Messages

[Evenwolf]

Evenwolf

I'm responding to something you wrote about earlier in this post that I just missed in all my other posts ...

Actually, I'm pretty sure Hitler's intentions were just to "liberate Europe."

So do you think this made what he did better?  Or were you just trying to differentiate Hitler and Hussein?  Because the fact that Hitler's intentions might have been different (and his ideology) I hate to think you were defending him?

As for your comment about living in a bubble?  I don't live in a bubble, I'm aware that there are good neighborhoods and bad neighborhoods.  I used to live in what could only be called a questionable neighborhood.  It's not a black and white issue, it's just some areas are okay, and some aren't.  It's just a fact.  Don't you live in America?  You should know this.

Are you saying there aren't evil forces/people out there?  I can't really see how you can think that.  If there aren't ... why are there problems in the first place?  Because good people over react and kill other good people?  Is that why gang-bangers kill each other off in record numbers (before any of you jump down my back for that last statement - gangbangers can be black, white, asian, mexican, etc.)  Is that what you're saying?  Because that's ignorant.

Do you also think that the right to bear arms should be removed from the constitution?

[Las Naranjas]

Las Naranjas - I don't think it's something deeply wrong with American society.  But parts of American society.  The area I live in now is very peaceful and quite full of community spirit.  

All of America isn't one cess pool of evil people who are paranoid of one another, though there are some places here that are.  I should think most of the world is that way.

dm

[Andail]

Andail - I'm not arguing the statistic.  I've seen it too.  I'm not arguing that there is a gun problem in the U.S.  But there is strict legislation on what guns are legal to own.

But do any of you honestly believe that if the gun laws in America were changed that the gang bangers and mobsters would just suddenly have a change of heart and drop their guns?  It's just not going to happen.  I know (or have to believe) that American politicians, especially the President, want to solve the problem.  However, they are also aware that whatever legislation they pass, the problem isn't going to just go away.

So what's the solution?  I've always thought it should be, right away, a long term jailable offense to be illegally carrying a gun, but then we've already got severe over crowding in the jails, so then it's just another problem.  It's like the drug problem.  If people want drugs, they get them.  If people want guns, they're going to get them.  Especially after the fall of the soviet union.  There's so much surplus weaponry floating around on the black market it's scary.

The weapons laws aren't rediculous, the ability to get guns so easily is.  I don't consider these the same things.  It's illegal to obtain them, just easy to do so.

I'm not saying they shouldn't try to make a change, but it's a political fact that those politicians who don't show results, don't stay in office.  I wish it were different.

dm

[YakSpit]

YakSpit - Thanks for the reply.  I totally respect your views, even though we're on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Why can't we just assassinate him and his cabinet?  Why must it involve a war sacrificing our youth and civilians in Iraq (and possibly the US, who can say?).

Unless we have declared an actual war on Iraq, Saddam (and his cabinet) would be considered political leaders.  And there is a law (not sure of the exact #) that specifically states that no body of the US gvt. will take part in political assassinations.  Plus, the vast majority of the world thinks of America as 'the big bully' anyway, so if we simply went in and whacked Saddam (which believe me I wouldn't mind!) we would never get out from under that rock!  I do hate the fact that our boys/girls are in harms way.  But they're soldiers, and that's their job.  But I still don't like it.  I totally admire and respect them though.

I've wondered if maybe a CIA operative could go over there and take out Saddam, and make it look like an accident.  But the problem then is that one of his sons would just take over.  And I don't think there could be a 'believable' way to take out enough people 'accidentally' to achieve the removal of his regime.  So a show of force becomes the only alternative.

As far as Bush attacking on a holiday.  Well if I had to play devil's advocate to that I would have to say this.  It seems to me that every time an action in the middle east becomes necessary there's always some holiday that gets in the way.  I am not fully informed on middle eastern holidays, but I think there might be one on every day of the year

I don't think Bush is a great man, I know he has his faults.  Perhaps it's blind Patriotism on my part, but I feel the desire to stand behind the man.  I can't help it

dm

You're assuming I'm wrong because you have your opinions which you think are right.  So I must be wrong?  My sarcasm, and how it's responded to, only proves my point.

