Larian Studios Forums Divinity - Original Sin Divinity Original Sin - Mods What older game should be done as a Mod ?

Blazed - You had a sook because I posted a thread about IP issues to centralise discussion (including paradoxically, saying "just create one thread about it and keep discussion there". So if you have IP related issues, feel free to confine it to this thread:
http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=527210#Post527210

Someone using an old game as inspiration is their issue, not yours (despite how passionately you wish to prevent others 'wasting their time') - As per the above thread, people can be made aware that using external IP may result in them having to abandon their work if the IP owner decides to follow that path.

I think this thread is a great idea - it allows people to work on mod planning (which is the same regardless of if it is your idea or someone else's) and develop modding skills while paying homage to people's favourite games.


MORE on topic - How hard would it be to incorporate other genres into a mod? ie. instead of a fantasy style mod, would it be possible to incorporate firearms etc? I dont have time to get into the tools at the moment unfortunately but I could conceive of a more 'modern' mod based on an insurgency/small scale civil war? Jagged Alliance style combat could translate fairly well?

As long as the mod is treated as a mod, there is no problem.

Even if it recreates some parts of an IP, it would still be very hard to sue as it's not strictly a carbon copy, actually, it's not even a game itself, it's a customization of a game. I'm not an IP lawyer, but in my view it could be described as a fair use case very easily.

Usually IP lawsuits happen when there is money involved, the similarity is too high (your product is trying to pose as my product) or damage to a brand by association with something their owners do not want to be associated with.

We could cite Shadowrun Returns, there are mod projects to recreate the games from SNES and Genesis using the engine of the new game, there are also projects that recreate some of the runs that only exist on the Pen and Paper game. 0 lawsuits happened so far, heck, the developers even PLAYED some of these mods in a live stream.

As long as people keep their mods as mods, lawsuits should never happen. And if they do, nothing serious is likely to happen.

This is actually one of the few positive things about the law being something that evolves so slowly.

Adding firearms to the game should most definately be possible, although it would require you to import your own models and textures. I'm not sure if that's possible right now though, might be in an update to the editor.

There are already a bunch of skills you could modify to mimic certain weapons/effects. For example the Boulder Bash skill can be used as something similar to using a mortar, or flare has a good arc to be like a grenade. There's also a marksman skill that's similar to a machine gun spread. It's also possible to modify ranges to get closer or longer range combat, and it's possible to set weapon restrictions so you can only use a skill with a certain weapon type.

Since that was on page 1, I'll just quote it again.


Both Lazarus and the U6 project vastly expanded the worlds of Ultima V / VI, added lots of new quests / dungeons and even featured hundreds of new portraits. You're obviously totally clueless about the difference between an App store clone (hello China!) and a faithful re-imagining and updating of a beloved part of your childhood memories. So far the only "ape" here is your vast ego and ignorance clashing in a titanic black hole of fucking muppetry. It's beautiful to watch



Back to general advice - if a product is either no longer sold, or available only through specialist services (GoG, basically), a generally good idea would be a legal disclaimer along the lines of the Lazarus one - I'll edit it slightly

Ultima V: Lazarus <Your Mod here> is being produced completely nonprofit by a group of avid Ultima <Game> fans who call themselves "Team Lazarus." <Your title>. Lazarus <Your title> will be available for users who own a copy of Gas-Powered Games' Dungeon Siege** <Larian Studio's Divinity Original Sin>, the engine we're modding. Dungeon Siege <Divinity: Original Sin> will be required because <Our title> is a Siegelet <Mod> for it and we do not own the rights to the Dungeon Siege <Divinity: Original Sin> engine...

** Dungeon Siege is developed by Gas-Powered Games (GPG). <Divinity: Original Sin is developed by Larian Studios>
<Insert all the trademarks and legal ownership and so on, don't skip anyone>

Ultima V: Lazarus <Our title> is a fan-built recreation for Ultima V <Game> and is not affiliated in any way with Origin Systems, Inc. <Original Studio / publisher> or Gas-Powered Games <Larian Studios>.


http://www.u5lazarus.com/AboutLazarus.php (@ bottom)

Obviously, replace all the legal trademarks & copyright with whatever you're doing.


