Dantius

Originally Posted By: Frozen Feet Unfortunately, the ancient engine of their ship called it quits and blew up, so they all died. So you might say that that's how the story... Finnished?

Originally Posted By: Erasmus A friend taught me that if one wants to bypass cache one can hold down shift while pressing refresh to force the browser to reload from the server, for me it only works when I press the browser's button (i.e. not the F5). CRTL+R also does this on Windows. It's just a hard refresh.

Sorceress casual, because nuking stuff with magic is fun. Nuking stuff with nukes is fun too, but I doubt that "tactical nuclear warhead" is a class skill for anyone .

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Originally Posted By: Dantius No, but remember that whoever does not posses the ring desires it. While in LotR, this is because of the ring itself as opposed to a curse, the effects wind up being identical (people want it), so just because the exact mechanism is different, doesn't mean that there's any essential difference between the two objects. My point is that this assertion: Quote: Had I shown the center section to someone who had seen/read both works, they would be unable to distinguish which one I was referring to! The salient events in both stories are so similar that it's nearly impossible to tell them apart from a single summary! is completely wrong, because Dikiyoba can clearly tell it's not a summary of LotR. Okay. Had I clarified the one phrase about Aragorn and eliminated another about the nature of the Ring, the paragraph would accurately describe both works. Acceptable?

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Quote: and a curse is placed upon it: Um, what? Definitely not LotR. No, but remember that whoever does not posses the ring desires it. While in LotR, this is because of the ring itself as opposed to a curse, the effects wind up being identical (people want it), so just because the exact mechanism is different, doesn't mean that there's any essential difference between the two objects. Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Quote: The ring then jumps from person to person as people murder and betray one another for it. Also not LotR. The ring gets lost and forgotten right away. Well, Isildur takes it from Sauron, refuses to destroy it, gets killed by orcs (not related), Deagol finds it, Smeagol murders him for it, Bilbo cheats at riddles to obtain it, Gandalf has to very nearly threaten Bilbo to give it up, Bilbo nearly attacks Frodo at Rivendell for it, Boromir nearly kills and betrays the Fellowship to obtain it for Gondor, Gollum leads Sam and Frodo into a trap to kill them so he can take it from their dead bodies, and Frodo very nearly attacks Sam when he finds Sam took the ring after Shelob's lair. That sure seems like betrayal and murder to obtain it to me. Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Quote: Later on (this is the main action), a hero with broken sword finds the ring and goes on adventures, Yeah, no. Frodo and Aragorn are different characters and do radically different things. Okay, bear with me on this one. This may be an instance of YMMV or just a discrepancy between the books and the movies, but it seemed to me like Aragorn was the main character and protagonist, since his personality and character actually goes through stages- at first, he's a loner ranger tormented by his heritage, until finally he gains the courage to accept who he is, finally saving the day as he acknowledges and shoulders the burdens placed upon him by the form of kingship. Frodo is just a reluctant hobbit who changes very little until the very end, where he starts to get corrupted by the power of the Ring, which doesn't really count as it's not an internal struggle against himself, but rather a test of wills between himself and an enormously powerful artifact that he loses. Frodo is also inherently replacable- had he died in Shelob's lair, Sam could have carried it to Mount Doom and destroyed it himself (we already know he can resist its power). If Aragorn dies, though, nobody is capable of rallying the men or ascending to the rightful throne of Gondor, so he's unique. If the main character is Aragorn, the it's clear that the main character is in fact just a clone of Siegfried, which proves my point. If the main character is Frodo, that weakens my point, but it's still clear that the second most important character still is an exact copy of the most important character in Gotterdammerung. If it helps, you can say that Siegfried was broken up into two characters: the one who finds the ring and is seduced by its power, and the heir with the broken sword. Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Quote: that escalate and consume the supernatural beings that created it, I'd say check, but Sauron was the only one who made the ring and the only one who died when it was destroyed. No check. It kills the Ringwraiths, the legions of orcs, and Sauron, and probably some other characters that were only in the books (like the Mouth of Sauron). At least two of those three qualify as "supernatural beings". There's a slight divergence here as in the Ring cycle the destruction of the ring winds up destroying all the gods, but the destruction of Sauron and his minions should qualify at least in part. Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba Quote: and the action resolves with man finally free to do as he pleases beyond the influence of the gods. Um, no. The new age might be a World of Man, but there are certainly still other forces at work. (Remember, Gandalf tells Frodo he was meant to have the ring.) Plus, elves aren't really comparable to gods. There's no spectre of Sauron to haunt the world, the wise and powerful Elves have left, the wizards (these were the gods referenced, because they are demigods) have left to the West as well, so there's really no clear ascendant species aside from Man. Hence, an age of Man free (or at least free-er) from the influence of those stronger than them.

