James

[color=#707875]My comments mostly relate to newer games, rather than older ones. Older games were more "simple" (in terms of concept, execution and everything else). But in terms of newer games, I think they are definitely becoming too complicated. Simplicity is key, not in terms of concept or gameplay, but in terms of interaction (ie: not barring access to anyone unnecessarily, particularly non game players).[/color]

[color=#707875]Note that this may end up becoming closed if we've had something too similar recently; I'll let the Moderators here decide that. My answer is pretty simple though. The whole idea of something becoming too mainstream tends to come from people who want to feel important. They want a clique that nobody else is a part of. They want to understand something and know about something that nobody else has access to or knowledge of. That's my basic thought. Having said that, I'm sure that when something becomes mainstream (either anime or video games), there are some possible negative consequences. But really, when something becomes mainstream, that's entirely a good thing -- you're talking about a much, much bigger market overall. This means that there is room for both the big productions and the smaller, more independent productions. In all, it's a win-win scenario most times. If I were a hardcore anime fan, I'd be in support of anime becoming mainstream. It just means that more people will get to enjoy it, and it means that I can share it with more people too.[/color]

[color=#707875]I have mixed feelings about this issue. On the one hand, I understand that there are many women who truly do feel that they are fat when they really aren't. And that's a clear problem, because it can potentially lead to eating disorders and so on. However, I also believe that some women frequently talk about how fat or ugly they are, because they crave attention. They [i]want[/i] people to rush up to them and say "No no! You're really gorgeous!" I can think of a few examples of this in my own life, where it's been somewhat obvious. However, again, I want to underline that it's probably a minority who behave that way for that reason. I think many women who [i]do[/i] say these things also seriously believe it, which is a problem. There is no question that the media has a strong influence on the way women (and men) perceive themselves. I think it's becoming less and less acceptable for a man to be overweight, for example. And obviously it's considered unacceptable for a woman to be overweight. However, I don't entirely blame the media. I blame a lot of men, too. There are apparently quite a few men out there who are more than happy to back up these negative stereotypes and imagery. Just look at what overweight girls will go through at school, as an example. Guys (and some girls) are often more than happy to sink the boots in, when it comes to weight. I know that my sister struggled with this too. She was overweight during early highschool and I know that she was always very insecure about it. I remember one day, she came home and she was in her room all day long...and I remember hearing my mother talking to her while she was crying. She was upset because she felt so terrible about herself -- as if she didn't even deserve to live. I felt completely heartbroken for her. As it turns out, she lost weight as she grew up...and now she is incredibly sought-after by all the guys her age. lol In fact, it's a little annoying when I go into the city with her by train, because all of the men (including the old ones) stare at her. It's actually quite unnerving, but anyway. The problem is that she [i]still[/i] feels highly uncomfortable with herself. She may look slimmer, but inside her emotional problems remain. Generally she will never even wear a skirt because she feels so embarassed about going out in public like that, even though she has [i]nothing[/i] to be embarassed about (quite the opposite). But this is definitely not just a problem for women. It's also a problem for men. There is plenty of pressure for men to be very athletic or something like that. So, it's a universal issue I think. At the end of the day, I think it's mostly just about being healthy and being comfortable with who you are. If you are very overweight, then that's probably not healthy for you. But I wouldn't tell you to lose weight simply for aesthetic reasons -- my angle would be more related to your health. However, I do also know that weight can often be the result of genetics rather than diet. My mother has always eaten very healthy food and before she had me, she was very slender. But after first giving birth, she was [i]never[/i] able to really reduce her weight to what it was (even after a period of pretty rigorous exercise). That's not really a case of genetics I guess, but it should be known that being overweight is often [i]not[/i] a simple result of eating too much or being too lazy. I have known several people in my life who always ate healthily and were quite active, but were still reasonably large (one of my kung fu instructors is a great example). So, I guess it's a complex issue. But there is one thing that reassures me, if I ever worry about things like this. It's that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I've never heard a more accurate phrase than that, really. The truth is, every single person has their own tastes -- their own idea of what they find attractive. No matter what you look like, there is a good chance that there are people out there who will find you attractive for one reason or another. I can tell you that from personal experience. I've known people to find me completely forgettable (in terms of looks) and others who have thought I was the second coming. lol And everything in between. And I've seen that with my friends and with others too. So...that's just the truth of it. I could never walk around and say either "I'm so good looking that everyone will love me" or "I'm so ugly that nobody will ever love me", because [i]neither[/i] is true. It all comes down to meeting the individual that finds me to be just what they desire. And in the end, that's what's most important I think, at least in terms of discussing appearances.[/color]