However - really obvious one here: don't expect to be able to launch World of Warcraft - episode III (or whatever) and get away with it. General rule of thumb is that if the IP is active, forget it, and do your research on how active / protected your IP is. e.g. remakes of Baldur's Gate etc would likely run into problems given they're currently sold as "remastered" on Steam (itself a massive con, given the free fan made mods do the same thing, but better and were around long before); Star Wars / Kotor will get an instant spank (unless the force is with you) and so on and so forth.

A good example other than the ones I've already linked to are the Vampire: Masquerade mods / patches.



Ignore the muppet, but be sensible.

And don't even consider charging for it.

Some people just have an inflammatory way of expressing their opinions. I find it is better to either respond with polite discussion or to avoid engaging them entirely.

If you do plan to remake something you should really look into who has the rights etc. For example, Someone suggested redoing the Monkey Island games, which I can tell you straight away is a really bad idea. Lucas Arts has always been very protective about their IPs, and now they are owned by Disney which does not make the situation better. Besides, the Monkey Island games were remade quite recently (and very well) by themselves.

If the game you want to make was created by a big company, you are probably better off making a "spiritual successor" or "homage". i.e. not make the exact game, but instead something very much like it with new content. Which incidentally also sounds like a lot more fun, at least to me!

You're a funny man SteamUser, My first post was completely neutral and non-insulting and you felt the need to snip my quote and call it bullshit, even though everything I said was actually correct, your defence being an example of a specific case where the owner hasn't taken action against the modders. You sparked the start of a flame war, but people will see what they want to see, because some people are in fact stupid. In this case, I've aggravated people who want to simply copy another game using the assets of yet another game (divinity in this case) basically doing nothing at all besides doing some asset placements, and game tweaking, (Some may push it further by adding their own models etc, which is a great start on making original content, at least it's something).

I've never played a remake of game in mod form, to be honest I don't think it will live up to the original title and the emotions it brought originally. I have however played official remakes and they are great, thats another point if it's not redone by the original people then I feel it doesn't reflect the original title in question.

One thing I loved about Warcraft III and Starcraft 2 mods is playing all the new custom maps people created and seeing all the fun little games people made, most of them which were rather original, or at least not a direct copy of something.



I agree, that's why in my first post I said maybe start with seeing which ones would actually allow you to do it, it doesn't even need to be a formal permission but a "yeah sure, go ahead" under the radar response. Apparently I encouraging people to ask owners politely was "Bullshit" information by SteamUser. The fact he doesn't understand basic courtesy (rather than outright stealing) or that just because someone allows it doesn't mean it's not copyright infringement, the fact that they can change their mind at any time and take you to court and pretty much win, pretty much proves that it's copyright infringement at all times, always at the hands of mercy.

The Dark Queen of Krynn.

Did I mention Dragon Warrior? Because Dragon Warrior.

Funny. In the top #10 SCII mods are:


The chronicles of Azeroth include the remake of the three original Warcraft game (orcs and humans, Tides of Darkness+Beyond the Dark Portal, Reign of Chaos+Frozen Throne) and new ones based on wow lore (vanilla-Temple of Ahn'qiraj, Burning Crusade, Wrath of the Lich King, Cataclysm + maybe future wow expansion) with campaign and multiplayer melee gameplay.

http://www.moddb.com/mods/chronicles-of-azeroth

WC: AND is a highly ambitious project that will utilize the immense power of the Galaxy Editor in order to breathe life into the Warcraft RTS series once more. This will be a fully fledged conversion featuring a breathtaking, lore abiding storyline spanning several emotionally-gripping campaigns containing new units, new heroes and new features as well as a fully fledged melee mode.

This is a complete overhaul; the finished product will have much more in common with wc3 than sc2, however daunting it may seem this is possible and can happen, but not without commitment! Not without you! Join the team, post suggestions or just show us your enthusiasm! Continuation of the Warcraft RTS series lies but a click away!

http://www.moddb.com/mods/warcraft-a-new-dawn




Not. A. Fucking. Clue.


p.s.

If you need it explaining: Blizzard aren't concerned about such remakes because they own both the original IP and the engine that it's being remade in. Go ask them how much Steam had to settle over DOTA for. Hint: you won't, as it's sealed by the courts but it's a huge fucking % cut.

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/02/10/blizzard-taking-valve-to-court-over-dota-trademark/

^ Check up ^ and take a look at the red sections as like I said silly people only see what they want to see.

