Yes.Volourn said:"Same things for all intents and purposes in the context of the discussion."
No.
Does the mental illness you suffer from has a name?" 'cause making and testing a few patches = paying for 4 straight years."
Yes.
No, you thought that if the majority likes it it's a success overall. I tried to explain (unsuccessfully, 'cause you hate thinking) that there are different criteria based on different goals and positions. So, different groups representing these positions would rate things differently. There are those who look at sales number, those who look at what NWN did for the DnD brand, those who want MP, those who want SP and epic stories, those who want hardcore role-playing, etc. All these groups would rate the game differently and wouldn't give a fuck about other groups' opinions. Just like you don't give a fuck about anybody else right now and keep mumbling that NWN was a success. It was, but not for everybody. Deal with it.No one, espicially me, were arguing that EVERYONE liked NWN. What nutjob if you think otherwise.
You picked a new word "goomba"? Good for you, Volly. One new word a day, and in a few years you will feel much smarter, you'd even be able to understand most of the things I'm often trying to explain to you. Anyway, I'm not picking on anything, if anything, I prefer a dwarf-like race to be called dwarves, instead of some made up stupid name. So, I'm glad they did that and I fully support their decision, not that they give a shit. My point was that DA would have enough DnD elements to appeal to DnD fans, at least those who thought that Bio was making DnD games :p"The point was that they weren't going to use the standard names, but then did."
Huh? That's your beef. Tha theyd ecided to go basics and isnetad of calling the dwarf like race roofilorons instead of dwarf? Hahahahaha. You'll complain about anything when it comes to BIO, huh? Hahahahaha. They also never said 100% what their races before the FAQ came out. What a goomba.
I think that's a very good analogy. Here in Sweden we always seemed to consider USA an unofficial ally, but I suppose that may have changed a bit since Russia now appears to be less of a threat to us. But if there weren't laws against it, we'd watch even more american TV-shows than we already are. So I think it's safe to say that we still don't hate USA. Perhaps envy and annoyance, but far from hate.Whipporowill said:Let's say that the US was looked up on as a big brother - not always right, not always wrong - but pretty cool, although you wouldn't admit it openly. Now it's more like a schoolyard bully - might makes right and all that. I'm not saying that the US was super-popular, but in Europe it was more of a love-hate relation. The EU and US has lately been on quite different opinion on things.
Totally agree with you, Volly, on your political stand though. Let's trash some of your opponents together.Volourn said:Though the US killed more Vietnamese than the Vietnamese killed the US; the US did not accomplish their goal and the Vietnamese did so therefore the US lost.
Meh. US bashing has been a habitual pasttime for many coutnries in Euprope and elsewhere for a very long time - way before Bush was even on the horizon. This idea that somehow Bush = the reason for that is just plain silly. The hatred is just more pronounced 'cause for one of the few times an Amerikan President was honest enoiugh to say we are the US, we are the super power, we will no longer be bullied into not doing what we think is best for US.
Afterall, Euprope has always looked down upon the US as a piece of shit nation of no class neanderthals. That is not new. Even Britian though they helped and the war still have the same 'ol arrogant stance towards their 'allies'.
America was always strong, and people hate those who are stronger, more rich, and more successful. That's where the human nature thing kicks in. Not to mention that US deserved and caused a lot of the blame. They did nuke Japan (two fucking bombs? Wasn't that a bit too much? Couldn't they blow one CLOSE to the island and say "the NEXT one gonna really hurt?"), and let me tell you, nothing adds to popularity like nuking somebody, people love that shit. The Vietnam dealio also made them very popular, not to mention fucking up with the regimes of several South American countries to ensure good trade deals. Also, it's worth noting that people who attacked American properties including the 911 thing did they before and shortly after Bush came to power, so he didn't have a chance to piss anybody off yet.Whippo said:Simply not true Volourn, there's a more open anti-americanism in Europe than ever before. During the 80's the US was quite popular and Clinton kept international affairs smooth - which isn't the same I can say for Bush. Making enemies isn't how you fight terrorism, unless you decide to nuke everyone, as they can't fight back.
'Cause if they aren't in the EU, they are not a part of Europe, even if they are technically located in Europe. WOWSERS! :shock:Yeah. Some of the European countries aren't even IN the EU, and others - such as Poland are newly inducted.
No, I had no idea. Maybe if I had bothered to check those coordinates, but I'm too much of a slacker to do that. I wonder what those other europeans think of USA then. All those crazies down on the continent...Whipporowill said:Oh, RGE - you know I'm Swedish, right? Just checking. That might be why we both find the analogy so fitting...
That's a good point that demonstrates how success/failure is measured by a point of view. For Germans it was a failure, for the Allies it was a success, and for Sweden it was a success because they made tons of money helping both parties kill each other. Sweden rulez! :wink:RGE said:As for the success or failure of WWII, I'd say it was a failure, because the people who started the war lost the war. For Sweden it was apparently a great boon to our economy, since we managed to stay out of it by turning our coats whichever way the wind blew.
Vault Dweller said:'Cause if they aren't in the EU, they are not a part of Europe, even if they are technically located in Europe. WOWSERS! :shock:I said:Yeah. Some of the European countries aren't even IN the EU, and others - such as Poland are newly inducted.
I said:The EU and US has lately been on quite different opinion on things.
Whipporowill said:You calling me crazy, you old coot?
That's it. I can't take this shit anymore. EEVIAC tells me that in Australia its fashionable for girls to wear jeans cut so low that their cunt hair shows, Whippo tells stories about naked chicks (with sexy Swedish accents) everywhere, and here in Canada we have absolutely nothing like that and the only chick who is crazy enough to walk naked is Volourn....while on the topic of Sweden -...our female population walk around in the nude - with fur hats. Just so you know.
Are you confusing governments with people? Pakistan and Saudis are also allies, what's your point, my easily confused friend?Volourn said:"let me tell you, nothing adds to popularity like nuking somebody, people love that shit."
Actually do or how else can you explain why japan is one of the US' most loyal and steadfast friends despite the fact that country faced the worst the US has done? WOWSERS!
Ding Dong! Another welcome addition to your repertoire. Anyway, you have obviously missed the comment I made to RGE:"It was, but not for everybody."
The first aprt is *all* that matters when saying somehting was a success. NWN was a success. period. Whether some ding dong in Waterloo didn't like means crap.
Exitium said:Those 30-50 countries are meaningless and pathetic. Nobody gives a flying fuck about Tobago. The only countries on the list that actually matter are USA, Canada, England, Japan and Poland. Didn't Turkey pull out recently?
That list even happens to include a "country" with a population of 0. It's more like an ancient dead volcano in the middle of the South Pacific. It's represented by New Delhi or something.