The Ultimate List of Arcanum's Easter Eggs

i dont know if you have missed it or not but isnt the city Tarant:s name a reference to Isaac Asimovs Trantor in "Foundation"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_(novel)

*i know that this thread probably went inactive quite some time ago*

 

Hi there!

I think this thread may be one of those ones that is immune to gravedigging, considering the subject. Feel free to smack me if I'm wrong, men in charge.

Although it's an interesting idea, I don't think there's enough corellation between Tarant and Trantor for it to count as an Easter Egg. If it was, there's a lot of cheap Doctor Who references I could be making about now...

 

....maybe i didn't really express myself in a correct way... <it's hard to write English on a japanese keyboard>

was i ment was not only the name bu the whole structure of the city... one of the most obvious things is Bates "little castle". it's a copy of the Emperors* castle in Foundation.
It was several years ago i played Arcanum so i don't really remember everything, but isn't there a couple of references to Daneel* in your logbook as well?

*I didn't read Foundation in english so i hope that's what he is called in English as well...

 

I really like the design of the swords, that's the sword used by Xena?

 

...

...

 

Can't be sure if this is common knowledge or not, so I'll just go ahead and throw it out there anyway. Magnus is a pun, his name being Latin for 'great,' or more loosely 'big.' Which of course we all know is one thing dwarves generally aren't. Do with that what you will.

Only realised this when I was running some light translations for an essay.

 

The Barbarian Heavy Blade looks to me like quite a lot of designs of two-handed Gothic medieval blades. Hell if I know, though, could still be a reference to Conan.

I severely doubt that Magnus is a pun, more of a stereotypical name for a Dwarf that was given to the most relevant Dwarven character in the game.

Also, good to see you back here, Minuos. I always liked you back when I was just a lurker. You seem to be part of a trend, actually. I never thought I'd see Floyd here again, for one thing. Although I must say I was depressed to still see Zanza here (When I realized the Alliance of Self-Indulgent Pseudo-Intellectuals wasn't accepting new members, I gtfo'd. Zanza, however; "Yeah, lulz, I'm a total troll, I know", kinda sad, if you ask me).

 

I don't know if Magnus was a pun or not. It could be. It could also relate to the Scandinavian name, which is my middle name and my late Great-Grandfather (b. 1920ish)'s name.

Lawl, this forum is made up of pseudo-intellectuals? How far does the 'pseudo' part go, exactly? I mean, for the vast majority of us, any attempt at intellectualism really would be pseudo (at least one of us actually has one or two university degrees, DElf being a teacher, and so is probably allowed to claim intellectualism). I'm hoping one day I can get a Ph. D and claim to be the most intellectual person here, though it might be a bit overkill for 75% of the forum.

We never discuss anything serious, anyway. Pseudo-intellectuals think what they're talking about matters politically and philosophically. I think if there's a problem here, it's that we're made up of pseudo-artistics. People who think they're Tolkien or Lee Streisberg, but are really Anne Rice or Tim Kelly, and who fail to see the relevance of artists like Ernest Hemingway or Robert Wilson, who have eschewed traditional structure.

 

A good point and astutely presented.

...I fold.

However, words are not always crystalline conduits, and semantics always play their part in stalling communicative progress. In other words, I think you know what I was trying to say.

 

Ah, Magnus. Considering that Latin forms the basis of a good deal of European language, it's at least something to consider (for whether it was intended or not). Either way, I still found it a touch humorous and I envy your Great-Grandfather for it being his name, Grakelin.

But as far as intellectuality goes, genuine or feigned, I've never been one for formal attributes. I just like people who aren't utterly stupid. I'm probably a bit above average where mental prowess is concerned but it's quite wasted by the fact that I only care about literature and videogames. Such is life.

Also, I'm guilty of many a numb post - the fruit of strong liquor. Far from any form of intellect, I'm sure.

 

As far as I recall, there wasn't any bandwagon aimed at you, just Fish and Rosie having a little fun with the new guy and the new guy proving to not have a thick enough skin to wait till they get bored and make the initiation process complete. Me, I even threatened to eat a cat if you won't come back, and yet you didn't. The cat was quite tasty though, so no hard feelings.

 

You should probably be aware that certain people get paid six figures to talk about literature, because it is considered to be a highly important part of academia.

I don't think it's a waste. I've got a 4-10 year game plan for studying theatre, after all. And people are going to pay my university big money to make sure people like me are able to do that. Seriously. Ditch your girlfriend to save some money and go get a Ph. D.

 

Hence why I'm concentrating on literature in college. Can't say I'm fond of all the time which will need to be invested, but it's a given.

 

I study literature myself at uni, decided once I get my degree I'm joining the police though, take it how you will.

 

Ah, literary academia. *gags* I'd think better of them if one of them hadn't looked at my own work, and had the GALL to tell me what message I was trying to send, and to talk down to me when I told him he was way off base. (He got it completely wrong, incidentally. He thouht I was aiming for a metaphor about science gone mad; I was trying to say don't neglect your pets because it'll come back to bite you in the ass.)

 

I almost broke a personal rule and *roleplayed* a laugh there, Xiao. I'm the reserved, passive sort, but we have two of your hated type to put up with. One of whom pretends I don't exist because of a snide remark I once made about her assumed love for cream-cakes. So as a general rule, no one touches my stuff. Suppose I'm like a ghoul without the shuffling. It'd be a cold day in hell before they got their mitts on my more prized pieces.

 

I'll need absolute, undeniable proof of the existance of Hell before I ever let academians near my work again. Bloody lunatics...

Protect your work from them, my friend, they're crazy.

 

That's a fair jab, but I didn't mean to imply that there was any by and large bandwagoning against me, more simultaneously stating two reasons I left.

Touching, that. And i c wut u did thar.

Fake edit:

I think you meant to say 'til. I just wanted to be petty once more for old times' sake.

 

I don't mean to sound negative, but if it were me, I would let the guy think it was about the fallacies of science before telling him it was a PETA ad. Just saying.

You shouldn't be getting worked up just because somebody interprets your piece a different way. That's the point. Bertolt Brecht wrote in such a way that different people who watch or read his plays would disagree as to the argument contained within. Robert Wilson refuses to explain anything he does, and it is entirely up to the audience of his works to interpret what they will.

Similarly, allowing yourself to get too narrowly focused on what you want your work to be is not beneficial. Let these interpretations flow, and if you like them, weave them into your writing. People don't interpret things by accident: you had to have actually done something to make them think of this. In February, two of us performed a work of physical theatre (and I know that you're not referring to acting, but this same principle applies to writing. I've done both) in which we represented crops growing in a field, entwining together, and finally being harvested before growing anew. One interpretation we received of an erotic message, another involved the desperation of relationships. Neither of these was what we actually had in mind, but they were interesting avenues to explore nonetheless.

At any rate, it's your responsibility as the writer to communicate your message. Making the choice to disguise it is up to you, but if somebody else interprets it a different way, it is simply what they experienced from your work. Which is to say, it's your own fault.