Not really.

Very openminded.

So why does your opinion (which you obviously feel strongly about) automatically superscede my opinion?  Because I use sarcasm?

I haven't degraded your opinion through the use of bad wit -- the fact that you use sarcasm to debate me only makes my points of view stronger.

So you can't listen to my opinions because I use sarcasm?  Again, very openminded.

The constitution of the United States is one of the greatest documents ever written that has stood the test of time.  Sure parts are archaic.  But you're not going to sit there and try to tell me bad things about America that you have NO way of proving are more accurate than what I'm saying.  That's hypocritical.

Well, actually I just did.
You haven't given any evidence that contradicts.
In fact, you've agreed with me by saying "Sure parts are archaic".
And you contradict yourself saying that, because a few sentences before you say that it has "stood the test of time".

I agree that parts are archaic.  But the fact that almost the entire thing HAS stood the test of time, and still stands up over 200 years after being written, PROVES my point.  You're not an American, and no matter how much education you have, and how much you think you know, you don't live in America.  You don't live by/under the constitution.  So you can't say it doesn't work by what you've read.  Even coming from 'a number of difference sources -- left, right, middle, whatever'.

The constitutional right to bear arms is very restricted in America.  So no, the average American couldn't, even if he/she could afford it, legally own weapons grade plutonium.  

Why is it silly?

According to the constitution, it's true.

And no, the constitutional right to bear arms isn't restricted.

See Bowling For Columbine and you will see how unrestrictive it is -- For exmaple, Some banks give guns out when you open an account.

You're wrong.  Again, you don't live under the constitution.  The right to bear arms IS restricted.  Actually it's VERY restricted.  It's not possible for me to go into a store and buy a machine gun.  Check your 'a number of difference sources -- left, right, middle, whatever.' again.

I think that was a silly statement.  My other point that there is a huge difference between me owning a hand gun and Saddam owning nukes stands.
Why were there more firearm murders in the US?  Where did you get that fact?  From a newspaper or TV?  Do you believe everything you hear in the newspaper or on TV?  Contradiction alert.

It's a statistical fact from the bureau.

Over 11,000 people are killed in firearm homicides.

And I'm sure the bureau is FAR more reliable than the US gvt. or CNN, or the Washington Post.  Oops, was that too sarcastic to be taken seriously?

Critcising someones opinions with sarcasm is the lowest form of wit?  You can insult me if you want.  You don't know me, but that's okay man.  I really don't have anything against you.  I'm just, quite frankly, sick of this anti-American sentiment that's so popular right now.  You know what, if you people have a problem with how my country runs its government that's fine.  But you shouldn't assume that all Americans aren't worthy of respect simply because you think George Bush is 'goon' (or whatever you called him, I don't have the quote here)

No one has insulted you or taken any potshots at the American people.

And no one said Americans aren't worthy of respect.

I don't know where you got this idea from either.

I merely stated my opinion beforehand and you let loose with a lot of sarcastic nonsense.

Why don't you stop getting so emotional, relax, and write legible points of view without jumping to false assumptions such as "everyone thinks Americans are bad for invading Iraq".

I am open to any points of view against my comments.

But only when they make sense.

Your sarcastic rantings haven't made any sense.

Please, don't get over-excited about this issue -- this is an adventure game forum, not a soapbox opera.

If you stated your opinions in a simple, dignified, and civil manner, I'd be more open to them.

I have stated my opinions clearly.  And you call them 'sarcastic nonsense' and 'sarcastic rantings'.  ALL my points make sense to anybody with an open mind.  You can claim to be as educated and know-it-all as you want.  Apparently all your experience didn't open your mind at all if a little sarcasm makes you immediately discredit somebody elses opinions.  I'm not getting any more 'over excited' than anybody else, but I'm certainly not going to allow you to make yourself feel better by trying to degrade me with close minded comebacks attacking my p.o.v.

