Yeah, I worked fror a software retail company back then and I remember each time a complex RPG was released and the headache that came with it. The lines at the counter demanding refunds, complaining, or wanting the patch diskettes. I remember going home and taking the original patch diskette and copying it to numerous blanks just to pass out the fixes so customers would be happy because we had limited stock of the patches.

Good times. *chuckle*

Certainly a popular opinion to have. And they also deservedly went bancrupt because of the company-leader's missmanagement of budget.
Because even though the games might be ambitious, they were failures in every other sense, except being ambitious and different.

I very much agree with this sentiment. Which is why I like to give unproven devs noone ever heared of with projects that seem way to huge for them the benefit of the doubt and buy their games full-price on day one.
But what you ommited, is what the other person said, about now changeing their buying-behaviour. Because judged by how the devs handle this mess, they have yet to bring this to a simple baseline; A stable release.

This anon said it quite well Them patching this right after release is nothing to be giddy about. The interesting thing, will be, if they manage to fix it completly before they move on to other things or if they just dump it and let the true heroes of the gameingcommunity pick up the pieces, the community-modders.

Because, even if I like ToEE, VtM:B or even Arcanum, ~ nice try to make the mental connection of this game to those, btw. ~ I'd never give Troika, even if they suddenly reappeared with the exact same studio today, a single dime for the games they make.
They might have made ambitious games, but they had to be made playable by fans, who got nothing out of it, while they still get shekles and respect for the figurative turds they had put out.

This is quite like "Movieenthusiasts" saying, that every shitty uninspired Indie-movie is a good thing and you can't call it for what it is, because otherwise big bad Hollywood wins.
And what it is, is feces.
Plain and simple.

Not to mention the rather hamfisted way of "damage-controling" their community. I guess you are a product of your environment and what you see enacted in it, is inevitably seeping into your own behaviour.

I would. Hell, I'd back the shit out of that kickstarter even. And I don't even care that it might be bugged. Those were great games no matter what. This is why dedicated fans took time and effort to fix it. Those games were diamonds in the rough, not turds.

Not to mention patch distribution back then was pita. Pretty sure they would do a lot better with digital platforms available now.

And yeah I am actually fanboying for Troika. I am aware of that. And I like it that way.

You are comparing apples with oranges here and I hope you either are a paid marketeer or someone roleplaying as one.
There is a huge difference between games that were made in the infancy of the industry, which we now revere as great old games and games like this.
Not to mention that for most people nostalgia is a way too hard drug to handle.

Games like Doom, Command n Conquer. Heroes Might and Magic or even, like you mentioned, the DnDs forgotten realms games were made without acces to the absolute insanly comfortable way devs are able to create their games now. In the age of developementtools like Unity, the Unreal-engine and a market that is full to the brim with well trained professionals to look for, when you need a freelancer.
Which is exactly why devs like this one are able to even put out what they do.

And the other thing you curiously ommited, is, that a lot of the devs that created those games, did so without the access of a free feedbackpipeline to harness their communitys and no ability to quickly offload the testing of the new-builds to their paying customers, which is what this dev is doing, when introduceing new bugs with every hotfix-patch.

So, instead of preaching leniency for everything that seems a tad ambitious, in the offchance something might come out of it. How about we just stick to what we have.
A broken mess of a game, set in a novel-setting and ruleset. In an industry that is too busy regurgitateing what it ate just to eat it up again, over and over.

The thirsting man drinks from a muddy puddle and calls it sprinkling water, in absence of a true source of nourishment.

edit: changed the metaphor

Point is, those companies who "hamfisted" their released, etc....

Well... I will take their failed games every day of the week and twice on Sunday over the complete garbage that exists out there today. Yes.... they were nightmares on release. Yes, the companies handled things badly on many things. Yes, they failed to deliver what they promised.

Yet., their failed promises ended up providing games that make games of realized promises today look like side parlor gimmicks for the inept and lazy. Every Trokia game is gold in my book and if I had to deal with that company today, releasing every game of such nature over and over…. Well…. Here is my money… next?

We aren't romanticizing those old companies, this isn't an experience of shallow memory or dementia ridden nostalgia of a feint emotion of the past or some YouTube halfwit kid going off about a game they never experienced originally released. This is an objective and completely cognizant understanding of what is being provided and what was provided in the past as well as what is being achieved in over all impact of game play and design.

