that has nothing to do with them. Like Bush said, you're either for the US or against the US. What a shit decision!

I'm not trying to validate anything here. Where have I said that the things we've done are OK? Where have I shirked responsibility for what our country has done?

For example, the part where you said "Bush may be a terrible president who has abused his powers in office, but don't extrapolate this one case to all of American history or to all its people."

It's been a major part of American history and it was a decision approved and allowed by the majority of Americans. So, I think it's fair to extrapolate that to the extents you deny.

I'm trying to point out that there are real reasons underlying the things that have happened, reasons which won't be found by blindly buying into all the spin.

BWAHAHAH! I'm so surprised you say this now, especially when the real reasons underlying things happening were explained back in 2001 and 2002. But the majority of Americans supported Bush's spin (according to polls, over 90% post 9/11) such as "The terrorists hate our freedom" and "Iraq has WMDs".

Don't tell me I'm naive. I've been probably the most vocal opponent of the War in Iraq on this forum. Plus, you want to talk facts? I'm probably the one you links more references than anyone else. I study up on what's happening in American politics more so than most Americans do. And from a range of right and left wing sources.

So don't treat me like I'm a three year old, pal.

Okay consider the fact that Bush has done all these things: big tax cuts, low unemployment rate (4.4 per cent), high security, and a poverty rate that although has increased during his term is still lower than times when Bush Snr and Reagan were in power. How do you explain the majority of people against Bush's policies?

Big tax cuts: Yes, but when you start considering the national debt and burgeoning expenses from social security and Medicare, none of which he has fixed, then we're looking at a much higher tax burden in the near future.

Low unemployment rate: True, although many perceive that jobs are being lost to outsourcing. It's also true that while corporations are raking in record profits and the richest 1% or so of the nation are getting richer from said outsourcing, middle-class wages have remained stagnant. People may be working, but they're not happy.

High security: Possibly, although it appears that our personal liberties are being jeopardized in the process. And a study showing that the Iraq war has actually made us less safe suggests that Bush's "war on terror" isn't working after all. (If that link doesn't work, try this one.)

Poverty rate: As you mentioned, going up. Nobody cares what it was 5, 10, or 100 years ago. During Bush's term it's gone up.

I mean, c'mon, people care about those things and they're all related to Iraq/War on Terror.

Yes, people care about the war because it impacts their life. They care because of the reasons I've mentioned and also because people they know are dying or coming home maimed. Not for some vague notion of empire or "spreading democracy" to foreign lands.

You know, it's funny that you say America isn't trying to "spread democracy" to foreign lands because I looked up the White House website and low and behold there's a fact sheet from December 2005 all about bringing democracy to Iraq:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051212-1.html

Just in case you missed that link...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051212-1.html

My favourite part is this:

"The United States Is Helping Iraqis Build Inclusive Democratic Institutions That Will Protect The Interests Of All The Iraqi People. By helping Iraqis build a democracy, America will win over those who doubted they had a place in the new Iraq, and we will undermine the terrorists and Saddamists, gain an ally in the War on Terror, inspire reformers across the Middle East, and make the American people more secure. Democracy takes different forms in different cultures, but successful free societies are built on common foundations of rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, a free economy, and freedom of worship."

Oh yeah, and this part:

Democracy In Iraq Will Inspire A Region And Help Defeat An Enemy. When the new government takes office next year, Iraqis will have the only constitutional democracy in the Arab world, and Americans will have a partner for peace and moderation in the Middle East. People across the broader Middle East are drawing inspiration from Iraq's progress, and the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed.

Hahahaha, isn't that funny? Because that was over A YEAR AGO in Dec 05.
And America still hasn't made a partner for peace in Iraq. Instead, they've plunged the country in a civil war! Like, their interest in going to war in Iraq was self-serving but now it's bit them on the arse? Isn't that freaking hilarious? And it's pretty much what I predicted would happen back in 2003.

oh I love being right all the time, time to do my victory dance UNNHHG PELVIC THRUST UNNHHG UNNHGG

I guess what I'm saying is if you seriously think the US wasn't been attempting imperialism in the Middle East or "spreading democracy" over the last few years, you might want to check your government's website first.

See, I remember this stuff because I saw with my own two fucking eyes Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld talking about spreading democracy back when the Iraq War was popular.

And you call me naive?? HAHAHAHAHAH!

/hi5

So you're generalizing that I, as an American, must be war happy?Ã,  It's interesting that the entire point of my posts in this thread keeps being proven over and over again in this thread ...

Yes. Why? Because your public is ready to fight the "nuclear threats" in Iran and North Korea. Ready to invade Cuba (once Castro dies) and invade Venezuala to remove the "evil" regimes. Its imperialism. Some of us just want to try to live our lifes and run our small countries without USA's prying fingers in every aspect of our lifes. I felt more secure in this world when the Soviet Union was around then now when there is only one hungry world power. Isolationalism > Internationalism

Im pretty disgusted with how many people viewed Sadaam's execution video. How fucked up do you have to be in the head as a nation to WANT to see a human being be killed. Im done with this thread, it makes me to angry.

but I trust the word of my friends who said that flocks of people thanked them on a daily basis for what they did/were doing there.

Lol i'd believe it. If 300,000 foreigners with assault rifles showed up in my country id be kissing their ass too.

The U.S. President cannot simply start a war.Ã,  It must be approved by Congress, the representatives of the people.Ã,  Congress approved the war in Iraq due to faulty information they were given from several different intelligence agencies.

Kosovo War 1999. President Clinton went through NATO completely bypassing any need for Congressional approval. And the president CAN go to war for (might be inaccurate by a few days/weeks) 60 days before needing approval from Congress. The President has plenty of "magic buttons".

You really need to be more careful with what you say.

Or what? You'll invade him? lol

It just reached 2007 in the UK.

It's weird in 2007. Everyone wears hoverboots and speaks Martian.

:o

Next stop, North Korea...

You are forgetting Venezuala. Probably the reason they will be invaded first is because they have a law that says Americans cannot do the drilling itself, for oil. Its practically in the crosshairs already because over there gasoline is 16 cents a gallon. And I know this because I've been to Caracas.

The US gov. has been supporting/funding groups to overthrow Hugo Chavez but they are NEVER successful because he's managed to make a good image for himself to his people. Whats funny is that alot of media outlets try to suggest his "elections" are fishy. Which is funny because last time he got 95%+ of the votes. Thats not even close enough to call it "fishy". It would have to be like 51/50 to be fishy not 95/5. On top of that 5/6 of the voting regulation organizations there have claimed the elections are legitimate but one of the American groups claims EVERY time that he is cheating.

On the other hand, you have to wonder. If gasoline is only 16 cents there why are so many people poor. If they took the money they could make from drilling and distributed it to the common people everyone would be millionaires. I understand his idea of socialism about everyone needing to be an equal, but if everyone is upper class and rich, dosent that mean it has been accomplished? 

What I know of his is that he was stupid enought to suicide by cocaine and heroin use... That makes him loss a lot of the (not many) points he had. Of course personal aspects of the comedian won' t make me laugh less if the jokes are good, but, for me, he is totally out of the "best comedian ever" race for that.

Not sure if you live in the USA or not but Mitch was considered to have "a lot of points" amongst alot of comedy fans.