Messages

Very good job indeed. I really like this one!!

However I think there should be a shade on the left side wall of the house, given that the sunlight somes from behind. Just like the shadow cast on the grass, the wall itself should be darker on this side.

Also, from a user's perspective, it seems odd that there is no road leading to the castle-balancing-on-a-cliff on the horizon. I assume it's because they can't reach it from here, but that is very ambiguous to the player. You could place some sort of obvious obstacle in front of it, or just make it look less 'highlighted' (less saturated / a bit further away, etc.).

Other than that, I think the only thing left to touch would be ground detail, especially the paths. Other than that, I'm looking forward to seeing more!

Have fun


/Scarpia

This will probably end up in Teh Wrong Hands, but what the heck. I trust you people, don't I?  

Oh, well - my # is 28.

I guess that's a lot. It doesn't feel like a lot though.

[Quick Danish course for Americans and British People:]

I am from Denmark.... And frankly, I think it's time the Brits and Americans learn all of our languages, since we all learned theirs.

Quick Danish course for Americans and British People:

we = vi
us = os
ice = is
see = se
they = de
them = dem
that = at

one = en
two = to
three = tre
.
.
.

and, perhaps the most important sentence to learn, it can be used for nearly anything:

"JEG HAR TISSET I DEN"

(but you'll probably not want to use it as a pick-up line, not even in sweden)



/Scarpia - danish is very easy

I am a musical master!!!1!!!!!1!1!!1 I juz d0nt have any progz 4 makkin music with.

Much kidding.


Actually, I too have been thinking a lot about starting to compose / remix / sample some music on my computer, but I seriously need a mentor who could help me choose the right software for the different tasks involved and step me through the most basic steps of music-making, such as:

1. Where to get the samples?

2. Basically, how is remixing done?

3. it seems most of the 'pro' music programs I've seen can basically do nothing but cut/paste, pitch/speed change, echo, fade and volume. Is that really it???



Scarpia

No, I think the whole magic-thing in adventures has a bad tendency to ruin gameplay somewhat (take RON's Davy Jones character for instance). Also, I think meeting the witch could make much cooler interaction. And perhaps coming across the exiled king on a desolate road, dressed in a dirty cloak and looking like a wandering beggar. (could make a neat Aragorn reference, hehe..)


Go ahead with it, I think it sounds nice!


Scarpia

It has changed from that to being about not complying with the UN resolutions, coupled with telling the UN that the US doesnt really give a rats ass about its opinion, while at the same time conveniently using its resolutions as a reason.

The UN failed.  Actually, I don't really blame the UN.  I blame France.  I'm disgusted by France's unwillingness to help the US.  The 56,681 Americans who died liberating France in World Wars I and II are rolling over in their graves.

I agree that the French leaders are pathetic, they are. And the fact that french people apparently don't get sick of listening to their imperialistic BS, is unbelievable. And the fact that Chirac went on international TV prior to the attacks and said he would not allow the war 'no matter what', is sickening and should be reason enough to throw his incompetent a** out of politics. That kind of uncompromising and stubborn political attitude is a crime.

But France isn't the reason why Bush couldn't get the support of the Security Council. Noone denies that the US would have had a whole lot less than the required 9 votes. It wouldn't even have been necessary for France to use their veto.

Besides, the permanent members of the UN, France, China, Russia, US and Great Britain were originally selected because they were imperialistic 'super powers' in the World. How does that make sense now? Russia is an empovered, corrupt, weak (in all senses) country. Great Britain is no more of a super power than Germany or Spain. France has never forgotten the dream of world domination, which is the same dream that has haunted Saddam Hussein, Hitler etc. How does that make sense?


Scarpia

Just thought I'd contribute.... An interesting point that nobody is talking about, is that the strong peace movements in Europe throughout the Cold War, were supported and funded by the Soviet government! In secret, naturally, but the (often left-wing oriented) organisations actually received contributions directly from the USSR because if those countries were disarming, that would weaken them compared to the USSR. Devilishly clever..

MonsterSasha:
So Damn Insane is the sworn  enemy of Osama Bin Laden, Osama Bin Laden is based in Saudi Arabia and has strong ties with their goverment, through the goverment denies it. USA is using Saudi Arabia as a base for it's troops and pays Saudi Arabia a hefty sum for it. Some of this money is sure to wind up with Osama Bin Laden. Oh, the irony!

Felt like correcting this: Osama Bin Laden is originally from Saudi Arabia, but they Threw Him Out of there, deported him and told him never to return! He has hated the Saudis for it ever since. Trust me, Bin Laden does NOT have 'strong ties' with them, he hates them even more than he hates America - according to his religious belief, the people of Saudi Arabia are committing a religious crime (I think the word is Fatwa, but I'm not sure I remember correctly) by practicing Islam 'incorrectly' - to him, the 'correct' way of practicing Islam is to wage 'holy war' against the US and others.

DgmacPhee:
Not only that, but the reason why Iraq has any "weapons of mass destruction" is because the US sold them to Iraq in the first place.

Hmm. Actually, those weapons did not come from the US alone. Besides, they came from private (or semi-private) companies and manufacturers, many of which are located in France and Germany, ironically. These companies have made billions of dollars selling technologi and equipment to the Iraqis, sure. But Saddam could have made them himself, and he would have, if western governments in those years hadn't allowed him to buy them abroad.

