Darnoc

Personally, I believe the Redguards are a mix between arabic, japanese and chinese culture. This comes clear when looking at their original homeland, Yokuda. The names sound very asiatic or even japanese, they have warrior monks, an emperor (who lost most of his power to provincial lords called Yokedas almost like the emperor of Japan during the Japanese middle age). But the land they live in is a desert and the Redguards look like Arabs. The Yokudans also had a special warrior class, the sword singers which could be compared to the Samurai of Japan. The Sword singer could create a Shehai, a spirit sword. One of the Yokeda came to power over all other Yokedas and declared himself Elden Yokeda, highest of the Yokeda. This could be compared to the Shogun of Japan. He established the Sword Singers as a special class, since only they were allowed to carry a sword, the greatest Sword Singers were called Ansei (also sounds Japanese). This is also like in middleage Japan. The greatest of all Ansei, Frandar do Hunding Hel Ansei No Shira, wrote a philosophical book about the "way of the sword", not unlike the Bushido of Japanese. At the end of the Yokudan Empire, the last emperor tried to take control again over his empire (for centuries, the title of emperor had only been represantive, like in Japan) and tried to exterminate the class of the Sword Singers. He could be compared with emperor Meji of Japan who succeeded in taking control of Japan in the 19th century, by destroying the class of the Samurai. But unlike Meji, the last emperor of Yokuda didn't succeed and his army was defeated by Frandar do Hunding Hel Ansei No Shira and his army of Sword Singers. After that Sword Singers fled over the sea and founded Hammerfell and renamed themselves Redguards.

So you mean the Elder Scrolls acctually work a little like the Oracle of Delphi in ancient Greece? For example, it is said that the Oracle of Delphi gave as an answer to king Kroisos when he asked, if he should attack Persia: "If you cross the river Halys, you will destroy a great realm." He crossed the river and attacked Persia. His realm was conquered by the Persians. So the Oracle was right, but it would also have been correct, if Kroisos had conquered Persia.

Yeah, another great idea. But it will probably only happen, if you do it yourself. I don't think you could do a total conversion of MW based on Dune, since you had to change really everything. There is of course the possibility of using a freeware engine like Crystalspace. Agreed, cast was good and it catched the spirit. But I will never forgive Lynch for creating this ugly, slimy, brutal, bloodthirsty monster which he dares to call "Baron Harkonnen". When reading the books, I personally think that the Baron in the miniseries is more like he should be.

I've got the Special Edition of David Lynch's 1980-film and both Three-Part-Series. Personally I think that the two series are superior to the cinema-version of David Lynch. First because they are longer and more accurate to the books and second because of their better special effects. But the books of course are still superior to any of the films. Personally I also hope that they will make mini-series of book 4, 5 and 6 (God-emperor, Heretics and Chapterhouse). Of course I also read "The Butlerian Jihad" by Brian Herbert and I will buy myself "The Machine Crusade" and "The Battle of Corrin" soon. I also heard that Brian Herbert will write the seventh book in the series which his father never completed. Can anyone affirm this? Of course I would also look forward to a new Dune game, but it probably won't happen. Personally I would very much like a well-made Dune-FPS (playing as a Fedaikin would be fun).

The C&C games were great and Generals had no right to call itself this way. Yes, its graphics were great, but what about the great storyline and the cinematics? The Red Alert games were great because of their gameplay, but personally I liked the Tiberium games better, because their story was superior and far more interesting. I still hope that they continue and that we will learn more about where the Tiberium originally came from (anyone remember the crashed spaceship from "Tiberium Sun"?). By the way, I also enjoyed the Dune games which were also created by Westwood. But that's probably just because I love the whole Dune universe and am a great fan of the books.

OK, good point. Simple lifeforms may exist somewhere in the universe, perhaps more than we think. But don't expect to get across something intelligent. The development of an intelligent being is even more complex than the development of life itself and it is very unlikely that there are other intelligent beings.

We know enough of chemistry to know precisly under what conditions a certain reaction must take place. You can experiment with different conditions inside a lab. And I tell you, they made a lot of experiments trying to recreate the reactions leading to a lifeform. A very early lifeform is very unstable and requires very precise circumstances to stay stable. It is difficult enough to get a protein molecule, because those are very complex molecules. Now those were experiments under control of human. How much more does it take for mere chance to create life, when not even the humam mind can recreate it?

@Maquissar: You make some good points, but you forgot some things which are rather important in order for life to come into being: - As you said, binary systems are not possible to hold any live, since the radiation is to great. When you are far enough that radiation does no longer matter, you're too far away already, it is to cold for the chemical reactions which cause life. About 70% of all star systems are binary systems. - Even when you get a starsystem with only one star, this has to be a special kind of star. It can't be a red giant, nor a white dwarf, nor a Pulsar nor a black hole. And of the normal stars which are in their medium lifetime, the star has to be in a similar class like our own sun, else the star is too hot or too cold. - If you are lucky to get such a star-class, it has to be a second generation star, because when it is a first-generation star it would only consist of hydrogen and helium, while second generation stars consist also of higher elements. - The starsystem has to have planets. Not only this, the planet has to be in a certain distance, either it is too cold or too hot. Then the planet has to be not too big and not too small. When it is too big, the gravity is too great to hold live, when it is too small, the gravity is too low (like our moon or Mercur). Exception only when it is a satellite of a greater planet (like the satellites of Jupiter). The planet must have a certain own velocity, not too fast and not too slow. The planet must have its own rotation, but also this not too slow or too fast (because then the corriolis force would be too great) and it the sides which face the sun must not always be the same (like on Venus). - There must be a dense enough atmosphere, temperatures must not be too cold or too hot, the chemical reactions producing live only happen under very precise and delicate circumstances. Also the atmosphere mustn't hold oxygene. - Even when protein molecules form, this doesn't necessarily lead to live. If it does, it very unlikely that the circumstances are good enough for development, the lifeform may be unmade pretty fast unless it is not hold under very precise circumstances. - Who says that evolution must lead in the end towards an intelligent being? Or how long it takes for such a being to evolve? Our earth was the ideal place and it is very unlikely that anywhere in the universe you find exactly these circumstances which lead to intelligent live like on our planet. Earth was just the perfect hit, one you'll never get again in this universe. Mathematical looked at, a place like our earth and a development like on our earth mustn't exist, it is so unlikely to happen, that is impossible, mathematical speaking. So our earth shouldn't exist, theoretically. But it does. Think about that.