You took one little sentence to argue for from my whole argument, because you obviously didn't have anything else to say, on that note I accept that I won over all other arguments that you couldn't respond to. gg. Now let's move on.



1) Both mods which were not available at the time I was playing SC2:WOL.

2) Most people like myself download mod maps directly from in game, this polarity is based on www.moddb.com, if you are using this for your argument you really need to learn how to come up with more accurate conclusions, if you look at steam statistics Dota 2 is usually the most played game if you look at xfire the statistics mismatch by a lot, this goes for other games beside Dota 2.

3) The mods seems to be taking lore from various games including World of Warcraft, MMO to RTS. Not exactly a direct copy, not even the same genre of games. If someone said they want to make Skyrim as a RTS game my opinion will be slightly different, as there is some signs of originality within that statement.



That's not what I'm arguing for, If someone wants to remake Divinity, Using Divinty: OS, thats a lot better than someone wanting to remake diablo for example, the fact that both the Engine and Game being copied are by Larian that means you only have 1 Company to worry about IP infringement. Heres the thing if someone makes a good remake it still benefits Larian as free content for the buyers of the game, however a diablo remake will only benefit Larian (if using the Divinity Engine.) and nothing for Blizzard.



Don't get your point here, you are saying Blizzard Sued Dota and won? I think you are forgetting what side you are fighting for again, you are the guy who thinks IP Infringement is fine remember? I'm the guy saying "don't do it!" remember?? Hello?




Frankly I am getting bored of your obvious troll attempts to start a flame war again, I gave a polite, valid concern point as my first post on this thread, you felt the need to call it out as "A load of Bullshit". So I tried to educate you as we both ended up name calling each other.

I was again rather neutral with you in my last post, not trying to continue this flame war but you are again pushing for it.

Your conclusions, points and arguments are bad, and pretty much invalid most of the time. I'm tired of trying to teach a monkey some sense, I conclude that it's not possible.

With that - welcome to my ignore list.

Maybe we can have some quiet time now, without you bringing me out here to sit you back down for every poor argument you make. Whilst I enjoyed the arguments, Its apparent it's a never ending cycle especially with you taking 1 sentence, where you think you have gained an advantage for, and linking random shit, you're like a kid who sends Wikipedia pages as facts without questioning it's accuracy or validity.

Good Night.

When your argument rests on your own personal history, which we have no way of knowing about, then... *shrug* Get a mirror, we're not interested. A better ape, I mean monkey, I mean lizard, I mean person would just admit they were ignorant of the modding scene, eh?


I was merely attempting to educate people about how to do it right, and to point out that even with active IPs, there are ways around your (frankly ignorant) mis-reading of the Law. For the record, using the threat of ignoring me is kinda cute, given the tone of the peanut gallery. Hint: I ain't the one worried about it.


This dirty Ape wins - flawless victory.

I do love the reference to "wikipedia references".. when none of my links are to wiki pages, all are accurately sourced, show an accurate and useful understanding of the current modding scene & legal ramifications and this chump hasn't provided a whit of evidence for his total melt-down.

Oh. He did once make some anime commentary videos on YouTube, that got taken down.

Such is the life of the sub-Ape reptile lizard from Mars, eh?




This muppet doesn't even understand the basics about Law.

Law doesn't give a flying fuck about "courtesy". No business will ever give such permissions as such permissions amount to a legal rescinding of their rights over said copyrights to all parties. Once such permissions are given, the claimant has no legal recourse to any party in the future. Aka, it becomes Public property.

II. Other Defenses

A. Preemption has been successfully argued as a defense when a state cause of action has been
brought against a D. The 1976 Act sought to clarify preemption and did so to some extent, but
not completely, and cases continue to turn on preemption...

B. The copyright may be expired, or the holder may have forfeited his or her rights in the work; both
of which are defenses to infringement.



http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/copyright-defenses.htm



I'm so happy I'm ignored so this fuckwit doesn't spam us with more bollocks.

I think Spiderweb Software games would be nicely done in D.OS' engine.

That's really funny if you know the history of Spiderweb games. (visa vie workshop)

Let's just say: he put off having anything outside of direct downloads for years, was weary of Steam, then the moment he put them on Steam... He made a shit load of cash.

However: he's probably not the sort to view it favorably, given his (justified) pride in his own engine. Just a head's up there.

