Kush

quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: You know, that "sounds" really really good, but it does not deal with the realities of the situation. My personal thing would be this, go in and destroy every terrorist that I could find, then make EVERY "palestinian" in the territory take an oath AGAINST terrorism, if they are not willing to do that, then they would be deported and permanenetly banned from the country and the territories.[/QB]You know, I could say the same thing about your conclusion. I don't think it's realistic to destroy every terrorist, and your attempt could create more terrorists than you destroy. And I realize my suggestion has been attempted and failed, many many MANY times. But I just don't see a future until that happens. Many mortal enemies have learned to negotiate their problems and find a way to live in peace. I'm sure there was a time when the Angles and the Saxons never thought they could live in peace. Same with the French and the English in this country. Or the blacks and whites in South Africa. Or the Canadians and the Americans. (There was a time in our history where our relationship bore a striking ressemblance to the Isreali conflict; Canadian Loyalists Soldiers marching on the Washington, burning down the White House. American rebels entering villages and killing innocent supporters of the loyalist cause. Most of what happened is now a long forgotten memory, but at the time it was a very real conflict with no end in sight.) Peace can happen. It's happened in the past and will continue to happen. I'm certain that a time can exist when the thought of bloody termoil in the middle east will become a faded memory, it just won't be within my life time, but it is possible. Only through negotiated settlement.

So I guess you've been busy!!! Congrats my friend.

Although I'm not a console person at all, the X-Box is still in a good position to do very well. The graphics are better than the PS2. (I've had a long time PS2 fan admit this, begrudgingly) The hard drive is an Awesome idea. Two words, save games! The modem is a great idea. It's relatively easy to program for. All in all the machine is a well thought out, well made piece of hardware. Sega had solid well made hardware. Sega is dead now. It's about the games. If Microsoft can create a ton of great games for the platform, then it will do just fine. The one thing that Microsoft has up its sleeve, that no one knows the full impact of yet, is internet play. That could really open things up, and give MS an advantage. [ 04-27-2002, 11:15: Message edited by: Kush ]

I go on vacation and suddenly the thread is back on topic! The only thing I want to add is that many peoples have fought over that land for many many years. England made a mistake promising the Palestinians something they couldn't deliver. The Isrealis made a mistake that the Palestinians are going to simply accept what Israel offers. The Palestinians made a mistake thinking that suicide bombing is a path towards reaching their goals. For the fighting to stop, both sides must sit down and recognize their mutual interests, the mistakes they have made, and put the past behind them.

quote:Originally posted by J.Smith: *looks around and says quietly* These people have been fighting each other since biblical times. What in the wolrd makes people think that peace will come in a few years. I belive that fighting each other is a major part of their culture. And the only way to change that is to change their culture. Which if possible will take much longer that two or three years.Sadly this is all too true. If the Isrealis and the Muslim world can find a path to peace in the region then there may actually be hope for the human race. Right now, I'm not too optomistic. It's just never been in our nature to seek a non violent path to conflict resolution. As opposed to other beasts on the planet, we actually have the capacity to reason, to use wisdom, and yet seldom do we do it. I hope that they find peace in the region, but it won't happen in my life time. Oh and guys; Socialism, and Socialist governments HAVE worked, just as successfully or unsuccessfully as any other form of government, in countries like Germany, Sweden, Canada and England to name a few. One could get into a long debate about the nature of socialism and which government was more socialist than another, one could get into an argument about whether or not Tony Blair is a real Socialist, BUT WE WON'T. It's not the purpose of this thread. You can criticize Menchise all you want for his ideas. That's fine. But let's not get into a 'socialism is the demon of the world.' debate. PLEASE. [ 04-13-2002, 09:24: Message edited by: Kush ]

I gotta say I was really looking forward to Half Life, and when it came out, I wasn't dissapointed. Still play Team Fortress on occasion. Never got into Counter Strike, but I can sorta see the appeal. The sad thing is that Sin could have totally been my favourite game of all time if they had just finished the game before releasing it. Side by side, I found Sin much more fun. But Half Life got out the door first and in better shape. Too bad. Oh and BCM still rocks my world.

Aww man! Everyone's leaving just as things are getting interesting! I would agree that it is not necessary for a culture to have a state, but I would add that it is intrinsic to the desire to be a culture to want a state to represent that culture. States with dual or triple or multiple cultures are always struggling with the desire of one or more cultures within the state to declare themselves a state. Whether the creation of Isreal is right or wrong is immaterial. One could spend energy arguing that the creation of Canada, Australia/New Zealand, America, Mexico et al is wrong, and one could be right in that argument. It won't change the fact that these nations exist and will not go away. I honestly believe that the only solution to the problem is that both sides MUST find a way to put their mutual hatred aside. It is possible. Other nations have done it. Every citizen must learn to put their anger and hatred aside, and desire to live in peace. The only way to stop terrorism is through sitting at a table and participating in harsh tough negotiation. Tanks will not do it. Don't take my word for it. Look at N Ireland. S Africa. People must change. Their hearts must change. Period. You can't legislate it. You can't force that to happen with a gun. You must communicate. Deal with harsh truths. That's the only way. Really.