[QUOTE=Godelsensei][COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]Another point to do with humans, indeed, living in groups, is the very idea of morality. The concepts of it being wrong to murder, steal, rape, etc... are elements that make it much easier to uphold a functional society. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]I think that's a good point. And it illustrates that we are not so different from other species. We are more advanced and we call these things "morals". However, I think that these codes of conduct exist not simply because we want to be nice and do the right thing...but because our survival largely depends on such a code. Our society wouldn't function without the appropriate rules -- whether those rules are legal or moral/cultural is irrelevant, I think. The fact is, they exist so that our society will function. And that's why you see totally different moral/cultural codes in different countries, in different groups of human beings. Every society has a totally different heirarchy and "moral code". To me, it suggests that the specific morals themselves aren't the focus, but that the reason for them to exist is the focus (ie: a stable and functioning group of human beings). Other species have the exact same type of system, in the sense that they have rules that govern their societies, whether simple or complex. But I suppose the key difference is that within one species, the rules might all be the same, as they are derived from instinct. Whereas with humans, we have multiple variations and interpretations on the rules, because of our increased complexity. Perhaps that can sometimes be more of a weakness than a strength. Maybe it's another point for debate. ~_^ I think it's worth reminding everyone to be civil, again. Adahn (as far as I can see) hasn't been going out and attacking anyone or anything, he is just presenting a view. Please be respectful enough to talk about the topic and not to get involved in personal statements. So far the thread has been a very interesting read -- this is the type of thread that is really suitable for Otaku Lounge. My hope is that it can continue on its current course, without any needless aggrivation.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think execution is part of it, but it's more than that. It depends how you define "simple". I don't think we're talking about games with simple concepts or simple stories, etc. My view of a "simple" game, is a game that allows the player to interact with the character/environment in an intuitive way. For example, I would say that the Zelda games have a "simple" design. Those games obviously have more complexity than, say, Mario...but Zelda is easy to pick up and play. Virtually anyone can grab the controller and manipulate Link with great ease. I think that quality can make games addictive. If you are fighting with complex controls (or poorly implemented controls), it doesn't matter how good the story is or how cool the concepts are; the game simply won't be fun. Actually, today I bought Sonic Mega Collection for GameCube. And I have to say, it's one of the best decisions I've ever made. Obviously there is a nostalgia factor there, but it has to be said that the older Sonic games have an addictive quality to them. Consider how simple the controls are -- one button to move, one to jump. Very, very simple. Yet look at how engaging these games are. There are so many varieties on that theme. Sometimes Sonic is running around a twisted vine, sometimes he's hanging on the side of an air ship, or sometimes he's looping-the-loop. The combination of highly balanced level designs as well as an extremely intuitive control system, are what make those games so much fun. The rest is just window dressing. So, I think that's mostly what it comes down to. To continue Alex's example of The Matrix; I enjoy those movies because of their fundamentally clever story and compelling concepts. The special effects and awesome costumes are simply the window dressing that adds to the flavour of the material. In the same way, I will probably tend to enjoy games with intuitive controls -- games that are easy to interact with, but not necessarily "easy in difficulty". Does that make sense? In some ways, this is why I don't like the newer Sonic games as much. Yes, they have much prettier visuals. But their implementation is a lot less defined and an attempt has been made to make them "more complex" -- but greater complexity, particularly where it isn't warranted, hasn't made a better game. It's only made a more tedious and frustrating game.[/color]