Ok I have to admit I made a quick toggle and scanned through your posts quickly, it kind of felt like an emergency because you're constantly posting replies, you know just like when someone keeps phoning you?

Scanning past the general rubbish and flaming, here are some answers back to you:

- Maybe you should stop using "anime" as an insulting term. I shared a tiny bit about my life and you're desperately clinging onto that for some insults. (Oh I see you removed this comment now that you alerted the moderators, haha!)

- Permissions need to be a proper document, a legal paper signed and follow the normal procedures of lawful documents, not something you can pass on in an email Muppet. Are you really that dumb? You can forge such emails so easily, what you going to do? Go to court with an email printout that a developer said yes you can remake their game? This does not at all forfeit anything, do I need to bring a lawyer friend to bash your stupidity? But yeah I'm clearly one that doesn't know anything...

A developer giving you permission to remake their game (a nice gesture) through an email conversation will not forfeit, rescind or revoke any of their rights to their copyrighted material dont listen to this guy.

- I check back regularly for updates on the forum, so sue me lol.

- You're still picking out one sentence, and driving a whole
argument from it, good job!

- Stating I mostly saw original and fun mods in SC2 is already a personal view/statement so why is it not valid that I state the those specific mods you mentioned were not available, because they weren't?

- Please stop crying to the moderators, I'm sorry for bullying you!

- I do use external links/evidence when required, when I'm sure of its validity, I don't post every little crap I find to make my points like you, links that don't prove much or add to the argument.

To repeat:
Your conclusions, points and arguments are bad.

Time to Smoke up the thread. This is what I thrive for accurate information.

SteamUser you should not be allowed to encourage fellow modders to make bad decisions and then disappear when the shit hits the fan. Your information and advice is bad and you should be revoked from discussion privileges. Your only valid argument throughout the thread was "Company might not sue you". Then it was "here is a mod that hasnt been sued, thats bullshit, you know nothing, etc..."

This is also how to properly link information and articles directly relating to the debate, not a mod link that proves literally nothing.

Please feel free to read the full FAQ, I pasted the most relevant parts only.

Here we go:

www.sloperama.com/advice/faq61.htm

#61: So You Want to Clone Somebody's IP

Q. Can they sue me, take me to court?
A. Yes. The risk goes up the more you take actions that impact someone else (like using their IP for instance). The more you are afraid of being sued, the more careful you should be about using somebody's IP (the harder you should work at not copying it). The more you are afraid of being sued, the more you should consider consulting a lawyer.

Q. What if the only thing I want to "borrow" is a character?
A. Characters are probably the most unique, most recognizable aspect of a game or any other IP. A resounding NO to this idea. Create your own characters instead.

Q. I'll just claim that it's "Fair use." Like what Weird Al did.
A. It's unlikely that your game would fit the qualifications for fair use.

Q. Yikes, then I guess I shouldn't do that.
A. Ding ding ding ding!

Q. What if the only thing I want to "borrow" is a game's title?
A. Titles are also fiercely protected. We're getting into the realm of trademark here (as with characters and manufactured goods). You'd be better off entitling your game - don't go using other people's trademarks!

Q. But it's just a little bit of money!
A. And it'll only be a little bit of a lawsuit. No matter how little the suit might be for, are you really sure you want to risk getting sued, taking time off from work without pay, to go to court, hire a lawyer to defend you, so you can explain to a judge why you had to "borrow" somebody else's valuable IP instead of just being creative...?

Q. So there's nothing I can borrow from any game? Then how can anybody make a game at all? This is all so confusing!
A. So consult a lawyer. He or she can help you make sense of it all.
---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=26290&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GamasutraNews+%28Gamasutra+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

Analysis: Clone Games & Fan Games -- Legal Issues

Just because you wrote your clone or fan game from scratch does not guarantee that it is legal. The intellectual property contained in a video game is truly vast. For instance the copyrights alone may include (but are by no means limited to):

<list removed Check link>

The most frequent argument I hear concerning a persons clone or fan game is that the code is different or that they Created the game from scratch?

Unfortunately, the law doesnt really care, and is not on your side here if you relied on or used any of the other elements noted above. Even if you create the images, sound recordings, etc. from scratch, if those same components are clearly derived or ripped off from the original game, all your hard work may mean absolutely nothing from a legal perspective.