I disagree strongly. (now the discussions start) Why this? Deus Ex and Half-Life are good games, they are even some of the best games, but they certainly do not deserve the title of the best game ever. The question for the best game ever is difficult in itself. It would be easier to answer this by genres and not the best game of all games. Or when the question would be "what is the most important and influential game?". That would clealry be one of the following games: Command and Conquer, Civilization, Doom, Wing Commander, Quake, Descent, Baldur's Gate, Myst, StarWars: Rebel Assault (because it was the first game to fully use the capabilities of the CD-ROM). But the best game... well, there are several games which are nominated for this award, I think. - "Myst" is certainly one, just because of it's simple genious; "Riven" perfected the already good "Myst" - I would agree on "Baldur's Gate 2" being the best RPG of all times, where the "old" 2-dimensional RPG was perfected. Worth mentioning and considerable are also "Fallout", "Planescape: Torment" and "Diablo 2". For the 3d-RPG's I would nominate both "Morrowind" and "Gothic II: Die Nacht des Raben". - "Civilization 2: Test of Time" and "Age of Empires 2" are probably the best strategy games of all times. OK, I would also consider "WarCraft 3", "StarCraft", "Sudden Strike", "Comand & Conquer: Tiberium Dawn", "Command & Conquer: Red Alert" and "Stronghold". "Rome: Total War" is probably the coming best strategy game and will top them all, at least when it holds to its promises. - Now it is the Action-Games turn. What shall I nominate here? "Quake", "Unreal Tournament", "Counterstrike", "Half-Life". - Space-simulations, yes. "WingCommander", "Freespace 2", "Freelancer", "Descent" (one of my favourites, especially the much underrated Descent 3), Privateer OK, this is my nomination list. Feel free to add :D Now, who wins? Let's look by genre: Adventure: Riven RPG: Baldur's Gate 2 Strategy: Age of Empires 2 Action: Counterstrike Space-Simulation: WingCommander Now, who wins in the end? OK, lets look. Riven is really cool, but it has the flaw that you can play it only once and then you know it all. Counterstrike gives you endless gaming, because it is always different, the enemies are human. Problem is, the principle of the game stays the same, there isn't much variety there. Age of Empires is cool in the Net, but suffers from the same problem as Counterstrike. WingCommander was the first of its Genre and one of the best series in game history. As a plus, it had a good story. Multiplayer is something that lacks tough. Baldur's Gate is the perfected RPG, which you can almost play endlessly until you are through once. The cool thing about is that you can play it again and again and always do something new. When we take 200 hours to play the game once, and you have about ten different classes, well, that gets you 2000 hours of gameplay. Quite a lot, don't you think? That is also the reason why I say, Baldur's Gate is the best game of all time. At least from an objective point of view, or at least partial objective view. Subjectivly, I would name an other game, or should I say "games". Outcast is one of my favourites, then there is Descent 3, Arcanum (just because of the genious story), Planescape: Torment (for the same reason), Battlezone (because of it's genious combination of Strategy and Action), Gothic I and II (I just love those RPG's, because of their unique living world)

@Slaiv: But isn't this thread a little different from those you mentioned? This thread asks the question, which is the best game of all times and this can be discussed. The other threads you mentioned ask different questions, like the best RPG's or what is the favourite game of a person. So it seems to me that the question here is different, since you can discuss acctually why something is better, while the threads you mentioned only asked to state what you think is better, not discuss it.

My favourite game? There are several. One is the already mentioned Arcanum, so I don't repeat it here. The next would be the Gothic-Series. Really great games. The best Reviews I can give you here are German, sorry for that, but the English reviews either rated the games terribly bad or too good. Gothic: http://www.gamestar.de/magazin/tests/adventure/139/ Gothic II: http://www.gamestar.de/magazin/tests/adventure/10795/ Gothic II - Night of the Raven: http://www.gamestar.de/magazin/tests/adventure/13716/ And here some Screenshots: http://www.worldofgothic.de/gothic/index.p...hots&dir=gothic http://www.worldofgothic.de/gothic2/index....ens&dir=gothic2 OK, next game. That would probably be Thief and Thief II, really great games until today. Thief: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/thiefthe...ect/review.html Thief II: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/thief2th...age/review.html Then there is Battlezone, truly a great and innovative game. Here the Review: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/battle...one/review.html Age of Empires II, one of the best strategy games ever: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/ageofe...aok/review.html Baldur's Gate I and II should also be mentioned: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate/review.html http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate...amn/review.html