[color=#707875]Yeah, I've definitely had this feeling. I kind of think that it's the reverse of nostalgia. ~_^ When I play old 2D Sonic games for example, I don't just think about the game itself. These games remind me what life was like in the early 90's. So much more carefree than today, when I had no responsibilities and when all I ever did was have fun. So I think that's part of the reason why those games can have such appeal. In terms of the reverse...I'm not really sure. I can't really think of any games that actually bring back bad memories about certain things. [/color]

[color=#707875]Also, you only have to take a look at our Dragon Ball forum. That was always our most successful forum. It is the one forum that has had the most insanely high activity -- during its peak it totally dwarfed the rest of the site. But really, since that period, we just haven't seen anything like it. Even the most successful franchises (which used to have their own sub-forums) were really dragging their feet. They were barely alive. So, the idea itself is great. The problem isn't with the idea, it's just a question of the reality at OB as it stands currently.[/color]

[color=#707875]I tend to agree that I have more respect for opinions that are supported by some kind of logical thought, or some kind of evidence/information. At least that shows me that the person involved has made a conscious decision of their own accord, without necessarily being pressured or brainwashed into thinking something. With politics especially, I come across so many people who are simply following the media bandwagon. Those people, by and large, have a position (a very strong position) that has the right ideals perhaps...but that is, mostly, uneducated. I tend to feel that people are willing to throw their opinion into the ring, but they aren't as willing to seriously go out there and try to do some research. But really, isn't it more rewarding and enlightening when you look deeper into an issue, even if you come out the other end with a new viewpoint? As for me, I guess that I have certain general philosophies about life, as a result of many things (my own upbringing, what I've seen and experienced, etc). But within those general philosophies, there is usually plenty of room for change. I suppose that if I am asked for my opinion, I can give it, on just about any issue. However, I am quite happy to admit that there are many issues where my opinion shouldn't hold much water, because it may not be a subject that I am particularly familiar with. And that is why I may not even enter into the discussion in the first place. Other people would be frustrated with me, as I would be if I were debating with someone who knew nothing about politics at all (and that has happened here on numerous occasions, lol). So, I think it's good to see both sides of an issue. It's not necessary for you to strongly come down on one particular side of something. At least if you can see both sides, you can have some understanding of what both sides think. However, I do agree with the general statement that if you are indifferent to [i]everything[/i] or you are undecided on every single issue, then you really don't believe in anything. I mean, I guess that's a bit too simple a statement...but surely most of us have at least fairly general philosophies and ideas about life, even if we don't always have views on some specific issues.[/color]

[color=#707875]Basically, we put restrictions on certain types of ads. However, there have been occasions where our ad client has included things that we don't want (ie: pop-ups and the like). I've notified Adam and I assume that the matter will be dealt with. Adam can probably provide you with more details on this issue than I can, in any case. Although Adam does tell me that some myOtaku sites are embedding things that prompt such ads/downloads (about 40 people were using a type of music player that we had to ban, because it was creating unauthorized pop-ups). Again, though, Adam can provide more information than I can on this subject. I can only tell you that we are very sensitive to this type of thing; it is our policy to avoid the use of obnoxious pop-up or "crawling" Flash-style ads. You should really only seen banner ads on our sites. So if other things are popping up, that's something I assume we will be able to deal with once we identify the source for these problems. [b]Edit:[/b] Oops, Adam posted just before me. Well, there you go, folks. ~_^[/color]

