Ihmishylje's forum posts

#1 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@Draxyle said:

"Heart" and "Soul" are funny descriptions for things. A lot of people will say they're meaningless in this context, but as an artist I can understand the sentiment behind those phrases.

My own take on it is that a game with "heart" or "soul" is a game "made for all the right reasons". Basically, they weren't produced because of clinical or mathematical reasons. There was a clear drive, a creative force, and a desire to reach other people on meaningful levels through their works. It's quite easy to tell which games have it and which games don't.


#2 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@iAmJohn said:

@Animasta said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Ihmishylje said:

To be fair, all the people who voted for Obama weren't necessarily voting for Obama or his proposed policies, or whatever, but his promise of "change" (whatever that meant... he didn't make good on that promise as far as I can tell) after two terms of what amounted to, arguably, the worst presidency in the history of the country.

To some, I seemed cynical back in 2008 when I was certain that Obama wouldn't really change anything of signifigance but I wasn't really going out on a limb, since the precidency isn't dictatorship and Washington is corrupt as fuck.

Ahahahahahahahaha, you don't know a damn thing about American history if you're really going to try and argue that.

Also, he's only had one term.

(he was talking about bush)

Oh wow, you're right, I'm a total idiot. Sorry, Ihmishylje.

:D No probs. Probably my fault for using such long sentence structures.

#3 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

To be fair, all the people who voted for Obama weren't necessarily voting for Obama or his proposed policies, or whatever, but his promise of "change" (whatever that meant... he didn't make good on that promise as far as I can tell) after two terms of what amounted to, arguably, the worst presidency in the history of the country.

To some, I seemed cynical back in 2008 when I was certain that Obama wouldn't really change anything of signifigance but I wasn't really going out on a limb, since the precidency isn't dictatorship and Washington is corrupt as fuck.

#4 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@MrRedwine said:

@mosespippy said:

@Dagbiker said:

i hope you like your taxes rounded up.

I actually do. If the government has more money to spend then that's more services that they can provide for the community. I actually disliked it when taxes dropped from 15% to 14% to 13%. I don't mind paying cents more on the dollar to get a better quality of life.

Awesome, so how much extra money did you donate this year when you did your taxes? You can totally do that. you can write the government as big a check as you want.

Theoretically, it'd be great if everybody could just contribute whatever they felt like and the state could still afford to produce enough necessary and high-quality services but that's not the world we currently live in. People tend to mostly think about themselves, forgetting the realities of a modern society.

Tax reduction has an almost irresitible appeal to the politician, and it is no doubt also gratifying to the citizen. It means more dollars in his pocket, dollars that he can spend if inflation doesn't consume them first. But dollars in his pocket won't buy him clean streets or an adequate police force or good schools or clear air and water. Handing money back to the private sector in tax cuts and starving the public sector is a formula for producing richer and richer consumers in filthier and filthier communities. If we stick to that formula we shall end up in affluent misery.

...and the was said by a Republican, way back when they were sensible.

#5 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@myketuna said:

Liara T'Soni. She's got it all together. She's exceptionally smart, she doesn't have major problems like the other female love interests (daddy issues, cultural dilemmas, emotional baggage, etc.), she can live for about 1000 years, she's basically got super powers, and she's really fucking gorgeous (I moved the camera on one of the missions so I can see her face up close and that FACE). I feel like a game where you play as her doing some Shadow Broker commando shit would be cool.

I liked her in the first game but in the second one I was kinda meh on her, particularly because of how she was written and her fairly small role in the game. Also I was totally into Tali at that point, and had been lamenting that I couldn't bang her in the first game. I loved Lair of the Shadowbroker, even if it only somewhat reminded me of how great Liara was. By the third game she had "gotten her shit together" by dealing with all that Shadowbroker stuff that had been keeping her occupied mentally and physically and had emerged from all of that as a more mature character, yet she still reminded me of what a nice person she was.

I made the terrible decision of dangling both Tali and Liara along in the third game, assuming that it would lead to some kind of triangle conclusion (like in the first game) where I could decide to favor Liara. Instead at some point she jus stopped talking to me and decided it was over between us. I was heartbroken, and the sex with Tali later felt empty and pointless, especially in light of what was going to happen.

That moment with Liara on Earth, though. That joining thing... man. I almost cried. Reminded me of all we'd been through and what a lovely person she was. There was a great sense of closure there, to that relationship and the game series as a whole (the whole game was about closure, really, we just played through it, instead of having one cut scene or text roll in the end explaining things to us). I felt like she forgave my Shepard for going with Tali, and that even if we weren't lovers anymore in a physical sense, she had not forgotten what we had and somehow we remained something more than friends in the end.

