FadedC

I guess the question is how realistic does she want it to be. If she just wants a game that revolves around baking cakes then you might try Cake Mania. It's a fairly popular time managment game that involves running a bake shop and baking custom cakes for different clients. It was in fact popular enough that it spawned at least 2 sequels. I still see women playing it from time to time. It's not especially realistic though. You can find the link to the first one at <a href="h

[quote who="MichaelCook" reply="37" id="2863501"]Alright I'll give ya all a go... Played this on the Amiga 500, role playing game, the world is viewed as if in a 3d maze and combat freezes the world and you fight in a turn based method. Any ideas? [/quote] That really describes just about every old school RPG every made. Some kind of a distinguishing feature would be helpfull.

I don't mind having to give a lot of thought to my turns. Generally speaking though I don't like it when I have to spend a lot of time managing every detail of every province I own. So for example I enjoy things like building buildings like in civ or Galciv or setting battle formations and giving thought to my ship or army designs. But to give a specific example, I've played a few space games where you have to spend a lot of time building shuttles and putting people on those shuttle

Is the game very micromanage heavy? I remember trying the demo awhile back too and really wanting to like it because of all the detail and all the cool races. But I also remember that there was something about it that kept me from getting into it. But it could have been just the learning curve too.

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="88" id="2858527"] That's completely uncalled for. Faded already admitted he made a mistake which is more than what most people would do in a similar situation on an internet forum. He hasn't stooped to calling people names and slinging insults so there is no good reason for you to jump on in and do it. [/quote] I appreciate the effort but it's better just to report scratch and ignore him. He's been the subject of several moderator actio

[quote who="scratchthepitch" reply="84" id="2858466"] Your statement that the poor are least affected by inflation is one of the most stupid things I've come across relating to economics (and that includes speeches from Sarah Palin, btw). Do you think about what you write, or just type whatever fluff that pops into your head? [/quote] Now there's the scratch we all know and love.

[quote who="kenata" reply="80" id="2858330"] Are you really arguing against the basic economic principal that when money loses value it hurts most the people with money saved up a lot more then people without it. Let me state that the fundamental of principles of economics are fault at best. Now, that said, let me state as well, yes, inflation hurts the poor far more than the rich, and it is well understood fact of life. While the rich may have a larger devaluation of cu

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="71" id="2858130"] But like I said, inflation is a really nice tool, it just has this incredible weakness when it comes to things like technology. It's relavent in that your point was correct, imho, but inflation was not the reason, advances are. [/quote] Right, and see I agree with you and that's the part of where the minsunderstanding was. I was not saying that inflation was causing tech prices to go down. I was just comparing

[quote who="scratchthepitch" reply="76" id="2858214"] Quoting FadedC, reply 60 Yes as inflation occurs games become more expensive. The same could be said for every single product in existence, and this inflation hurts the rich far more then the poor. In which alternative universe are you talking about there? [/quote] Are you really arguing against the basic economic principal that when money loses value it hurts

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="68" id="2858081"] You cannot talk about inflation and ignore how much things cost today. That's like saying you want to talk about water but not H20. Inflation is about costs. You cannot ignore costs and still talk about inflation. No, I would not agree with you. Your 1977 200 dollars would not give you more buying power when it comes to technology items then than you can get now. 200 dollars can get you a 32 inch LCD TV today. You could not get any

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="66" id="2858059"] That is not what the CPI does. The CPI takes a basket of goods and compares what that basket of goods cost then to what they cost now. It is certainly about the goods and services. Inflation is not as simplified as CNN and Fox News tries to tell everyone it is.That basket of good is flawed because while a box of cereal is relatively the same over a decade, anything that deals with technology is certainly not. Let me ask

Ooh, I'm pretty sure I remember playing it. Was one of the robots a long range missile robot where you could take control of the missiles and guide them accross the entire battlefield? No clue about the name though, nor anything specific enough to help me google the name.