Protecting your Clone/Fan Game

You have a few choices here:

1. Make a legal clone. Rely on unprotected game elements, mechanics and processes that are so common and prolific in the game industry as to no longer warrant protection, copyright.

2. Ask permission. Yes, this does put you on the owners radar, but show some respect. If youre making a clone or fan game, at least be sincere about it obviously you enjoy the game, so show some respect to the games creators and publishers and inform them of what you want to do.

3. Come up with your own game. This is probably the best approach. If another game has inspired you, that is a wonderful thing. Let that propel your own creativity and make something unique that is truly worth playing.
---------------------------------------------------------

http://kotaku.com/5420240/how-to-make-a-fan-game-and-not-get-your-ass-sued

How To Make A Fan Game And Not Get Your Ass Sued

Making a fan game - like this, or this - can be a tricky thing. Is it a tribute, or is it stealing? We like to think it's the former, but lawyers often think the latter.

The best plan of action is to "rely on unprotected game elements, mechanics and processes" and ask the IP owner for permission before commencing work. If those don't work, you can always take what inspired you from somebody else's game and use it as a foundation to build your own game on.
---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-05/5/investigation-are-fan-games-legal

Investigated: Are 'fangames' legal?

Imagine that you've just spent the last eight years of your life toiling away at a tribute to your favourite game series. And then, imagine just days after your labour of love hits the internet, he original game serves you with a cease and desist letter. That was the crushing story for Spanish coder "Bomber Link", whose Herculean tribute to Streets of Rage got shut down by Sega's legal team.

Nintendo killed off online Pokemon battler Pokenet and fan-made Zelda film The Hero of Time, Square-Enix shut down unofficial Chrono Trigger sequel Chrono Resurrection, and fan-made King's Quest follow-up The Silver Lining fell into a legal wormhole as Vivendi and Activision constantly changed their minds over whether the fan game was kosher.Expressing your admiration for a game in interactive form just doesn't seem to be worth the hassle
Unfortunately, by ignoring these infringements companies would be putting their hard-earned trade marks and copyrights in danger. "If a company was to continually ignore infringements of a trade mark, the protection afforded by the mark is eroded and may render it invalid, this is the exact argument that Sega gave when booting out Streets of Rage Remake. "We need to protect our intellectual property rights and this may result in us requesting that our fans remove online imagery, videos or games in some instances,"
---------------------------------------------------------

Ladies and gentlemen, I rest my case, Basically the same information I have been saying from the start of the thread, some of it word for word, but sure I'm one who doesn't know anything, and I'm the one who gets most of the hate. It's cool I forgive you all, except SteamUser he's a muppet.

Blazed. You are seriously being a complete jerk to anyone who disagrees with you. You are providing giant walls of text that I promise you that very few people would bother reading. Every single person who dares to stand up to you is effectively shot in the face by you.
Please, for just a minute, think about how rude you're being to everyone. You are the one who started this massive derailment of the thread and I implore you to just let this go and move on. I created this account solely so I could post this, this situation was that frustrating that I felt I should reply.

EDIT: In addition, I feel I should once again reiterate how horrible you're being to everyone. How dare you say that you accept our "apologies" when it should be you that should be apologizing to us! What right do you have to be so stuck up to people? I'd seriously like to know! You're a condescending shell of a human being with not an ounce of respect for anyone besides yourself. If you reply to this, I beg of you to respond in two paragraphs or less for the benefit of all of us.

You are lazy enough to not read, but motivated enough to make an account for a useless post. This is what's wrong with the forum. Youre not worth a "face shot" please be quiet.

Edit: spent time to post educational post for everyone's benefit and first post right after was a "didn't read, but I'm going to derail this in another direction now".

At least ScrotieMcB took it in, acknowledged the information, even if it's just 1 person, worth it.

Actually, blazed's second-to-last post was pretty good. It contained actual information, cited sources, and backed up his argument.

It's a shame he decided to be rude and uninformative for so much of the thread before then. Don't get me wrong, good conclusion, and it seems to me he was "right" the whole time... but it would have been nicer if he was, um, nicer about it. Posting those sources at the beginning would have also been a huge help.

And then, of course, back to being rude again.