Paddy, The Strong VS the Weak argument doesn't stand up in real life. Only in novels. The Roman's were strong. So was the British Empire. So was the Mongol Empire, Hapsburg (sp), Norman. Etc. So on. The idea that the Isreali army is strong and must wipe out the palestinians who are weak is... well... weak. [ 04-11-2002, 09:24: Message edited by: Kush ]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy Gregory: How the hell would YOU feel? I will never rocognise the State of Israel as it stands, it is a false democracy, run by European bigots[/QB]So is Canada. As a Canadian I would be a hypocrit to criticize Isreal for doing exactly what we did centuries ago. And I would be a hypocrit to criticize the palestinians for doing what we have done to First Nation peoples. (We didn't use suicide bombing, but our tactics in dealing with tribes like the Beothuks were those of terror, and succeeded in exterminating them from the earth) The state of Israel will exist. It should exist. If WW2 hadn't happened, it would not need to exist. If there was less anti semitism in the world as a whole, it wouldn't need to exist. Israel exists, and both sides need to recognize that if they are ever to live in peace together, they must learn to see each other as human beings.

If Rabin were alive today, this thread wouldn't exist.

The idea that it is immoral to intentionally kill civilians in a state of war is a pretty new concept. Most nations have done so at one point in time or another. (Canada has. So has America, Britain, France, Germany, Nigeria, China, the list goes on.) To say that the palestinians are somehow slightly more immoral than the Isreali military is an act of sophistry. At this point, morality is not important. Getting the two sides to a ceasefire is important. Resuming talks about Jerusalem is important. If you sympathize with Isreal, they will always have the moral high ground. If you sympathize with Palestinians, they will always have the moral high ground. If you care about a lasting peace in the region, then you have to put talk of morality aside and prepare to do the hard work of negotiating a lasting peace.

It's like any drug. Hatred is like a drug. It kills you. It eats away at the cells in your body. The pleasure it gives slowly starts to dissipate, and so you try to get back the same sensation with more and more hatred, until you destroy yourself and many many things that you love around you.

Very well said goaliejerry. The only thing I have to add to this debate is that we tend to talk about this whole conflict using words to describe people. Words like Isreali, Palestinian, terrorist, soldier. But those people are also, husbands, wives, sisters, brothers. I have friends who are Jewish. I have friends who are muslim. One who is Palestinian. Some have family who are directly involved in the conflict. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what side they're on, what religion they practise, if a family member dies, in whatever fashion, it's a personal loss. One day, the people of that region will have to learn how not to hate. It's that simple. Treaty's can be signed. Words can be spoken. But only once people honestly learn to put away their hate, and move forward, can the problem find a solution.

Oh that's just insane!

And I like it too!

Derek is actually super open about listening to suggestions and if the SC is cool with it then fire away. Just remember, what you might suggest as an improvement isn't necessarily what I would suggest. (No more comments on how easy it is to attack a station, thank you very much.) Just my 0.02. [ 03-11-2002, 21:33: Message edited by: Kush ]

The game industry may have a few morons in suits, but the film industry has an ARMY of morons in suits. I would be willing to bet a hundred million dollars that when Chris went to hollywood he was surrounded by a bunch of idiots who had never played his games, had no idea about what made them special, and basically took what could have been a phenomenal movie and turned it into crap.

Just tell your wife she's To Die For. (I just had to.)

I don't believe in the death penalty. I DO believe that people like serial killers should be made to suffer. Horribly. Death is too easy a punishment for some.

Probably? Definitely! [ 03-06-2002, 12:56: Message edited by: Kush ]

quote:Originally posted by Jeff Lackey: Well, like I said, I can only speak for the mags and sites I write for. There are some really bad sites that freelancers joke about privately. Like with anything, there are good reliable companies, and there are some companies that are not so reliable. CGW has always been one you can trust. Both CGW and PC Gamer are good mags whose reviews I may not always agree with, but the writing talent it always top notch. quote:I know editors who've seen ads pulled by big companies, and they still refused to back down from a review. I was looking at this aspect of things REAL closely when I first started writing in this biz - it isn't so clean cut in some other areas. We need more guys like that working in other areas of journalism, that's for sure! Have you ever had a company kinda hint to you that they would make it worth your while if you give them an extra star? "You know Jeff, Nicole Kidman is in town, and she's single. We could set up a nice evening for you two. All you gotta do is give Moulin Rouge: the GAME a five star rating. Whadayasay?" [ 03-06-2002, 08:14: Message edited by: Kush ]

What saddens me is that that game could be Lemiuex's last game. I hope not, but his hip situation isn't looking so good.