[color=#707875]The difficulty with this idea is that it could be a little messy to implement. I mean, if we create a sub-forum for a specific anime, all related threads (or at least the latest ones) would need to be moved to that sub-forum. Then, when the sub-forum needs to be removed, those threads would have to be moved around a second time. It may not sound like much, but if you're frequently rotating sub-forums like that, it becomes time consuming and potentially a little confusing for members. If you look at the Play It forum, you will see evidence of how the "one thread per subject" can work at its best. At the end of the day, all we are really talking about is creating more sub-divisions. My feeling is that it is possible to have one single thread about Bleach, for example, which covers anything related to that franchise. It's possible to address multiple points within one post, for example (as is often the case anyway). If you look at the Play It forum, you can see that there are two types of threads. One type is a franchise-specific thread (where you only talk about that franchise), the other type is a more "general" thread, where you may want to make broader comparisons or discuss broader anime or gaming topics. My feeling is that this process can work in Anime Lounge too. However, Anime Lounge is possibly falling into a habit where this process is not being strictly adhered to. In Play It, the staff had to be very firm and very active all the time for a couple of weeks, in order to really clearly demonstrate how things work. I think it's the same in AL. AL is possibly at a slight disadvantage because of the fact that it's a more active forum in general, though. When it came time to design Version 7, I can tell you that I had considered many ideas; one of them would have seen a much broader selection of sub-forums and things of that nature. However, my feeling is that OB does not have the membership numbers to maintain that sort of environment. In order to make that successful, you really need to have a very large amount of activity to keep those areas afloat. Even with the most popular series, I daresay that we'd only see a couple of threads that might only spawn a few dozen responses. Part of this really comes down to a change in OB's dynamics in general, I think. You'll find that the most active segments of OB today are The Arena and The Prefecture, rather than in Tokyo 3. So, that's my longwinded response. Don't get me wrong; I think it's a great idea and I really love to see members taking the initiative to develop new ideas for OB. But by the same token, I think it's important that I really lay out my reasoning and feelings behind these ideas, rather than simply saying "Yes" or "No".[/color]

[color=#707875]Our rules (located on the left navigation menu) are essentially the broad guidelines that will determine actions like thread closures. Beyond that, it comes down to the discretion of the individual Moderators. I believe that I've actually asked all staff to provide a reason for closing a thread, when they do so (ie: to actually create a post that explains the reason behind the thread closure). That reason may cite rules, or it may cite some other reason. The reason that this is important is so that members will have a clearer understanding of why threads are closed and how they can avoid that in the future. Also, if members disagree with the closure of any threads, they are able to take the matter to a Team Leader or some other senior staff member (either via PM or in this forum). If a reason hasn't been provided, I'd urge the Moderator who closed the thread to provide one.[/color]

[color=#707875]I only have one question. Why did you censor yourself? I am unsure exactly what your aim is with this piece (other than shock value), but surely censoring yourself dilutes whatever impact the piece may have. I ask this question for that reason (to find out what your intention is and why you chose to apply self-censoring), but I'm also wondering whether it is even possible to use uncensored text in this forum. I had thought it was, but if you did that as a result of the censor blocking you, then that would explain it.[/color]

[color=#707875]True love definitely exists; those who say it doesn't simply haven't experienced it themselves. The question isn't whether or not true love exists, in my opinion. This question seems to revolve more around the idea of having one single soul mate or something. I don't really believe that we have [i]one[/i] person in the world who is perfectly right for us. My belief is that each person has many potential mates. Even if that is true, though, it doesn't mean you'll necessarily find one of those people. The biggest challenge is simply finding one of those people who could be a potential match for you. But I don't think that anyone should be too depressed over the idea that they may not find their true love or something. The fact is, it takes time. Very few people are going to find love like that in their teenage years. When you go out in the world and you start dealing with more people, a good match may come along. In that case, I think it's mostly a matter of circumstance -- being in the right place at the right time.[/color]

[color=#707875]Basically, the reason we have announcements as they are currently is so that they can be viewed from within any forum. If we make an announcement forum, it might be easier to avoid reading critical announcements (especially if that area were to be minimized or something). Also, the Suggestions & Feedback forum is actually a place where people can discuss and respond to announcements if they like. Members are free to use this forum to discuss those issues, or any others that relate to the boards. ^_^[/color]