And, yet, I'm not sure I'd call Liara my favourite character of this generation. There are simply too many to pick from.

And yes, I take my fiction a bit seriously sometimes.

#6 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

The joining/melding with Liara on Earth. Broke my heart.

#7 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@CyborgDuo: Yeah, something like that.

#8 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@Pinworm45: I agree, an allegory is not an end in itself, but a means to an end.

#9 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@CyborgDuo: That actually makes a lot of sense. I didn't really get the atomic bomb vibe from the games, but rather the very real dangers of technological singularity that we might ultimately face in the non-too-distant future. But still, a cool interpretation.

#10 Posted by Ihmishylje (405 posts) -

@Pinworm45 said:

1)It doesn't make sense for tons of reasons. The ghostchild acts as if synethetics killing organics is a bad thing (let's not even get into how IT IS ITSELF synthetic making its own claims about how synthetics will always rebel wrong and pointless), so it's solution is for synthetics to kill organics. How does that, in any way, make sense?

2)Why do the reapers team up with the Geth and improve them if the goal is ultimately the eradication of synthetics? For that matter, why don't the reapers simply come and ACTUALLY FUCKING KILL THE SYNTHETICS? I mean, the goal is to rid us of Synthetics, so why don't they, you know.. actually do that? There's absolutely no reason to kill Organics. The fact that they're killing organics to prevent organics from dying makes it make even less sense.

Why don't they simply leave warnings? have the reapers greet new civilizations with "hey guys, don't mess with synethetics lol seriously though we'll kill you if you do"? What was the point of them "guiding our evolution"? All that did, is far as I can tell, is increase our technology increasing the speed and odds we create synethetics

3)Why was the first game needed at all? Why did stopping sovereign matter? Why did that prevent the citadel from opening to the reapers when it was the citadel itself that called and controlled them? Why didn't it just open the portal? Why did they make Sovereign pointless?

4)Why was joker flying away from the explosion? He couldn't have made it that far before the explosion started, so why would he leave the battle? How did he pick up my crew members that were CHARGING WITH ME TO THE CITADEL? After anderson ordered "go forward, do not stop until your dead"? Did Joker assume that meant "fly down the planet guarded by large amounts of reapers killing anything going towards the citadel portal, land somewhere in the area filled with reapers in which, and I quote an alliance soldier "all of our forces are decimated" - somehow picked those people up (there was no shuttle so I'd love to know how this happened) and then bolted to a relay, leaving everyone and everything behind in the middle of the battle he's been waiting to get into, then flies away, and somehow safely crashed on a planet - when reentry was impossible as his ship was torn apart by the explosion - and this planet just happened to be in an exact straight fucking line from were the relay aimed?

1) The starchild is probably obeying orders from a long gone organig race that designed it (or designed it through the reapers). Or it's just a VI explaining these things to the player. As for the solution, you first have to understand that it's supposed to be flawed logic. If it was perfect logic, Shepar wouldn't need to and also couldn't do anything about it. The solution isn't to simply kill organics, but set organics far back enough in evolution and technological advancement that they couldn't create a synthetic lifeform that would destroy all life, especially all sapient or near-sapient species. It's to allow for human civilizations like ours to succeed for a few thousand years. If the synthetics gained control, presumably, according to the flawed logic of the creators of the reapers, sapient life, possibly all life, would forever be doomed. Maybe the starchild had been waiting for someone like Shepard to break the cycle, to transcend perceived laws of the universe and the life to the next era. If you're asking why the reapers didn't rebel and just kill all life, well, maybe they actually weren't the advanced AI they said they were, or they had some kind of failsafe in their programming to prevent that. I'm not going to argue it's the best plot ever, it's not, but it doesn't make it a giant middle-finger from Bioware either. If your head hurts, just enjoy the game for what it is. Or now. Whatever.

2) Presumably the Reapers were using the Geth as a means to an end and would've dealt with them later. If they'd have wiped out the geth first, they'd still have to deal with sapient species, and how to stop them from making another race of synthetics. Clearly, they assumed that warnings don't work.

3) Obviously these weren't all-powerful forces, as their plans were ruined by Shepard. They also probably had a different idea of what to do with the third game (or no idea at all) at the time, so there's bound to be some inconsistencies.

4) Yeah, I guess. But it's a story, the grandpa is a bit fuzzy on the details. ;) I thought it would make sense that they'd retreat when Shepard reached the beam and thus made their effort worthwhile.