No, he's not correct. In fact, all he did was google some articles when I'd already linked you to the specific USA law governing it. Every single piece he linked is about complete remakes, not mods. That he doesn't understand the nuances of the discussion is because he's blowing smoke - anyone who knows anything about the issue would have seen my link to the Law and realized the "why" to "why do companies prosecute IP infringment // don't give permission when asked 'courteously'".

It was right there, but of course Blazed didn't read it.

There's a world of difference between a mod as a tribute and remaking someone's still active IP, which I've highlighted continuously. Several times. Repeatedly.

To wit:

1) In contrast to a simple "rip assets & recode" most mods use third party engines, and the assets found within those (or original assets), often differing completely from the original game. Mods that fall foul of legal challenges (MERP etc, already linked) fail not because they're using old IP covered assets, but because they're using other copyrighted elements. e.g. "Middle Earth" etc.

Example: DOOM RL. Doom RL is rather unique, in that it is a rogue-like, but obviously uses ID software's IP. ID software has chosen to just ignore it, probably because they like it.

Strike #3 for "Blazed" (Lazarus / U6 Project are #1 and #2)


2) In using a third party engine (e.g. D:OS or Dungeon Siege or SC II) the modder is not claiming rights to either the original IP nor the engine used (which, as I've stated already, requires a license & legal framework if you want to commercially release software). Mods are, by definition, non-profit entities, unless we enter the realm of hacks (where a lot of money is made, especially in the FPS realm). This is pertinent because in all the cases he linked to, the authors were attempting to monetize their own code / engines that used another companies' IP (DERP - of course you're gonna get smacked).

Example: the original Counter Strike : It was initially developed and released as a Half-Life modification by Minh "Gooseman" Le and Jess "Cliffe" Cliffe in 1999, before Le and Cliffe were hired and the game's intellectual property acquired.

Strike #4 for Blazed

3) If you want an in-depth and particular analysis of say, Blizzard and modding, I'd suggest you stear clear of vapid gaming magazines that Blazed google'd, and try something like this:

Detailed analysis of WoW, mods of t..., in particular with regard to donations

Blizzardç—´ incorporation of new features based on mods was to ensure that the default UI maintained a robust æ–—owest common denominator (see also Reece, 2009). Blizzard had only incorporated basic features of the mods; they were not copied wholesale. The lowest common denominator referred to the basic features of popular mods relevant to most players.

In addition to the notion of a lowest common denominator, Blizzard also acted to protect its vision of the game. Blizzard used its legally conferred authority in mods ownership to disable mods that did not conform to its idea of good play. One famous WoW mod, Decursive, had automated, into a single mouse click, a task comprised of a series of actions. Decursive was a hugely popular mod, but Blizzard deemed that its execution oversimplified WoW by Blizzard standards of play. Decursive was rewritten by its owner to provide some relief from the tedious actions required to remove diseases, poisons, and curses, but in a way that was not as simple as the single膨lick version.

For those who haven't played WoW, or any other MMO, there's a huge community of mod makers who make 3rd party add-ons for them. From GUI changes, to DD calcs, to fashion... you get the drift. These are mods; I'm referencing these because although original, they skirt the grey area of monetization of someone elses' IP (in this case, Blizzard's). Blizzard simply used it's legal rights to squash any mods that they didn't like (without using the law).

Strike #5 for Blazed.


In the particulars of IP law, I've already shown you the way - as a modder, there's no harm in changing your mod to not incorporate someone elses' IP; but unless you're really stupid, remaking your childhood favorite is possible.


There you go - instead of bleating and just googling some vapid press, I actually know something about this.






TL;DR

Blazed knows little about the issue, and has taken a black/white stance he's been fed by the gaming press, usually referencing specific total remakes that a) rip art / name assets and b) have IPs that are commercially viable & used at the present time. Remaking Pokemon, when it's a global brand is just fucking stupid.

Blazed, throughout this, cannot understand why I hold a position that covers both areas (he's complained about this three times). This is because reality is a little more complicated than a binary world-view, and it takes real brains to understand. Not pretend Lizard brains.

I, on the other hand, am showing you the Grey Area. Unlike Blazed, who thinks "monkey" is an insult, I know the real insult: meatfucker

You know, this is actually becoming really entertaining! Anyone want popcorn? Personally, I'm rooting for SteamUser, he's able to provide good information without insulting a new member to the forum!