While anecdotal remedy is no means to establish validity, I saw the games released, saw them from an intimate perspective when they released. I am well aware of the failures of those games at the time, but as I said, their failures make the “successes” of games today look like halfhearted attempts at cash grabs and so it really comes down to if the product is worthy of the problems it has and I think this product is more than worthy of the issues it has and I think easily fits into the realm of those predecessors who failed in release, but provided products of substantial merit.

Please detail your point. What is the difference? Feel free to compare and contrast the differences between then and now and validate your point. Why is it apples to oragnges? What did those companies deal with in their development cycle, process, and flow concerning the game systems that has changed today? Or is it you are saying that technology has changed, and therefore translating a detailed RPG system to computer is much easier? By all means, explain in detail, I am pretty sure I can keep up with any technical topics you might use to support your point.

What engine did they use for this game? Did they have to customize tools? Create their own adaptions to the rule-sets, interfaces, or base engines? By all means, explain to us the details of your knowledge and understanding here to dismiss the works of the devs and this project?

If you know anything about software development, then you understand the pitfalls of using 3rd party tools versus creating your own. It is always a trade off, there are always issues and obstacles to overcome and to be honest, the fact that you so easily dismiss this issue as you do lends me to believe that your knowledge and understanding of this industry is one of a novice armchair who likely would have issues getting through basic data structures and organizational design. Again, just my "speculation", much like your own and surely we could both be wrong right?

Well, in the early days, alpha/beta testing was done by paying people to test the game. So feedback was ALWAYS present even back then. In fact, it was common for people to actually put Q&A Tester on their resumes as it was considered valuable experience in the job market back then. I know... funny right? considering "beta" testing these days means a bunch of people testing without any direction, coordination, or structure and often complaining like witless children about how they didn't get what they wanted. Yeah, back then beta testing was so "hard" for companies. /rolls-eyes

Here is what I see....

I see an ambitious game that isn't trying to chase mainstream appeal, they actually are making a game, not an entertainment simulator for the inept and moronic.

I see them having a horrible release, but.... they have been diligent seeking feedback and applying patches with a fervor of someone who is diligently seeking to fix the game.

I see devs asking and communicating on the forums, seeking any form of feedback they can to solve the issues being complained about.

That is what I see...

I would say... I am willing to give them a break as long as they stay diligent to their task and anyone who thinks that isn't enough, well... I think personally they are not being reasonable.sonable.

I am not saying this game is finished or perfect or bug-free. what I am saying: this is one of the best, if not THE best, cRPG experience in the last decade or so. And yes I am willing to wait for patches and won't bring out torches and pitchforks unless they abandon the project. That is it.

Here is the thing. I am not saying "blindly" defend these companies. Hold their feet to the fire, BUT... do so understanding that while they are failing at providing the promised result, evaluate what they are providing. Are they communicating? Are they attempting to patch and fix issues? Are they working with the public to remedy the issue?

If the answer is YES, then give them a break! Does that mean, ignore their failings? Nope.

Does it mean, don't criticize when they mess up? Nope.

What it means is, praise them for the "intent" and "effort", but be PRODUCTIVE in being critical in your assessments.

If a poster comes in and throws out some BS complaint about the game, without defining what the complaint is in any real verifiable form, then do not add on to it, condemn it as it is not productive and is counter to the health of this game.

Not only that, but it drowns out the positive comments that are trying to get things resolved (notice how I stated a criticism of this game is positive if it is informative and serves a means to find solution from/for the developers?).

The game is good, this is (for those at least who like these types of games) pretty well established. The issue is the release and this is where those who do understand that this is a good game should take steps to support it by defending that which is real. The developers are trying to communicate an fix the game (this is blatantly obvious).

So, all these complaints about how this game is failed/garbage because of its release only serves promote something that is a false as is evident by the existence of GoG itself.

As I said, we should defend developers who honestly attempt to achieve complex games, even with a poor release, as long as their intent is true (ie the actions of the devs here have been pretty evident they are truly trying to fix the game).

I like how aggravated you got, mate

Anyway, I guess I wasn't clear enough. The reason why compareing this game to the now current versions of the games we "revere as great" is like comparing apple and oranges, is, because they are at different stages in their development.
If you solely compare the releases, you might have gotten worthwhile results in the comparison. But you didn't do that, did you?
You can't compare this game to the state of the other games right now, however, because one of these hasn't even reached the minimum-requirements for that.