[color=#707875]I like the Sonic Adventure games, but as a long time Sonic fan...they really disappoint me in many ways. Fundamentally, the Sonic/Shadow/Tails levels are all very good. Not as good as the 2D games, mind you, but still very good. They tend to capture the "essence of Sonic" a lot more than the other gameplay styles. However, the other gameplay styles are simply awful. The robot levels (I forget his name) are pretty terrible; moving the actual robot around is all floaty and yuck, and the shooting is insanely boring. And the Big/Amy levels...ugh. Don't even get me started on those. Total, total chore (although Amy is slightly better than Big in my view, but only marginally). But the [i]worst[/i] aspect of these games are the so-called "puzzle" levels. The treasure-hunting levels. These levels are so bad that it actually upsets me to play them. lol In fact, I enjoy the games until I come across those levels. It's almost like I start to get happy with the game and then suddenly I get brought back down to the harsh reality, before I'm allowed to continue. The Knuckle/Rouge levels are simply awful. There is one Rouge level that I particularly hate...I can't remember exactly which one it is, but it involves opening little doors to find hidden items. And you have a time limit on you. It's [i]terrible[/i]. The level itself is as boring as you can get, the camera is disgustingly bad and the process of discovering the hidden items isn't fun in the least; it's a complete and utter chore. So, how can one game have such extremes of good and bad? How can the Sonic levels reach some pretty sublime heights, while the Rouge/Knuckles levels seem to represent everything that sucks in video games? I really don't know. My feeling is that maybe Sonic Team wanted to try and be clever; to try and inject variety into the franchise, in an effort to make it evolve or something. Unfortunately, this seems to reflect a disregard for what makes Sonic games fun in the first place. Let's face it: Sonic is not Mario. I don't know if these levels are some poor excuse to add something a bit more complex into the game...but whatever the intention is, it clearly doesn't work. Having not played the newer Sonic Heroes, I'm unable to say whether or not this problem was truly fixed. From what I have read from various accounts, Sonic Heroes eliminates those terrible treasure hunting levels and essentially returns to the series' roots a little more, while still adding some new depth by way of the team system. This is why I'd like to buy Sonic Heroes at some point, if only because it might really show me what a 3D Sonic game can be like. As it stands, I was [i]really[/i] excited about Sonic Adventure when I first read about it. When I played it, sure enough, I adored the Sonic and Tails levels. But the rest was junk. My hope was that Sonic Adventure 2 would fix those issues. In some ways, it does. At the very least, the Sonic and Shadow levels are pretty cool and they work quite well. But the junky bits are even [i]worse[/i] than what was in the first Sonic Adventure game. Yuck. Also, there is one other thing that I find attractive about Sonic Heroes. From what I've seen of it, the levels seem to have more of a relationship with the 2D games, in terms of the design aesthetic. Those checkerboard patterns and the general environments themselves seem much more reminiscent of the 2D games. And that's a big bonus in my book. One thing I didn't like about the two SA games was that they tried to put Sonic "in the real world". Somehow that felt really jarring to me; as a Sonic fan, I didn't like it. In some cases it didn't matter because generally, the levels were quite well designed and quite beautiful. The first level in Sonic Adventure is a great example (even though it's much too short, as are most of the "running levels"). But still, I'd really like to see a 3D Sonic game that maintains the awesome and far-out artistry of the 2D games, while pushing the 3D aspect even further, with really smooth controls and a manageable camera. [/color]

[color=#707875]You are wrong for two reasons. 1) There are no hard-and-fast rules when it comes to a relationship. Some people are friends for many years before they decide to enter into a romantic relationship. While others (perhaps most people), experience physical attraction first, with trust and other aspects developing over a period of time. 2) People do not enter relationships for logical reasons, most of the time. This is why it is impossible to simply tell someone to "stop having a relationship". Human beings are not so simple. Generally speaking, people enter relationships for emotional reasons -- based on their own feelings, which are out of their control. Like I've said in previous threads, you can't simply look at someone who you find attractive and say to yourself "As of this second, I will [i]not[/i] find them attractive". It just doesn't work that way. Relationships vary from person to person and as I mentioned above, I don't think there are any particular rules that can or should dictate how relationships form. The truth is, everyone is different.[/color]

