Fade_Spiral

This.

Lucas should have worked more with the fan base, in my opinion. Looking at some of said fan fiction, the enrichment possibilities in this particular galaxy (far, far away) really start to shine.

Admittedly, this is a very charged topic for me. Even after posting what I did, it became clear that I've been begrudging George Lucas on this for too long.

"Good. I can feel your anger ... "

The original collection of movies follows the flow and format of a tale of modern mythology. Not only do the events happen exactly as they would in classic mythology stories, but their timing also follows suit. That is, the specific events in the plot are milestones that serve as a revelation of character as the story progresses. Lucas didn't write this story; I'll even be so bold as to say that he soaked up the material for it by picking Joseph Campbell's brain over the years (most heavily taken from his work "The Power of Myth"). When Campbell died, Lucas suddenly found himself without any more material so he was forced to actually write the story for the newer films himself. We all saw how that turned out. It's evident from those films that focus group discussions, opinion polls and pop-publicity are what formed the basis for them. He couldn't tap his resource anymore, so he turned to marketing demographics instead.

Despite my feelings on this, the original films remain unblemished by their "creator's" follies after the fact. These films are not forgettable, in my opinion. You didn't have to see any of the movies back then to know who Darth Vader was. They touched us, as a species, on a primal level precisely because they're right out of mythology. In that context, they're drawn from the stories told since ages past, those that explore the most poignant themes known to the human condition. Revenge, betrayal, hope, fear, forgiveness, redemption, love, freedom, loss, maturity (from young boy to young adult), etc. Not only are themes explored, but some of the archetypes clarified by Carl Jung in his work were as well (which, incidentally, was a student of Freud and influenced Joseph Campbell. Hmmm. Small world.). Those are the stories that teach us about ourselves, and provide us with hope as we make our way through this thing called Life. Evidence of its popularity can be seen in the world-wide response to the original films, in terms of box office sales and fandom all over the world and such. Its impression on us is undeniable and, quite amply, unforgettable.

Episodes 1-3 are not any of that. They're forgettable, and they present some asinine elements for the audience to digest. Such as:

Reducing the Force down to the equivalent of a bacterial or viral infection (or even symbiosis), via Midi-chlorians

Force bugs? That's how you substantiate "an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together?" You couldn't find room for plausibility in faith to cover this? Or in Karmic energy? Or in a galactic equivalent to Trasncendentalisms's Oversoul to cover it (since you're already drawing from concepts in comparative religion and comparative mythology via Joseph Campbell, anyway)? It could have even been left unexplained, with the presence of the Force being more important than the "how" or "why" it's around in the first place. This bit is just pathetic, and it shows how little he cares for the integrity of the story or its potential impact on audiences. As long as he's making a profit, I suppose this isn't an issue for him.

Showing Yoda and Palpatine as characters.

In the original films, these two are not characters. Rather, they each represent phases that Luke was going through at critical points in the story, intended to symbolize the inherent conflict within (between "good" and "evil") and show that consequence cannot be avoided. It also accounts for the persistent presence of temptation, whereby Luke must remain vigilant and use restraint/self-control, lest he become just like Vader ("Do not underestimate the powers of the Emperor, or suffer your father's fate you will.")

They even help perpetuate the exploration of things like "Destiny," which you'll notice that Vader, Yoda, Obi-Wan and Palpatine all make reference to along the way. This suggests the possibility of fatalism in a galaxy that is otherwise influenced by the Force ("There's no mystical energy field that controls my destiny."). They also serve as powerful, yet subtle, foreshadowing elements in the original films. Looking at each, one gets a very distinct impression of how life in the galaxy could be should Luke choose a particular path or make a rash decision.

For those that cite character development/background as the reason(s) for Palpatine and Yoda being expanded on in the new films, I'd offer:

-If you want to know Palpatine, then look at his work. Look directly at Lord Vader. End of story. That is his work; that is who he is and what he does. He tempts. He corrupts. He destroys. He teaches others to tempt, corrupt and destroy. He's a catalyst for everything the dark side of the Force manifests. There isn't any more to him than this (as portrayed in the original films), and there was no need for there to be. Here again, he's not a character. He's a symbol, and his function is as one part of a balance in Luke's journey.

