Chyll

I am not sure this is a good plan, but we will see...

*shrug* different people like different things.

I'm right there with you though, it sounds like a very limited concept and probably not very viable in this type of game setting. And for me somewhat boring rather than fun, no matter how it is spun.

But, concepts like this can lead to interesting places and all ideas find their place in the big picture.

Oh, I got it.

I'm sure they did.

I was just saying in terms of the one conversation there was a disconnect and why I thought it may have been.

Ha! That's pretty apt, actually. In more than one way.

That moment came up specifically in the discussion during the car ride home. She didn't like it much, she thought it too random and out of place in the moment of the film.

I liked it because it showed the Hulk keeping memory across appearances and doing something 'playful' if a bit violent to a cohort...

In short, an example, I think of the contrast between someone who grew up enjoying Marvel comics and someone who didn't sitting in the audience for the film.

I am right there with you, TJ. I can't understand, or support, the clear design intent for some time now related to the team/individual issue. Even more so since I've recently started playing another game that has done a fantastic job of balancing and supporting solo play in their main story line, and clearly delineating where raid/group instances are encouraged. You could argue that this is the case here... And I like the small team aspect, I suppose, but it is just that for a 'blockbuster' event with fanfare and 'woo' and 'hoo' I find it odd that there is not a balance for all - from solo, to small, to standard teams.

But I also decided a while ago that my chosen play style doesn't really fit modern CoH, on the whole anyway. (Hence, I've been playing elsewhere almost exclusively.)

(quoted relates to the small team nature of the event over solo)
Fair enough, but it was designed that way with intent, so it hardly excuses the requirement after the fact...

Maybe you haven't, but we all know that there are those who make questionable choices out there that have, and will continue to do so. And this IO in support of a 'proper build' will give them fuel. But that is fine, I wouldn't want to play with them when I choose to team anyway.

And there is the nice chance that sets that don't get enough play-love will get dusted off and get a wider audience thanks to this IO, so that is nice.

OTOH, I am not sure where I stand on all this IO proliferation... but activity, on the whole, is good.

And, on another note:
This comment just boggles my mind. So, they are gaming journalists... and that means we should cut them some slack for lack of polish in their professional presentation or seeming lack of gaming refinement? (based on the comments that promoted the quoted.)

I really just... but... excusing... professionalism... it makes my head hurt...

Not at all. Stealthing missions (in TFs, solo in tips,...) debunks that nearly instantly. And that comes down to mission design, rather than the foes choice...
Sure enemies are balanced around their abilities and vulnerabilities, etc. But, the time per enemy generates completely different results depending on which character you take against a specific foe. You would have been balancing each set combo against each opponent option, to generate an aggregate value that would risk being pretty wonky, I'd imagine.

How on earth could you test that, to prove out any metric besides just a pure spreadsheet exercise - which brings you back, ultimately, to just a DPS analysis...

(Maybe I should summon Arcanaville....)

So very this.

First $100M+ second weekend. Very nice.

Saw it again with my teenager daughter this weekend. Interesting contrast in perspective. She was all grumpy because "Avengers" trumped out her "Hunger Games" so soon. She understood that it isn't a zero sum game, but she wanted the rosy period of recognition for her favorite to last longer.

She also thought that once it got going there was too much boom and not enough dialogue. Her favorite scenes that she quickly rattled off when asked were when the characters were interacting and talking. I thought that was interesting.

Could be. I went and did some hunting and couldn't find the reference I remembered reading...

edit: for brain activity. or not Ang Lee's was not Norton's....

Except it is the second, I'm pretty sure. One of the on-set issues with the last one was Norton's insistence on using himself for the capture, as I recall reading...

No. It crashes.

You are owed wages for sleeping on the job?

I stand corrected - I had somehow been under the impression that he was not in any way connected to the original movie.

When I saw it as the movie ended, and the initial enthusiastic audience reaction died down someone shouted "I love you Joss Whedon!" and another round of applause and hooting began.

For the life of me I can't begin to fathom at all where this statement comes from or how it is the least bit true. Sure, Buffy wasn't his at the start, but he sure transformed it and made it his... I can think of only one thing that I could call a 'vanity project', and 'Dr. Horrible' is genius...

(edit: ignore the Buffy comment. Didn't realize/remember he was connected to the original film at all. I'd claim the foibles of forum posting pre-coffee... but I'm was into my second cup at the time.... That said, it further guts the quoted comment.)


Now, to be fair related to the box office numbers... How much are they skewed by the preponderance of 3D and IMAX screens? Sure it is the best raw gross - and that is what is going matter 'in the biz'. But:
How does it stack up in terms of any adjusted/normalized figures?
What is the lesson that Hollywood is really going to learn? I hope it isn't 'moar 3D & moar IMAX!' (but expect it will be) instead of - more time with character and attention to script helps even an action movie.

As for DC... I was never a fan of their material beyond Batman, so I can so totally agreewith this:
Now, in terms of full disclosure, though, while I was a Marvel fan I avoided Thor, Cap, and the Avengers from my regular reading and just wasn't a fan - but this arc of films culminating in the Avengers could not have been handled any better.

Yep, pretty much on schedule.


There is nothing vastly wrong with DA. It is waaaay down the list for any discussion or need for attention. Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.

Then easter egg one of the dozens/hundreds/thousands of Marvel options.

Supes would be a rather peculiar choice.

Why would Clark and Lois be making a cameo in an Avengers movie?

Dink just covered this item with the list in the costume discussion thread. I think it went under one of the not very feasible categories....

I was thinking of another (not sure how the forum rules treat direct references...), but nice to hear that multiple properties may be working on ways to get beyond the trinity.

There is a new MMO out there that says it aspires to something that sounds like this... but I wasn't in beta so I cannot say how it actually plays.

Yep, the entire "you are stronger than you have ever been before and to prove it we will send you off to fight alongside 15-23 other similarly power individuals" thing has sucked since it was first concepted.


But I refuse to believe it has to be how they work.