[color=#707875]If you cease to exist then presumably, this entire discussion becomes redundant. I mean, it becomes redundant if we assume that there is no afterlife (and since I haven't yet died or had a ghost come and tell me what death is like, I don't have the answer to that question). I think that your second post kind of gets to the heart of the matter; does something exist if nobody perceives it. My answer would be a definite "yes". When I was born, I didn't perceive my birth; I didn't perceive my surroundings or have any awareness of them. But had those surroundings not existed, I wouldn't be here today. In terms of life and death, my own feeling is that none of these questions matter when you die (ie: when you no longer exist and have no perception/cognition/thought). In terms of time...well, if we look back at the history of the earth (via carbon dating, for example), we can establish events in time that are beyond our own lives and existence. While it's true that we have a perception to allow us to view those events (ie: they are relative to our current existence), the fact remains that these events took place, regardless of whether or not we perceive them. I think that it would actually be very arrogant to say that something doesn't exist simply because we don't perceive it (ie: time or something). Mankind constantly puts himself at the center of the universe, when I think in reality, we are probably on the fringes somewhere. ~_^[/color]

[color=#707875]Erm, 200 repetitions per week? Are you doing them all at once? For a long time I was doing 50 reps each night, with a different position every night. It wasn't exactly high-intensity stuff, but it provided some level of resistance. I recommend simply going for what is comfortable. If 200 at once is too much, drop it to 150 and then do the other 50 the next day. It's mostly just a matter of doing what is comfortable; I don't feel that there is a hard and fast rule for everyone. As for diet...I have to tell you that I don't really get involved with the whole protien shake thing. I kind of don't view that as being particularly wholesome, somehow. But by the same token, I can't really tell you exactly how to get the right percentages; I don't worry that much about what I eat. I just try to eat healthy where I can, and include plenty of variety. But if you're definitely looking for absolute targets, I guess you're probably better to look at a site that contains specific dietary information.[/color]

[quote name='wrist cutter']But the problem is often that they CAN work at that level, they just don't want to exude the extra effort. This is demonstrated by quite a few posts in this thread.[/quote] [color=#707875]That's somewhat true, but it's also a vast overexaggeration. Let me give you an example. A friend of mine back in high school was in an accelerated learning class; he worked insanely hard. He definitely worked longer hours than the rest of us put together. However, his mother in particular was continually pressuring him to work harder and harder. The end result is that she quite often barred him from having [i]any[/i] social life whatsoever. If he ever dared bring a friend home after school (and he only lived a few houses down from the school itself), she would rant at him about how he should be working and not bringing friends over, in front of the friends themselves. Obviously, apart from the pressure, that also caused a great deal of embarassment for him. It's true to say that this was an extreme case. And I'm willing to bet that many of the people in this thread are probably exaggerating their situations (as many teenagers will tend to do). [i]However[/i], I don't think it's helpful to over-simplify matters either. Not only are we really unable to determine what the reality is in each case (because we aren't there ourselves), but we must also recognize that each person has a different limit on what they can handle. In regard to the working for the apartment and the car...I don't know what the context of that was, so I can only say that this is an obvious realization, lol. I mean, [i]of course[/i] you have to work for those things. If that is a stumbling block for anyone, then that person isn't going to have fun in the real world.[/color]

[color=#707875]It isn't necessary for us to make a whole new forum. If you guys want to do "art battles" or something along those lines, you can use the Adventure Square or the Art Studio. You can have sign-ups in Adventure Inn and put your battles in Adventure Square as you would with any other type of battle or RPG. The only difference is that you're using imagery. It really depends what you want to do. If you want to make a manga or something like that, you'll probably want to use Adventure Square. If you're just wanting to do a "graphics battle", then Art Studio is more appropriate. Either way, we've always allowed for this at OB. This concept isn't new; it's just that very few people here have ever done it.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think that Dagger's post hits the nail on the head, when it comes to this issue. On the one hand, let's not over-estimate the value of chickens. lol We really don't need to give them five star luxury, when all they want to do is eat, lay eggs and poop. ~_^ On the other hand, we don't need to deliberately make their lives a living hell. We might as well give them the basic kind of environment that they'd have under normal circumstances (ie: free range versus putting them in tiny little cages where they are severely malnourished). This approach is probably also better for the end result (ie: making the meat superior; I imagine that a healthy, fat chicken is better than a scrawny and diseased bag of bones). (Note: The title of this thread would be cool if "cruelty" were spelled correctly. That kind of kills any impact it may have had.)[/color]