-If you want to know Yoda, then look at his work(s). Both with Obi-Wan and Luke. End of story. Those are his works; that is who he is. He guides, counsels and cautions against temptation, corruption and lust for power or quick-and-easy solutions. He tempers the inevitable gravitation towards destruction. His function is as one part of a balance in Luke's journey.

Fast forward to the new movies.

By contrast, these two in the new films are lightsaber-wielding acrobats. I'm not even going to dignify this with a response beyond this sentence.

Having both C-3P0 and R2-D2 built by Anakin Skywalker.

So, the two droids who were the Alliance's best hope against the Empire (at the time they escaped Princess Leia's captured vessel and headed down to Tatooine, because they were carrying the Death Star plans) were both built by the same person, whose pursuit of them would lead the Empire to Tatooine? Talk about a small world.

I get that, ultimately, everything in the galaxy is connected but this is a little too convenient and coincidental. Amusingly enough, a student of the Force would probably scoff at the idea, asserting that true coincidences are actually rare. It seems like this was just shoved into the screenplay at the last minute. Even if that's not true, this is one (ableit small) way that Lucas handicapped the story. Even leaving his origins a mystery would have been better than establishing that Anakin built him.

then ...

I couldn't agree more. "Sterile" is a perfect descriptor for how the fight scenes and character interactions came off in Ep 1-3. Thank you for saying this.

For the original lightsaber duel scenes, these were used sparingly and when necessary in the Ep 4-6. Their appeal, to me, is as much attributed to their precise inclusion when necessary as it is from the emotion being conveyed in the scenes when they take place. They have their place in the story, but they shouldn't be so saturated that you devote entire segments of the film to portraying them.

This is an opinion that I won't share. If anything, they show how desperate Lucas was to fill the screen with something to entertain audiences for the price they paid for general admission at the theater.

Yes, I remember watching the scene over and over again. It took a few process attempts for me to register what had just happened. The effect/editing is not very seamless. I suppose that's to be expected, given that it wasn't part of the source material for the film and added in later.

I can only laugh when watching any of the edits to the original films ...

and

Excellent points made here. Thank you both for the reminder on the flow of dialogue between Greedo and Han. I'd actually forgotten some of those specific lines (referenced above). Taking that into consideration, I amend my earlier statement about Han's life not being in mortal danger at the time.

This isn't a valid comparison.

We're not talking about someone breaking into someone else's home; that is an intrusion into another's personal living space. The law recognizes this (differing by state, of course), and affords the homeowner/family a certain amount of leeway, with respect to the use of sanctioned lethal force as a means of defending oneself and one's family. This, by contrast, took place in a public setting that is not Han's residence. There are no expectations of privacy in public settings (generally), although I'm sure an effective legal argument could be made that even in public places, a situation could unfold that fits the criteria for acting in self-defense, even if that means the use of lethal force.

Regardless, the value of your question isn't lost on me. That Han would take the initiative and shoot first, to prevent being hauled in by Greedo (or killed by him), could effectively be argued that it was an act of self-defense. I'd go with calling it self-preservation, but that's just me. All that aside, I think it stands to reason that the following statement is in dire need of correction:

Han shot first

No he didn't. That implies that there was return fire. Han was the only one who fired a shot. Given that, there's no qualifier to justify the use of this phrase. This should read as something along the lines of:

Han only needed one shot.

Han shot Greedo. The end.

Han fired the one and only shot.

I think it's fair to say that we're splitting hairs here on the term "self-defense." At least, as it's used in a legal capacity. In that scene, Han's life was *not* in danger. He took the initiative and killed Greedo because he knew that Greedo would run him in to Jabba to collect the bounty.

You can reasonably infer that Han's life would be in danger at a later time after that scene (at Jabba's discretion, no doubt), but in the Mos Eisley Cantina there was no mortal threat. He fired first to prevent being caught and turned in. This is not the same thing as self-defense.

This was summed up beautifully here:

By altering the scene the way Lucas did, he fundamentally altered both of the characters in that scene. This, in turn, made them inconsistent with their own natures. Greedo was collecting a bounty; unless he's the sloppiest bounty hunter in galactic history, I don't think he'd be in the habit of opening fire on bounties in crowded, public cantinas. Not to mention, being so unprepared as to not anticipate that his target would be armed and willing to fight. These are things he would, as a professional bounty hunter, expect to be just around the corner (so to speak). This is especially true when you consider that he had to know something of Han's reputation, both as a smuggler and as a wanted man, before taking the job in the first place. The original presentation of how this scene unfolded was perfect for the characters involved: Han got the drop on Greedo and killed him. He even used their existing conversation as a distraction while he readied his blaster. That is consistent with what a charismatic scoundrel would do, given those circumstances. End of issue.