[i]~ which would probably open up an interesting discussion about when a game is truely "fully" released with the advent of modding, but lets ommit that for now ~
[/i]

So, if you had written, "this reminds me of how Troika released their games a broken and shoddy mess. Buyers beware!" I'd have no problem.

But my problem is with the specific view you're holding and your personal failure to see yourself being either hit hard with "beaten-wife-syndrome" or "preemptive-praise".
Because in all your posts you basically postulate to simply "not give a hoot" about the current state and just think about "what this game could become".
Which isn't really helpful to you, the devs or the industry as a whole.
Which is also the sole reason why companys rather spend millions of shekles on "marketing-campaigns", than on the Q&A-testers you seem to miss so much.
Because why would they spend money on Q&A testers, if they can just make you see the "potential" of something that is right now a hot mess, still in need of fixing.
Do you see the foolishness in that?

Why would they care to release a proper bugfree finished product, when they can just release the game like they did and people like you defend their actions, for free. Only because you WANT to see something that isn't yet there nor is even guaranteed to ever be there.

But, I guess I made a logical leap, so fair point. Let me explain what I ommited in the apple and oranges saying, as I assumed it to be obvious.

A gamedev is like any company, member of an environment. And this environment shapes their possibilitys and abilitys to put out their product. So yeah, technology has developed a lot. But more importantly, the human capital in that industries environment, has developed itself.
The collective experience of the game-indusrtry has developed a lot, even though most major releases choose to ignore those developments, for the most part, based on what is "economically viable", it has increased tenfold in terms of examples and empiric evidence of what works and what doesn't, both gameplay wise and developementwise.
Smaller devs now come in and DO look up that collective experience and make their decissions based upon it. Or they don't.
Simply because there have been more and more examples of "RPGsystems being ported to the PC", it is by definition easier or should be easier to release your own.
While a shitton of freelance-talent exists out there to harness, if you have a distinct lack.

So while I can't tell you specifics, like you try to pin me down to do, so you can say "Aha, but you can't know that without being part of the devteam!". I can tell you, that if you tried to create a RPG on PC and somehow ended up with more obstacles in your development-cycle than a company that existed more than a decade before, it's really just another show of you being illsuited for the job you set out to achieve. Like I said, ambition is no excuse for failure.

I'm not a programmer. I can admit that freely, because my arguement doesn't rely on "arguements from authority" or "anecdotal-evidence" like yours does.
But what I can do, is tell you that if you made a mistake by makeing choices in the develepment-process, like storing the whole worldstate in your saves, so every load of those saves takes literal ages on anything other than a SDD, it's not something to be excused on the grounds of the games potential.
But instead it should be seen for what it is. A mistake.
And if enough of those mistakes lead you to eventually releaseing a shoddy and broken mess of a game, it's nothing to be later down revered as "unrealized potential to be fixed by modders".
But instead, it should be seen as a company ignoreing the human capital in their environment and eventually going defunct because of it.

I really don't have any beef with this company. They just do what their environment tells they can do. Because releaseing broken messes is the industrys golden standard.
I have beef with people like you, who juxtapose themselves with the company and it's product, thus makeing any objective discussion about those impossible.
Because I am here, talking about what this game is and what we can do, to not have games released in this state anymore. [i]~ no promotion for devs who release their games like this and no first-day-purchase on followup-titles. Which is why I wouldn't buy Troika-games even if they appeard out of time, right now ~
[/i]While you basically tell me "think of what it can be", while reacting aggravated when reminded of the fact that you try to judge on the future while being stuck in the present, which is coloured by your nostalgia of the past.

The game is broken and has yet to be fixed. That's what we know.
Nothing more. Nothing less.

This is quite telling really.

You resort to associate people who don't say this game is good, right now, to people who are mainstream-drones and/or idiots faced with too hard a ruleset, therefore dismissing those opinions as instantly invalid.
You aknowledge the release being shit and isntantly resort to exalting the behaviour of trying to fix what's broken, which is essentially both, the industry standard and a basic concept of human decency. It's not some insane statement of pro-customer-attitude to do this. It's basically their only way to have a future in this industry. It's selfpresarvation.
You see devs asking and communicating. I see devs damagecontroling and banning for PR-spin, with busybodys like you trying to invoke the "picture of a brighter future" or the "afterlife" after this release, as the true reality that only true fans who want to support cRPGs and inovation can see.