Originally Posted By: loyal servile of sasuke uchiha why isnt anyone posting here >.< itll become a dead post soon This topic has been posted for all of two days. It can often take many times that period in order for a critical mass of people interested in the thread to build up to the point where you can have serious sustained interest in a thread. Plus, this question has been asked and answered many times before without lots of debate, so I can imagine that people are getting fairly tired of it by now

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba I haven't read the Ring Cycle, but I have read LotR, and I can tell you that your center paragraph isn't an accurate synopsis of it. Dikiyoba. And I haven't read LotR books, but I have seen the (extended? Director's cut? Whatever it's called) movies, (and actually seen the Ring cycle, and it's kind of important to be familiar with both works when you're having a discussion compating them ). So how is that not an accurate synopsis? It covers the rise and fall of Sauron, the corruption of Smeagol into Gollum, Aragorn's eventual acceptance of his rule and reunification of Man as symbolized by the reforging of the broken sword, the resolution of the romantic subplot, the eventual destruction of the Ring by its consumption in flame and its return to where it began, and the destruction of Sauron and exodus of the Elves, leaving an "Age of Man" to rule all Middle-Earth. Sure, Frodo got left out because there isn't really a commensurate character in the Ring, and the Gandalf=Wotan connection is tenuous at best (they're both gods with long robes who dress like old men), but I would definitely say that that is an accurate summary of LotR. What, exactly, am I missing? Originally Posted By: loyal servile of sasuke uchiha Lotr pwns This is a perfect example of the type of spam-y, nonsense posts that you really shouldn't make- it gets people frustrated with you. Try to either add something meaningful, original, or humorous to the discussion if you're going to post. Thanks!

Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES I'm not really up for an epic argument over this, so I'm moving on. Awww. I was gearing up to an epic debate . I guess in the absence of one, I'll just go sleep for about fourteen hours. That was an underwhelming conclusion to a promising start.

Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES "90%" is a gross overstatement, if you really mean "the entire plotline and concept." There are obvious similarities and parallels, on a very general level. Some of these can be explained simply by the fact that both authors drew from the Eddas, the Nibelungenlied, and other such sources (and I believe both explicitly acknowledged this; Tolkien definitely did). The others, I think, are less substantial than you make out. Here's the Wikipedia synopsis of the Ring Cycle: I've bolded the phrases that apply to LOTR as well: The Ring cycle is a 20-hour opera, you can hardly pull out one paragraph and expect that to adequately describe the series. This is further exacerbated by the fact that that summary grossly oversimplifies in places. Formatting a paragraph from an encyclopedia is not a refutation. Arguing that I have misinterpreted the plot points in my prior post, or that they are not important, would be. I think this is because you are confused about what I mean. Perhaps I should have specified: when I say "plotline and concept", I mean the general sequence of events both leading up to the story that occur before the main action, and the events that occur within the narrative itself. If Aragorn does A and then B, and Siegfried does B and then A, my argument is not invalidated because they did them in a different order. For instance, Tolkien's ring is actually evil, whereas Wagner's is simply cursed. This does not mean that I am false in comparing the two, as the results of this are 100% functionally identical for both items: they are desired as sources of power, and people will kill and betray to obtain them. What I am not saying is that the characters, setting, or progression of events are identical. There are some minor similarities, to be sure, but they are different enough to plausibly attribute them to actual independent thought. Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES the point is that "90% of everything" is several ballparks away from accurate, however you look at things. I am aware of this. That is why I at no point said "90% of everything" in my post. Like I explained above, I did not mean to state that 90% of the two works are identical- only the plot and the backstory are 90% identical. Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES Um, no, it's not. Copying someone's idea, and telling the same thing in different words, is plagiarism. This is exactly what Tolkien did, though! Did you read my previous post? Had I shown the center section to someone who had seen/read both works, they would be unable to distinguish which one I was referring to! The salient events in both stories are so similar that it's nearly impossible to tell them apart from a single summary!

Originally Posted By: loyal servile of sauske uchiha whats an FPS? First Person Shooter. It's the type of game were it seems like you're the one holding the gun, like Doom or Halo. It's classified as "first person" to distinguish it from third person or "over-the-shoulder" shooters, like, say, Mass Effect.