And Jeff, I remember reading your article a while ago. Great writing! And very true. But one thing about writing reviews that happens in the Film and Theatre world, and it's something that affects even the most respectable reviewers, and I imagine it happens in the world of game reviewing is... public perception bias. Throughout film and theatre history there have been times when an actor, or a film maker, or playwright, or style was out of fashion. The film/play they created was brilliant, but the public perception dictates the way the reviewer comments on the show. One of the earliest examples is Ibsen's Doll's House. The public wasn't ready for a female character who would leave their husband. The reviews castigated it as being one of the worst plays ever written and subsequently the show was banned for many years. It is now a classic. So is 'It's a Wonderful Life' but you would never have known that from the reviews at the time. They lambasted the film. Now it's a Christmas tradition. Citizen Kane is a special case because the reviews were dictated by the most powerful man in publishing William Randolf Hearst (spelling is off I think) I have no idea what it was like for a reviewer at the time to see that film and be forced to trash it, when deep in your heart, you know it's the greatest film achievement of the 20th century. Good proffesional reviewers are just trying to do their best, under the cicumstances, but they are also trying to ferret out public opinion, and play to it. When I bought Diablo I thought I was going to love it. I love RPG's. I love action. Everyone loves the game. Everyone plays it. I HATED IT. After a while I felt like I was taping a NAIL INTO MY SKULL with every click. It was too simple for me. Too boring. If I were reviewing it, I would have had to put my own personal feelings aside, and judge it for what I percieved most people would get out of it. I would have to think about what my audience wants to play and enjoy. Put their desires above mine. And sometimes that can get in the way if the gameplay is ahead of its time, or the developer is unpopular. You touched on this in your article. I just wanted to add my 0.02. [ 03-04-2002, 12:49: Message edited by: Kush ]

Personally I prefer PC gaming. Always have, always will. It's a lot of things, alot of reasons. Most of my buddies have the PS2/x-Box/Nintendo combo at home and I understand why. I have no problem going through my machine and working out the kinks to enjoy my favourite game. My friends would never be bothered. A close friend of mine has just bought an X-Box and he says he's never going back to PC gaming. Can't afford the massive upgrades every six months. Can't be bothered with hunting down drivers. It actually would be nice for Nvidia and ATI and all the sound card makers and all other computer device makers to just agree on standards and create a simpler device to program for. But it ain't gonna happen anytime soon. At least not in my life time. And so as a reader of game reviews, I don't mind a reviewer mentioning to me in their review, 'Listen, I had to ctrl-Alt-Del a couple of times just to clear out the programs running in background. And you may have to tinker with your registry, but the game is worth it.' Personally I prefer the heads up. But I'm sure some publishing houses would be furious. Personally, I think a games tech support is seved by listing all known issues clearly at the outset. Some games have a half hearted attempt in the setup text file. But it would be great if most developers took a page from Derek's book and publish the version control file. Again, it ain't gonna happen in my life time, but it would be great. And SC, really too bad about Sirtech. I remember the Wizardry series from back in grade 7. Man those were the days. Hope your friend has found a place in the industry, and is putting out more games! [ 03-04-2002, 09:46: Message edited by: Kush ]

Here goes an attempt at the devil's advocate: One thing I think must be said, is that developers for computer games are really given the impossible task of making their game function on literally a miriad of system specs. This is why console gaming will always be more popular and more stable. A developer can make a game that plays solid as a rock on video card X with sound card y and direct X version z. But change any of those factors, (or the DRIVERS for any of those factors!) and your stable game goes out the window. And don't expect Joe Gamer to have a clue as to whether they know which sound card driver they have, or Video card or what have you. I honestly don't know how you developers cope. It must be a nightmare at times. No review should be expected to say 'Make sure you play Deathrace 300 with the latest detonator patch, but not if you have a Soundblaster AWE, etc...' That would be silly and take forever. But reviewers did take the time to tell people that Unreal plays waaaaay better using Glide than D3d. It was important to know. Those of us who had Voodoo cards at the time, could breath a sigh of relief and get to the gaming goodness. And on top of that, even those developers who are considered at the pinnacle of games development, developers like ID and Valve, and Epic, even when they release a game, there are still bugs. Sometimes some pretty big bugs. I still have a HUGE problem with Half Life bugging out on me for NO REASON. Valve provided fixes in their auto updater, but never EVER listed the bugs they fixed. Not a single review mentioned Half Life having bugs. No reviewer would have dared to. The tide of popular support was at the time so in their favour that if a reviewer HAD experienced a bug, they would have ignored it. All software has bugs. All software. Everywhere. Code is written by human beings who are prone to error. It sucks, but that's life. No reviewer has to mention every single bug. But as with Anarchy Online, it was VERY important to hear that the reviewer thought the release was premature, and buggy as Hell, but it's a MMORPG. It will be fixed, and sometime in the future, the game will be incredible. That's what I read in review after review. They mentioned the kind of support and how it was going. (For a while, every patch they released was big news) And in the case of Wizardry 8, I think it's important to mention you shouldn't call the company for tech support cause they won't answer. And personally, I hate how fast some reviews are written. Some sites put out a review so quickly, you know the reviewer didn't actually PLAY the game, they raced through it. How can you tell me what's enjoyable about a game when you've just raced through it. Now your review means nothing to me cause I don't trust it. It would be great if a review could cover everything in a game, but they can't. It's the same with every other aspect of jounalism. You only have so many words. Imagine what foriegn affairs jounalists feel like when someone says, '1000 words on the middle east conflict, and I need it in two hours, now GO!'