If you think I'm wrong because I watch CNN and read the Washington Post, I have to question where you get your 'facts' from.  What makes your opinion correct, and mine so obviously faulty?

Does it really matter that deeply to you if my opinions are "correct"?

It doesn't really matter to me.  I'm trying to point out the hypocricy here.  You say the 'facts' that I am basing my opinions on are 'faulty' because of where I obtain my information.  Yet I don't get the impression that you're over in the middle east dealing directly with the Iraq situation.  So where do you get your information from that makes it more truthful than mine?

But obviously, you only want to here my sources so you can discredit them.

Like you immediately discredit mine?

And that's who I am -- and I am perfectly comfortable with my knowledge, so much that I don't feel the urge to imediately argue with someone just because their point of view clashes with mine.
There is a saying that goes "A man who knows nothing, speaks. A man who knows everthing, doesn't."
That is why I try to keep my points of view as brief as possible.

Yet when my view clashes with yours, you reply to it point by point trying to discredit it.  "A man who knows nothing, speaks. A man who knows everthing, doesn't." ... so you're admitting that you know nothing?  Or are you honestly claiming that you're not saying anything here?  Like insulting the constitution, or discrediting my opinions, or insulting Bush, or comments about the media?

I know there is a LOT more involved in this war.  But the bottom line to me is they're getting rid of Saddam Hussein.  And that makes it worth it to me.  It's just that simple for me.

It's not that simple, all things considered.

I said it's that simple for me.

dm

[YakSpit]

YakSpit - I guess I just don't see it that way.  I respect your opinion totally.  Can I ask you this?  Do you not think Saddam should be removed?  I don't mean to enflame this post.  I'm just curious.  Because I very adamantly believe that he needs to be gotten rid of.

Anyway, I love your avatar, man!  That's pretty cool.  Did you make it yourself?  I made mine (big Star Wars fan).  I am making an AGS game for Star Wars actually (check the Games in Production if you're interested - Called Rebel Spy)  Sorry for pimpin' myself

Peace.

[EDIT]

You're assuming I'm wrong because you have your opinions which you think are right.  So I must be wrong?  My sarcasm, and how it's responded to, only proves my point.

The very fact that nobody can see it, just makes it even more clear to me.

So why does your opinion (which you obviously feel strongly about) automatically superscede my opinion?  Because I use sarcasm?

I don't believe all the spin I see in newspapers and on TV.  But I certainly give it FAR more attention than I give Saddam's propagandists.  I find it repulsive that any of you can honestly debate this.

As far as 'Who cares if Saddam has nukes?' ... how in God's green Earth can you even type that, much of a less actually think and believe that?  You don't care that a psychotic has a nuke?  Are you nuts?

The constitution of the United States is one of the greatest documents ever written that has stood the test of time.  Sure parts are archaic.  But you're not going to sit there and try to tell me bad things about America that you have NO way of proving are more accurate than what I'm saying.  That's hypocritical.

The constitutional right to bear arms is very restricted in America.  So no, the average American couldn't, even if he/she could afford it, legally own weapons grade plutonium.  I think that was a silly statement.  My other point that there is a huge difference between me owning a hand gun and Saddam owning nukes stands.

Why were there more firearm murders in the US?  Where did you get that fact?  From a newspaper or TV?  Do you believe everything you hear in the newspaper or on TV?  Contradiction alert.

Critcising someones opinions with sarcasm is the lowest form of wit?  You can insult me if you want.  You don't know me, but that's okay man.  I really don't have anything against you.  I'm just, quite frankly, sick of this anti-American sentiment that's so popular right now.  You know what, if you people have a problem with how my country runs its government that's fine.  But you shouldn't assume that all Americans aren't worthy of respect simply because you think George Bush is 'goon' (or whatever you called him, I don't have the quote here)

This has turned into a slug fest.  Which wasn't my intention.  I really don't have problems with you (or anybody on these boards).  I just wanted to get my point across.  If you think I'm wrong because I watch CNN and read the Washington Post, I have to question where you get your 'facts' from.  What makes your opinion correct, and mine so obviously faulty?