More than 90% of the entire plotline and concept is identical. Sure, some names are changed and new character introduced, but when you reduce it to its essential elements, it's identical. Observe: The plot commences several centuries before the action itself begins, as a twisted and evil being forges a ring of vast power to rule the world, however, the ring is stolen, and a curse is placed upon it: whoever does not posses the ring desires it. The ring then jumps from person to person as people murder and betray one another for it. Eventually, it falls into the hands of a man and his brother; however; one kills the other and the flees, hiding in a cave for centuries until he becomes as evil as the ring he possesses. Later on (this is the main action), a hero with broken sword finds the ring and goes on adventures, incidentally snagging up a smoking hot immortal babe who sacrifices her status and immortality for her love of him. In the finale, the ring is eventually destroyed in flames that escalate and consume the supernatural beings that created it, and the action resolves with man finally free to do as he pleases beyond the influence of the gods. This is generally defined as "plagiarism". Your mileage may vary, but there is definitely a connection that goes waaaay beyond "used the same vague mythology" between the two stories.

Originally Posted By: Master1 Not to be a stick-in-the-mud, but wasn't there a ban on animated avatars? Yeah, but I don't think it got added to the FAQ, so he wouldn't know unless he was here when they were banned, which was like a year ago. EDIT: The ban is not mentioned in either the FAQ or the code of conduct, and is only mentioned in the one now-locked thread on about page eighty bazillion in General. Mods might want to look into this.

Originally Posted By: loyal servile of sauske uchiha how about gold? super sonic--i used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure No, it's just that in most games, there's one merchant or smith who sends you on a fetch quest for iron bars and purchases them for a significantly higher price (40c vs 12c in G2, for example)

Originally Posted By: Enraged Slith Originally Posted By: Mod. Mozilla Firefox is much better than IE, you should use it. I prefer AOL since it comes with email and messenger, and I can get it free with my large collection of free trial discs. I browse the interwebs using Netscape Navigator on my Windows 95 computer. Works fine!

Originally Posted By: Fflewddur Fflam son of Godo Originally Posted By: The Mystic Originally Posted By: Fflewddur Fflam son of Godo I read too much into everything. You can't study Tolkien and not pick up that habit. I've already read a bit of Tolkien, and don't have that habit; then again, I've always taken his works at face value, especially after the time I went into a bookstore and saw a tarot deck based on LotR. You saw a WHAT?! I'm 99.926738163564232% certain it was unlicensed. Well, I can't imagine Tolkien was ever concerned about people plagiarizing his works- after all, it didn't seem to bother him too much when he did the exact same thing to Wagner.

Originally Posted By: Ralph Waldo Emerson If the stars should appear one night in a thousand years, how would men believe and adore; and preserve for many generations the remembrance of the city of God which had been shown! Originally Posted By: Isaac Asimov I think men would go mad.

Originally Posted By: Lilith Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Obsidian rushing a game out the door? Heaven forbid! but kotor was developed by bioware Only the first one. LucasArts had Obsidian develop the second one. Because, y'know, when you develop a game that's critically acclaimed as one of the best games of all time, it's obvious that you should give the contract to make the sequel to a totally different company and then not even let them finish it before you order them to ship it. It's almost starting to seem like a string of decisions George Lucas himself would make!

Originally Posted By: Niemand That's hardly a case of advertising the game without working on it; it's a case of working very hard but never quite finishing. Or worse, working very hard, not quite finishing, and then releasing it anyways!

Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Aw, c'mon. What kind of game company would publish a whole load of promotional material without actually working on the game in question And I was about to make a Duke Nukem Forever joke until I quoted you and noticed you hyperlinked the question mark. You're no fun!

That's one post for every person who lives in Canada!

Originally Posted By: Master1 See, I've gone back a year or so after reading a book in school, and I enjoyed the book. The problem with school is that you know that there will be a test on the material, and you're on a strict time line. As I read the first (almost) half of the book, it really wasn't too bad. If I had started reading it before the night before it's due, things would be different. I still blame school. The only two non-Shakespeare books I've been forced to read and wound up liking anyways were To Kill A Mockingbird and Heart of Darkness. Everything else I still have a deeply ingrained dislike for. There's just something about trying to teach someone to appreciate literature that winds up with you not appreciating it.

Originally Posted By: Neon God The topic of this thread is drift, hun. Drift != Non sequitur

Originally Posted By: Master1 Where did all of this come from? I'm kind of confused how we even got on the topic of infinity. It looks almost like somebody posted in the wrong thread.

Originally Posted By: Karoka Pi is 3 followed by an infinte string of decimal digits FYT

Originally Posted By: Lilith obligatory goethe's-faust-is-better post Pfft... Germans.