So thanks in telling us what you see.

Me personally, I just see a small company out of their depth, with a game that is too big for the budget they got from their crowdfunding campaign. And now they fight for their future ability to make games under that name.
Their reputation.

Funnily enough, I agree with what you say, right up to the point of where you establish the game as being good in terms of RPG and judge it solely on the intent of what it set out to be.

Just illustrates the point of contention between us two, quite well.

There is nothing to "defend" right now, when what is released is nowhere near reviewable, since a lot of the systems are "workable", yes, but neither fully balanced nor properly functioning as intended. Since that is the case, how can I see it as anything other?
The few bits of what i experienced, are neither that revolutionairy nor innovative, while the most innovative thing about it, the "choices matter"-idea and the management of the kingdom are rather poorly executed, for now.

Compare to this to the biggest innovation of Original Sin, if you can call it innovative at all. The interconectivity of your skills and interaction with the environment. Pretty much the core concept of the game, which was mostly completly finished on release.

Now compare this to this game biggest innovation, the kingdomsystem. Which is by a whole lot of people missunderstood, evident by the myriad of threads complaining about it. And in some points even perceived as counteracting the idea of a cRPG where you can take it slow and RP however you want. On top of that part being sittuated in the part of the game that is the most broken.

So, while I am all for defending a game against negative backlash that is not deserved, this is very well deserved backlash. And quite honestly rather mild, due to the customer being starved for anything worthwile.

the only thing to defend at this point is it is being worked on and the developers are trying to fix things which is supported by the consistent patches of the game.

What else do you want?

At this point, your only complaint can be is.... "Well, they released a buggy game.. WAAHAAHHAHA"

Good, fine, ok... Next?

Have they been patching the game? Have they been in communication with the players?

So what is your gripe now?

When they stop responding, when the patches stop coming and the game is still broke beyond reasonable means, then you will get me supporting you over them. Until then, all you are doing is complaining.

Also, as for Larian, they are dead to me. They are a sell out company that road the backs of the true supporters of cRPGs in order to gain money to turn around an dismiss those supporters.

We supporrted Original Sin 1, we even after the changes were ok with OS:EE and the console sell out. Then they mid development told the core player base to go fly a kite and made Original Sin 2 a mainstream appeal (ie the mainstream supporters demanded a move away from the RNG system) to mainstream.

Anyway, my evaluation is based on action. So far the game is good, they are trying to fix it. Until they change, they are good in my book.

I allready stated as much. I have no gripes with the company. I have a bone to pick with people like you, who go out and defend companys like them.

They are makeing patches to fix a mess they created. A mess noone else but them decided to release in this state. With a game that is not held back by the ruleset they use, since that is allready tried and developed by other people, but their execution of translateing it to a digital state.
They could've gone the Steam EA route, to curb missconception on the purchase by impulsebuyers. But they didn't, didn't they?
Result = I don't promote this game and am currently stuck at the baseline of "I will not buy their followup titles day 1"

I enjoyed the bits I could quite a lot. But a good game that works on a broken framework is still a game on a broken framework. So I reserve my reviews of the quality of the game to it's release, instead of calling it "the best RPG game of the decade" or other such nonsense, because that is what I can judge for now.

Which is incidentally why I get triggered by people like you more than by people who come here to simply vent.
Because while they just come here to childishly vent their frustration with a system, you come here to just as regressivly explain to them how they are wrong, under the veneer of an arguement that is basically nonsensical and relys on "seeing the future potential only" while blocking out the present.

They are at best frustrated angry people who just follow their emotions. You are someone who follows their emotions and tells himself it's reason, not realizeing that you're the same coin just different sides.
Both ways are hurtfull to the devs and the industry. Because one is unable to express the reason of their frustrations with the game, while the other asumes the reason and instantly begins to downplay them as "invalid" from a point of elitism.

Guess what voice devs are more inclined to listen to? The one that needs filtering and effort to understand or the one that tells them they are golden gods allready and just need to maybe fix the game they released broken, if they want to.

Like I said, you juxtapose yourself with the companys product because you want to associate yourself with the image of someone who enjoys "the thinking mans" games. Your other posts make that quite evident, tbh.