I mean this is rediculous ... we're all being hypocritcal here.  This whole post was anti-war and yet here we are engaging in 'internet war'.  I want to state now, I am not pro-war.  I hate war.  But my country men are there, and there's nothing I can do about it.  So I back them 100% and support them all the way.

'War is just an extension of polictics by other means'

I know there is a LOT more involved in this war.  But the bottom line to me is they're getting rid of Saddam Hussein.  And that makes it worth it to me.  It's just that simple for me.

It truely does bother me that the rest of the world has such a problem with America.  Truely.

EDIT - I didn't mean to insult your religion man.  Had I known you were actually a Quaker, I would have used the word pacifist instead!  I apologize, it was a bad choice of words, and I must confess, my blood was up. END EDIT

You've convinced me ... you're right.  You should believe Hussein's propagandists over CNN.  What was I thinking?

You're giving a lunatic madman more credit than George Bush.  I think that's just sad.  Sad.

Those Iraqi solidiers who look so happy to be finally liberated.  And are shaking the hands (and hugging) American soldiers.  Wow ... Rupert Murdock and Ted Turner found some good actors.

Pathetic.

dm

"Saddam uses innocent civilians as human shields."

I'm terribly sorry, but I think your entire post is completely uncredible until you clarify this point and add some supporting facts.  This assumption is the pivotal point of your post and as no one is arguing Saddam's lack of morals etc, this accusation is more than just a character trait.  

However, like I've said- this is not as black and white as some people try to make it.  Saddam is bad, sure- he could be taken out of power.  BUT, not just any excuse can be used as a catalyst for this action- because many people in the world would see it as unjustified- including the U.N., countries   such as France, Russia etc..

SO the fact that Bush used 9/11 as the catalyst, in combination with these rumors about Saddam is what gets me.  Don't you see he's exploiting the victims of the world trade center tragedy?   If it just took a couple planes and a building to make Bush justified for blowing up any country in the world- you would think he would start fabricating instances himself- not to raise question or anything.... after all, I can understand how Bush had to finish reading his children's book that morning.  I mean, it IS a good book.

Haven't any of you noticed that ALL the Anti-aircraft weapons in downtown Baghdad are on top of buildings that aren't military targets?  Haven't you seen all of his propaganda photos of innocent people that were killed when our bombs drop?  These people were put in the basements of military targets.  A place where civilians have no right (or desire) to be.  Or he moves his military segments into civilian complexes.  How can you people not see this?

Bush isn't exploiting the victims of Sept. 11.  He's honoring them.  He might be using the event to get the world support he needs to take action against Iraq, but for you to say that he is 'exploiting' them is ignorant beyond imagination.  He's doing something that needs to be done.  And, sadly, it took the events of Sept. 11 to open the eyes of the rest of the world, to realize what needed to be done.  It's really too bad that you all just can't see this and need to make unfounded insults and accusations ... pathetic.

dm

[HUGE]

Regardless, Bush has done nothing to regulate guns in his own country, despite Columbine or the Washington Sniper.

And he has the nerve to talk about weapons of mass destruction when his own people are killing each other.

He's a hypocrite.

Yeah, you're right.  He is a hypocrite.  He should definately take away our constitutional right to bear arms.  Yeah, you know what you're talking about.  Bush HAS put restrictions on the type of guns that are legal, he has done great work in clearing illegal fire arms from the streets.

And also, there is a HUGE difference between me owning a hand gun, and a psychotic dictator owning nuclear weapons.  How you, or anybody for that matter, could even compare that is rediculous and sickening.

I just love that the rest of the world is just jumping on the "Anti-American" band wagon.  It's pathetic.