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="64" id="2858048"] The Consumer Price Index does okay for determining inflation. But it is basic knowledge that that these basic goods type indicators don't do well in aaccounting for changes in technology. I'll spell it out for you; the prices of technology are not going up in inflation because the advances in technological products out pace inflation. It's all relative. Under no circumstances would an Atari 2600 cost 700 dollars today. That number i

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="61" id="2858015"] Quoting FadedC, reply 60 Edit: Also as an interesting point of trivia: When the Atari 2600 come out in 1977 it cost about $200. That's the equivelent to about $700 by today's prices. While you have a valid point, it doesn't work in this situation. Technology becomes cheaper as time goes by, not more expensive. If you were to build a machine with the capabilities of an Atari 2600 today, it wou

Yes as inflation occurs games become more expensive. The same could be said for every single product in existence, and this inflation hurts the rich far more then the poor. The fact that games are becoming more and more popular and played in more and more households belies your claim that they are becoming only for the rich and elite. About 30 years ago when I was a kid you could spend $40 for a game, and by the prices of the time that was a lot more then $60 is

In general I do think it's extremely unrealistic to think that the price of games will ever be so high that only the rich will be able to afford to buy them. It's a product that's increasingly being marketed more and more towards the general public. All recent evidence and trends and economic theory would point to the opposite of what you are claiming. As for music, I still think your missing the point about how different the world today is to the world 400 years ago. But you als

I'm kind of curious about what you are thinking about too now. My first thoughts were that it's a roguelike game like TOME or Dungeon Crawl, but those are free. Maybe something from spiderweb? There was also Knights of The Chalice that I learned about from here.

I think your kind of reading too much into the statement "vote with your dollars". It's just a figure of speech. I've never heard anyone claim that capitalism is a democracy where everyone has an equal vote. I'm also not sure how this relates to the importance of intellectual property. With that being said it is important to note that someone with 10 times as much money is still only going to buy a single copy of a computer game. Regarding your music example, I don't think you can com

[quote who="aeligos" reply="112" id="2857326"]Empire: Total War seems enticing...but my max screen resolution is 1600x900. Is Dawn of Discovery any good? How about Supreme Commander? And when will Impulse place Object Desktop & GalCiv II on sale? I've been waiting and waiting and waiting...each night at midnight I check and check and check and yet nothing. -.- [/quote] There's a demo out for Dawn of Discovery that shoul

[quote who="DraekAlmasy" reply="46" id="2857287"] So is yours, in fact. Somebody who believes in "an honest day's work for an honest day's pay" would never approve of a scheme such as Copyright, which mandates monetary compensation for work done by your grandfather up to 70 years after he bit the dust and would, in fact, be actively campaigning against such laws rather than supporting them with their own money. [/quote] Well my grandfather was a businessman and i

[quote who="mentalinstra" reply="28" id="2856938"] I agree that piracy is stealing, I'm not so naive to try and justify something that is clearly wrong, I just choose to do it. All I know is that until someone comes knocking on my door, the Jimi Hendrix discography plays on and plays loud. [/quote] Honestly I can respect that a lot more then someone who claims that they are a crusader for social justice by pirating. If som

[quote who="TorinReborn" reply="16" id="2856658"] What would happen is a change in the business model. Probably more ingame commercials, or ways to demo games before buying them, and probably more quality games to get people to feel they need to reward developers for their effort. I would never buy a CoD game as they are all crap (but have played all of them but would kill myself if I bought all of them for the little content they provide in SP; I am not interested

[quote who="heil_stardock" reply="8" id="2856563"] Quoting joasoze, reply 1 None of the ones I have followed or posted in has been locked at all two elemental threads on the first page are locked. [/quote] Well yes if you create a thread titled "Elemental Sucks" or something like that it's probably going to get locked. In general though I think Stardock is far more permissive then many companies are. Most other companies would delete t

[quote who="OMG_pacov" reply="90" id="2855257"] heh - I'd love to see numbers as well... don't think we'll see any soon, but from what I've read, they are generally pleased with the sales and are committed to improving the game in the hopes of future sales. If the game was a flop, then I'd imagine they'd have an exit strategy (eg we will support 4 more patches and then we are done). I'm not seeing that now. Maybe they are playing it that way, but if so, they are playing

I think I have higher hopes for Civ 5 just because I feel the scope of the change required to make it a great game is much less. It's really just AI fixes and balance tweaks while elemental still hasn't even decided what type of game it wants to be, let alone how it will all come together in the long run. Elemental probably does have more potential for greatness though, it just also far more potential and liklihood for epic failure. Ultimately though it would not shock me if neither game ever