YakSpit:
Don't the US and UK have some of the best special-ops personnel in the world?  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?).  

I saw a documentary about that. I believe the Israelis have been trying for about a decade, with no luck, and they have the most advanced and well-trained assassination 'special forces' in the world. Saddam is good at hiding, he uses those Saddam Lookalikes, and he is paranoid enough to occasionally kill off people who are close to him, such as family members, bodyguards etc. In short: they would if they could.

Darth-Mandarb:
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

I disagree. The American Constitution is a good one, but seriously - it could be better. The 'gun policy' is one example. It is not only archaic, it is utter madness. You may rant and bitch and call it your 'constitutional right', but do you know what? 11.000 people would disagree a LOT with that, every year. And a lot more, if you count the americans who survive being shot at. I live in a country where that doesn't happen, because our constitution does not express such vigilante-ethics.

America is all about freedom. And freedom is good, I agree, but too much freedom is anarchy. And anarchy is bad. Why is anarchy bad? Because in a society of anarchists, people tend to go around killing each other, and people in general feel insecure on the streets, and paranoia thrives. I don't live in such a country. You do. How you manage to hail your constitution so vividly and patriotically, is beyond me.

Evenwolf:
I used to live in a beautiful community, very little crime- but my dad used to see unfamiliar cars creeping down the street at night and he'd hop into his car and chase them down with a spot light- not that he had any authority or any balls to do so. He was just scared, suspicious. And he never caught anyone or exposed any great conspiracy, he played vigilante for the nieghborhood "just in case."

That's such an important point, Evenwolf.. And extremely relevant. I think it is very parallel to the idea of 'preemptive attacks'. Let's kick the Iraqi's ass, just in case. WE don't really have evidence, but they ARE the bad guys, and we ARE the good guys, so we can bomb them anyways.

That mentality - if anything - defies the whole essence in your constitution. INNONCENT until proven guilty is a Core Pillar of democracy anywhere in the world. Bush (and whoever supports preemptive stikes) don't give a F.uck about democracy, or they are just hungry for a Strong Man, a Decisive Leader with Determination and Purpose, to lead them against the Evil Enemy Threat. That's - historically - Step One towards dictatorship and / or warfare.

Bush agitated for this war by asking if we really wanted to wait around for the 'Smoking Gun'. YES PLEASE! That's what we do in any democratic Justice System - we WAIT for people to commit crime BEFORE we throw them in prison / execute them / sentence them to whatever punishment. We LET PEOPLE WALK if they haven't done anything, EVEN if they are BAD people and everyone knows it.

Darth-Mandarb:

And you live in a bubble.  Mr Bubble Bugglage Bubbles - Evenwolf

You just discredited everything you've ever said in these forums and will ever say here again.  How old are you?  I was asking a serious question, looking for a serious answer.  Thanks for proving my point.  (I know ... I know ... I use 'sarcasm' ... ooh the horror!)

Wrong. He - at MOST - discredited that one post, but probably only that one point, since the rest of his arguments were clear and reasonable, which can't be said for more than a few (I think I counted three or four sane arguments in *all* your posts on this topic) of yours. Asking how old he is, that one made me laugh. Not because it is witty or smart, but because it is pathetic. Truthfully, I went to check your age in your profile after reading the first two or three posts you made, because I couldn't believe you could be more than 16 or 17, judging by your attitude and arguments. I usually never do that, and I haven't done so with EvenWolf, because it just never occurred to me to check if he was a kid. It did with you. If that's not enough of an argument to make you think twice about your sarcastic (childish sarcasm, I might add) and naive argumentation methods, I don't know what is. You come off as a teenager, and I'm not saying this to flame you, I'm telling you because you do and because it's sad.



Scarpia

I don't hate the U.S. I don't hate americans. Nor do I hate Iraq or Iraqis. But I do believe Saddam Hussein is a vicious S.O.B. who doesn't hesitate for a second to kill anyone who has a mind of their own. And I have seen enough historical evidence to support that he has done so. In that respect, I think killing off the maniac is the right thing to do. But making the first strike against a nation and calling it "preemptive war" is hypocrisy. And doing so even when the Security Council has forbidden it, is illegal. The coalition is not right to do so, even if the goals are reasonable.

Engaging in such a war is not a good idea, especially when the opposition can rightfully claim that

a) Saddam Hussein could have been removed LONG ago, but Great Britain, the US and others chose to keep him there for political reasons, well aware of the kind of dictator he is

b) One of the reasons why the attack came today (as opposed to giving Saddam more time), is that the troops couldn't wait any longer without reinforcements - I don't think that kind of logistical reasoning should ever determine when to go to war, and when to use diplomatic means

c) The Middle Eastern oil, unfortunately, looks like it has been one of the main reasons of the attack. Not that it makes Saddam less of a murderous tyrant, but the question "why now" is a damn good one. And September 11th isn't it, because if this was a war against terrorism, we would be attacking Pakistan (if we're after the training camps and 'harboring terrorists'), or Saudi Arabia (if we're after those harboring AND funding terrorism). And when Bush tries to answer the "why now" by referring to the weapons of mass destruction, that raises the question of "then why the HELL not bomb South Korea who have nuclear weapons and ALSO refuse to disarm!?". I'm not saying the war is wrong, I'm just saying that, to a lot of people, this war smells like oil.



Scarpia

I hope this one is never made, EVER!


Scarpia