Anyway, before you call the most powerful man in the free world a hypocrite, perhaps you should first know what you're talking about.

dm

If all the US and the UK are thinking about is oil, I say good for them!  Both our countries rely on Oil reserves from the Middle East.  We have a right to defend our interests.  But, of course, Saddam would never keep the oil from us ... nah .. he's a nice guy.

Even though the US plan to bomb areas of Iraq with a high civillian population?

I'm not for Saddam.

I'm not for Bush and Blair.

My biggest worry is how many innocent people will die at the hands of all all these "leaders".

Saddam uses innocent civilians as human shields, this isn't President Bush's fault, nor Tony Blair's.  Perhaps if the rest of the world wasn't so 'uneducated' about the facts, this wouldn't be an issue.  Yes, innocent people will be killed ... it's called war.  But this is happening because Saddam Hussein defied international sanctions.  He didn't do what he agreed to do.  Saddam forced the action that is being taken, not Bush.  This is Hussein's fault.  If you want to point a finger go ahead, just point it at the person responsible.  And as much as the rest of the world loves the 'I hate America' band wagon, this is Hussein's fault, NOT Americas.  Do any of you HONESTLY think, that if America were attacked, Bush would use the innocents civilians of America as human shields?  Would he gas/kill/rape/murder American civilians?

This whole thread has made me sick.  I can't believe that the rest of the world can be so f***ing blind that you can't see the most obvious facts.  I'll tell you what.  I'll talk to Blair and Bush and get them to pull out and leave Saddam in power.  But here's the catch, when Saddam creates his first nuke, and we HAVE to go in to stop him, all you panzy ass quakers have to go in first and be 'nucleur' cannon fodder.

dm

Star Wars: Rebel Spy - A Prelude to Hope

My favorite Star Wars character(s) were those that didn't have the force.  I always thought they were the underdogs, and thus more interesting to me.  It seems to me (since the prequels came out) that EVERY new thing to do with Star Wars makes the character a Jedi with a lightsabre.  So I decided that this game would feature no main characters as Jedi, but you never know ... perhaps Vader will show up.

All the 'big' characters you've seen so far are more than likely going to be only used in cutscenes.  The playable characters will more than likely be like the walking stormtrooper (pic above)  I haven't decided yet if I want the playable character to be that big.

We'll see ... it's still early in the dev. process.

I'll have more to show (hopefully) later today.

dm

Who cares WHY the US and the UK are doing this.  I don't.  I just care that it's getting done.  It needed to be done, and regardless of why, it's going to be done.

If all the US and the UK are thinking about is oil, I say good for them!  Both our countries rely on Oil reserves from the Middle East.   We have a right to defend our interests.  But, of course, Saddam would never keep the oil from us ... nah .. he's a nice guy.

Not really Fuzzpilz, I don't want to get into an argument about this.  I don't have anything against any of you (mostly 'cause I don't know you).  I respect your view (though I don't agree with it) and won't argue with you about it.  I think it's safe to say that you're not going to agree with me, and I'm not going to agree with you, so we can just leave it at that  Cool?  I really don't want to start an ideological debate!

(just to let you know, I am a historian, and very well educated)

dm

[BEGIN SARCASM]

You're absolutely right.

BEGIN SARCASM

We (America) should have just continued to ignore Iraq.  We should have just let them continue to flaunt their 'power' and throw their defiance in our faces with no reprecussions.  If you think for one second that we didn't want to go after Hussein in '91 (by taking the war into an invasion of Iraq) you're wrong.  But once again, politics, and negative world opinion stopped us from doing what should have been done.  And because of that negative world opinion that mad man was able to stay in power and continue to rape and murder his own people to garnish more and more power.

I mean, they (Iraq) only agreed at the end of Gulf War I to disarm, and after 12 years of increasing their weapon supplies what else could we do but ignore this and let them have their way.  I mean, think about it.  This way, by ignoring it, we could just sit on our hands and wait for another Sept. 11 to occure.  You're right ... that's just what we should have done.  Or better yet, we could have just let him develop nuclear weapons so that once we learned about it, and then had to invade to save the world, he could then use the nukes on our troops and kill FAR more people.