Fun fact:
Your gripe with Original Sin pretty much sounds like a narcistic injury. A gamecompany developed a game they own and create differently from what you wanted it to be. How dare they.
They still release that game mostly playable and even go as far as to give away free and improved versions of it, instead of indulging in practices like "edition"-nickle and dimeing. While their community of weresheep is in more than one occassion a great resource for them, that gets used. Just not the sole decideing factor.
They also released their open beta labeled such. As an open beta, instead of a full release.

That is the reason for the backlash.
Not the state of the game, but how they release it.
And no amount of whitewashing it, will allow you to wash away this stain.
And since this is the only thing one can judge right now, you're stuck with a big fat black splouge.

In conclussion, I just don't enjoy the culture of free marketeers, who do their deeds solely on the assumption, that if they like something that most people will not or can not like right now, it means they have superiour capabilitys to grasp concepts at play, have a bigger view of the picture or are the "voice of reason" in a sea of emotion.

Or even worse, people who act upon an agenda, regardless what kind of devs get a pass because of that agenda. Ugh! Like the general "we need to support every kind of cRPG"-mantra come to life in the cRPG-fanboys who get milked by companys like InExile over and over again.

Why I defend them is already stated and verifiable. They made a good solid game in its design, it is a buggy mess and they are very diligent in trying to repair it so far. IF that stops and the game is still buggy, my assessment will change and I have been VERY clear on this point. Seems you don't like the fact that I defend them in the face of their failure. Seems you want me to complain and whine like all the other kiddies about how they failed to give you want they promised.

Could you elaborate? Not sure your point here.


Broken framework? You mean you don't like the rulset? Not sure what you are saying here.


If you don't like a system and you choose to play a game that is based on a system you don't like and then complain about it, that merely makes you an idiot. /shrug



Says the guy who makes allegations without support. Usually when one makes such, they properly support it with logical premises. If you want to go down the route of logical argument, by all means, place it in proper logical form, but save me from the fallicous means to which you presented the above. If P, then Q, P format or run along.


Mobs. That is what the listen to, hence our current result of games designed for the inept and lazy and the continued cries about the difficulty and lack of hand holding of this game. Next question?


I like to not be bored, todays games are designed for low intellect idiots.

Does that bother you, are you offended? I honestly don't care, I stated a fact. /shrug


They appealed to mainstream. It is as simple as that. Your argument seems to be that my complaint about poor music ability is unfounded beause the masses chose the latest boy band in an overwhelming number. All you proved is that mob rules.


Except that is false. Their are plenty of posts and backlash concerning the magic/armor system, in fact when it changed the forums were littered with them. /shrug


That is, you don't like indiviuals with opinons, you like group think you approve of. I defended my positions with logic you have yet to even approach, you simply went on tangents to claim otherwise.


There is a severe defect of cRPGs out there that follow old school standards. You have even validated this very point by your obvious complaint about the RNG and AD&D system. It is obvious you are "new school" thought and honestly, there is nothing wrong with that, but it COMPLETELY invalidates your position as being OBJECTIVE or UNBAISED on this game. In fact, it makes your argument nothing more than a waste of time. It would be like an action gamer complaining about a turn based game. It is irrelevant, as is your argument.

Run along.

No, I don't want you to complain. I want you to understand that you do nothing positive by trying to excuse a company, by snubbing people who only come here to vent, when you imply that everyone who does is a "kiddie who doesn't get it".
I made it clear now, I hope.

> They could've gone the Steam EA route, to curb missconception on the purchase by impulsebuyers. But they didn't, didn't they?
>People who expect a finish game don't buy it because it is explicitly labeled as an "unfinished game", which it is right now, with the whole endgame being a landminefield of bugs

Understood?

I'm complaingin about the edit: software framwork this game runs on. Which is shoddy, or it wouldn't have the need for so many bugfixes. Here you just show, once again, your need to construct me into an i"diot who doesn't get it".

That's not what I said in that sentence, but ok.
In anycase. Something to ponder here, would be, why such a dissapropriate amount of peopl made this choice to buy a game based on a system they didn't like. Edit: Or rather, a system they don't come into contact with, often, in this incarnation.