[quote name='Serraph-Angel][size=1']James, I already told you about the banners, and I love the one that you have recently made for me, but I must ask you this... Where do you get all these animated images from???[/size][/quote] [color=#707875]Well, the video clips are usually taken from QuickTime trailers. I choose what I want to capture and I do it frame by frame. It takes a lot of time to use this method, but the end result gives me a lot of control. For example, if you look at my latest banner, where The Bride leaps up in the air...you will notice that the camera pans up. In actual fact, the camera doesn't move at all (other than panning left to right). But the clip was actually taller than the banner size I'd selected. So to keep most of Uma in the picture, I had to manually pan the image up -- to do that, I moved the group of layers (that sequence was a group of layers, to keep them in the correct position, relative to one another) and I positioned them so that in each frame, they'd move down by one pixel. So when you put the sequence together, it looks like the camera is moving up, when in actual fact, that's just me dragging the group of layers down. Nifty, no? Anyway, thanks to everyone for your critiques. This kind of feedback is good; it's good to see what you like and what you don't. In regard to the really quick Volume 2 banner (which I think Baron mentioned), I should probably underline that the banner wasn't actually complete. It was a test, more or less. The longer one (where Uma actually talks) is the complete and final version of it. The same is true for the Elle banners. The second one is actually my first test, but in the end, it wasn't right for my signature. It was too quick, too sharp and as a result, kind of annoying. The second one loops a lot more nicely, which is what I was after. Once I finish all of the Kill Bill characters, I don't know what subject I'll tackle next. But there are lots of options...I've even thought of doing a funky Requiem for a Dream style banner. So we'll see how that goes. [b]Edit:[/b] I've just added an Episode III banner. I'll only use it for a short while, 'till I put up another Matrix banner. After that, anyone is free to use it (and any of the banners I've had here so far), provided that you credit me in your siggy. [/color]

[color=#667F84]Wow, that's very interesting. [spoiler]I've already experienced a plane crash, actually; a plane crashed into the side of a mountain very near where I was. At first I wondered if I'd imagined it or not, lol.[/spoiler][/color]

[color=#667F84]Wow...that kind of surprises me. I mean, that almost seems like a glitch. You'd think that Rockstar North wouldn't have allowed such a problem to occur. I'd also like to ask you, am I going to be in San Fierro as long as I was in Los Santos? I guess that mostly I want to know if I'll be able to access Las Venturas while I'm still doing missions in San Fierro. It'd be nice to open out the entire map [i]before[/i] coming to the very end of the game, in my opinion. Again, that's something you may want to consider spoiler tags for, although I think it's probably a good idea to speak in general terms anyway (since I'm not there yet myself).[/color]

[color=#707875]I just wanted to let you know that I've merged these threads, as they are directly related. I recommend using this thread for this particular topic. Anyway, my opinion is that things will reach their logical conclusion. Iraq was never going to be easy and it will continue to be difficult. However, elections [i]are[/i] going to be held soon and that should allow Iraq to really begin the process of having a legitimate government (and moving ahead with its various important functions, particularly in terms of building up a military). On other issues, we aren't going to see many changes I think. I mean, no radical departures or anything. In foreign policy, that's not such a bad thing; no doubt that things have been tough, but in general things are going in the right direction for the long term. Afterall, people forget that the allies were occupying Japan for ten years until that country got back on its feet. Anyway, my main hope is that European leaders actually start to concede their positions in some areas. I think that Europe has an important role to play, but many countries in Europe (most noteably France) have been very duplicitous during the last few years. It would actually help them to try to unify the two continents, if only because any further divisions simply aren't going to help their own cause. As far as North Korea goes, I am always keenly watching that situation. The two Koreas are a part of my local neighbourhood, so I think everyone in this region especially has a very strong interest in how that goes. My feeling is that the situation will eventually be resolved. I strongly doubt that North Korea is going to attack anyone, for various reasons. Their interest isn't to physically dominate, but to intimidate and aim to get the best deal that they can. Other countries need to meet that with a sense of reservation more than anything I think. In my view, the biggest threat in Asia is both regional terrorism (particularly the kind coming from Indonesia), as well as the situation between China and Taiwan, which has potentially devistating consequences if something goes wrong there.[/color]