END SARCASM

Perhaps some of you know about this fellow from the 1930's and 40's by the name of Hitler?  Look what happened when the world ignored him and his rise of power and the Nazi party.  Well, if you all can't see that Saddam Hussein is another Hitler and another example of history repeating itself you've got blinders on.  If we continued to hide behind diplomacy and do nothing, and not act, we were just setting ourselves up for far worse than this invasion of Iraq.  

I understand non-American sentiments, because you're not involved, but this is one American who is damn proud to be one, and damn sick of people having opposition to something that has become necessary.  And as much as I hate to say this, if we did continue to do nothing, and let Hussein stay in power any longer you would all have become involved eventually.  

For the record, I hate war, I hate that it has come to it.  But the bottom line is that diplomacy failed.  The U.N. failed.  The United States of America, along with our brothers from Great Britain, were the only ones with the wisdom to realize what was happening (going to happen) and the only ones with the courage and resolve to stand up and do what needed to be done.

I respect all your opinions, and I live by the constitution which supports freedom of speech, so you can all say what you want.  I just wanted to get my opinion in here.

I say good luck and God speed to our fighting men and women overseas!

God bless the U.S.A. and Great Britain.

dm

[Dorcan]

Star Wars: Rebel Spy - A Prelude to Hope

Update (again)

Dorcan - Thanks for the advice!  I was thinking the same thing about his expression.  I'll get to work on that!

I've added two more ships (I tend to work fast when I can't sleep!)

A snowspeeder:


A TIE Interceptor


And one more character ...

The Emporer:

[EDIT]

Star Wars: Rebel Spy - A Prelude to Hope

Update: 03/20/03

I've created a walking Stormtrooper for use in the game.  I just wanted to see what you guys thought of it.  I'm pretty pleased with it.  There is one frame (the one where the leg in front is all the way back) where there is a little glitch in the hip area that I'm going to work on.

EDIT I corrected the leg problem (along w/ a glitch I found in the knee./EDIT

[color=000055]treadmill ...[/color]


[color=000055]In motion ...[/color]

I'll keep posting stuff in here as I develop it.

dm

[Basic Plot:]

I remember playing Sierra games back in the early 90's and always wanted to see a Star Wars game in that style.  So that's what I've decided to do.  So, I'm announcing:

Star Wars: Rebel Spy - A Prelude to Hope
Basic Plot:
You're a Rebel Spy (hence the title) and you've got a mission.  The Empire is supposedly creating a super weapon and you're assigned the task of finding out what and where it is.  Your journey will take you from Dantooine to the Bespin system, from the planet Despayre to Yavin 4, all in search of the Empire's ultimate weapon.  You must find the plans and deliver them to the Rebellion.

This story takes place before Ep. IV A New Hope and will end, pretty much where aNH ends.  I'm planning on tying the plot points of aNH into the game (just from a completely different perspective) so that it will all tie together perfectly.  I'm pretty much throwing out anything but what's in the movie (no Expanded Universe stuff).  I'm sure this subject has been touched before, but I'm making it my own.  I've got 90% of the plot complete already.  I'm basically just focusing on graphics right now.  Then I'm going to focus on the scripting part (which will be my biggest challenge)


Here is a sample to whet your appetite and entice you to click the links below:

Some characters Let me know if you like how they look, your favorites, what could be improved, etc.
A few of the ships There are only two here, 'cause these take some time, but let me know what y'all think.
Backgrounds (environments) These are some backgrounds I'm planning on using.

I plan on using existing Star Wars music.  I haven't decided if I'll go with mp3 or Midi yet.  I'm leaning towards mp3 just 'cause I think it'll sound better, but we'll see.  I'm studying the scripting part of AGS (as the only real programming I do is Cold Fusion) because I really want to make this something cool.

I just posted in another area that I wouldn't post too soon about a project I'm working on, but I thought I'd do it anyway.  I really want to see what y'all think of this beginning.

I appreciate all your input!