Do point me to thoss allegations I made.
Here are the few coreassumptions under which you operate as evident by what you wrote. Do the same for me, so you can further your readingcomprehension
>People who vent here are unable to understand the ruleset, from which you derive the absolute assesment that they are "idiot little kids who are to dumb", as we will see later down this post.
>The devs are free of criticisms like a very obfuscated way to make the rules tangible or such basic things as labeling their product for what it is when they sell it, a beta. A work in progress. Allmost like a EA.
>There is a distinct need to return to the cerebral games of yore, where most difficulty was based on the limitations of the hardware. Like not enough space on the medium, to allow for an extensive and easy to understand tutorial and/or countless numerous other comfort of life features
>And I'd add a general sense of grandure, tinted with nostalgia, that allows you to at least partially base your superiority on such meaningless things as the understanding of a game

I agree. But gueess what. If you want to change the mob you need to address why the mob is saying what it says. If that mob is angry because of something that is caused by or could have been prevented by the devs. It's not the mobs fault. The mob is merely a result of their action. Causality, my dude.

The "thinking mans game" was set in quotationmarks, because, at the end of the day it's just a game. And if you're bored while playing a game, it really just speaks of your inability to occupy yourself with something edit: else that isn't induceing boredom.
And it just being a game, means that you can talk it up all you like, but unless you use it to learn basic concepts of gametheory from an applied science POV. Or create your own games and disect them. You're still just a consumer.
A consumer of a medium which has procreation and wasteing of time at it's core.

my arguement was more of a metaarguement of how you project yourself in this thread. And the key part is the narcistic injury. In that the gripe is a pure emotional personal insult to you.
Creaters of any artform develope and don't stagnate. The mature reasonable thing to do, would be to accept that and simply adjust your consumerbehaviour, like, I don't know, not buying their games day 1 while being mostly neutral towards them. Not giveing any positive PR to them nor negative, to save your own time.
But the way you wrote that, it appeared quite personal. They are dead to me. As if they personally fisted you in a backalley.

[i]~ "aha, this one incident of criticism is different, your whole arguement is false!" The absolute state of your arguement ~
[/i]
My point was, that the biggest issue is how they released it. If they had released it under a beta-label or something that would without a doubt communicate that this is a "work in progress" in a late stage of beta, they could've dodged most of the backlash they get. And no amount of patching will fix this. Hence why it will allways be the mainarguement agaisnt supporting this dev in further releases.
You didn't get it the first time either so I let this one slide

Oh, I like individuals with opinions a lot. I just don't like individuals who willfully skim the arguement of their oponents, not really understanding it. Answering with clear emotions of anger, continuesly trying to deride the other person they talk to with condecending arguemnts from authority, which by the by isn't verifiable via the internet, with a quite honestly hillariously entertaining habit of juxtaposeing themselves, as in their personal selves with all that entails, with the product of a company and that company itself.
With the only reason why that person does so, being, the need to feed their own superiority-complex.
I just try to educate people like you, so you might shift your ways to a more healthy PoV.

[i]Just because I'm curious. When did I voice any personal complaint? When did I furthermore complain about the RNG and AD&D system. I guess this is because you wrote what you did before I did write my response to your other post in the different threat. I propose a mandatory timeperiode in which each of us trys to understand the others arguements.
Would probably help you to detach yourself from your emotions aswell.[/i]

In any case. The point is, that you can support your vision of True hardcore cRPGs all you like. I do the same with what I enjoy. But blindly jumping on anything that is remotely akin to your "agenda", disregarding the other consequences of that "flocking to something", is simply regressive.
What good is it to defend a game for it's application of its ruleset, when you also support other bad practices like releaseing unfinished games and milking specialized communitys on the promiss of "finally returning to the true way".
It's literally the reason why so many paradox-drones get abused by the devs.
Even worse, when you make such grandious claims as "it's the best RPG-game in recent time"

On a sidenote:
Adorable how you try to make me "go away" instead of actually engageing with what I say, as evident by your clear lack of understanding for what I actually wrote. Or do you willfully missinterpret my words? Hard to say at this point.
Here, I show you the olivebranch and propose you just say that it's my poor ability in a language I don't call my native tongue. Just say that. It'll allow you to save face and retreat from this.

edit: in general: Sorry for the edits in progress. I don't proveread what I write here. Mostly because I don't usually face people who like to repsond. So it's usually wasted effort. But I really think we can reach a deeper understanding here. Mindmeld. Have a good heartwarming powwow before we embrace eachother in a brother-kiss, while holding a knife hidden behind our backs.
We're right on the cusp of that. if only my writeing was easier on the eyes and mind....
Oh the humanity!