When this scene took place in the film, Han was still very much the mercenary that Leia accused him of being later on. The audience is already given the impression that he's at least somewhat devious. The more important storytelling aspect of this, as it's revealed during the unfolding of the remaining films in the original trilogy, is that we see him gradually change his values and attitude about who he is and where his alliances/loyalties lie. By the end of Episode IV, he's sticking around (despite his initial expression that he wouldn't when he was collecting his reward on Alderaan, just before the assault on the Death Star) and actively helping the Rebel Alliance fight the Empire. It's not an extreme change, or all-encompassing, but it's subtle enough that we see it continue to happen as Episodes V and VI play out. This is an excellent example of characterization.

This was supplemented very well by the remainder of the cast, too. The actors' chemistry on-set, and the fact that they had proper direction the entire time, helped shape the dynamic that we've all come to love in the films. There's humor, sadness, seriousness, hope, joy, fear, etc. that surfaces time and time again. Lucas had other directors, and even some of the cast, challenging his decisions on-set at the time. This is, ultimately, why the cast worked so well together in their character portrayals. We didn't see this in Episodes 1 - 3, and the direction was so absent that even seasoned/respected/liked celebrities came off awkward and shallowly-presented. After all, by that point, who's going to say "No" to George Lucas?

Don't fall into the trap that Jar Jar is what's wrong with Episodes 1 - 3. That "material" (if it can even be called that) is afflicted by a much deeper problem than an annoying presence on-screen. In fact, I'd even argue that mentioning Jar Jar at all only shows how little attention said person was paying to the value of the original films.

But I digress. I've prattled on long enough as it is ...

I wouldn't assume anything at this point. I had the same thing happen on my account, and the support team told me to log out of the game and then back in. When I did, the issue was resolved.

This suggests, to me, that there may be a synchronization issue between the account database and the game servers. I'm not technically-inclined, so I admit that's purely speculation on my part.

I don't disagree with you. I just posted about it in here instead of the correct thread.

I do believe you're right. This is what I get for having too many browser tabs - each for a different thread - open at one time. How embarassing.

Thank you for the reminder.

No, you're just lazy.

You're lazy to the point of robbing yourself of useful information and keeping your mind stimulated with learning new things, and making faulty assumptions because of that laziness. That is entirely your loss. If you're not going to read the material, don't comment on it as if you had. Doing so is a disservice to those that actually do spend the time reading what others have used their time to make available.

Maybe this is a good lesson for doing away with the TLDR behavior pattern, then.

It sounds like you might want to try some different Corruptor builds. At the risk of sounding redundant, you might find that such a change invites a power set combination that really turns your experience around. If you're interested in solo-play with a Corruptor, having your own heal (arguably the best in the game), the debuff arsenal to completely destroy EB and AV, and the ability to lay down some serious damage, try Fire/Dark. Don't take my word for it. Take the word of the author that wrote the guide found here:

http://boards.cityofheroes.com//showthread.php?t=115217

Read all of it, particularly slotting advice and power summaries. When I read it, I completely changed my stance on Corruptors as an AT.

That makes sense.

I was just trying to get a feel for the build in terms of what to generally expect from its performance is all. I'll follow that with the notion that such a feel is probably best obtained through direct testing in the game through a combination of trial-and-error and specific reference to this thread.

This happened to me on and off all day. It's not only annoying, but it seems to point to a cookies issue of some kind or maybe how the board software manages login authentication. Anyway ...

I corrected this by clicking on a thread title (pick any), and then finding a post in that thread. When I clicked "Quote" to start a post (even though I wasn't logged in), I was asked to log in. I entered my login information and that resolved the issue. Now I can peruse the forums as much as I want without getting randomly logged out. This may only last until the next time I log out but at least I can sift through the forums while logged in during this session.

He can't make that kind of a decision, he's just a grunt!

No offense ...

I understand the point you're making and I sympathize with your concern. I really do. I'm familiar with the same waste-of-time finding the very kinds of teams you're referring to. Ultimately for me, I transferred my characters to a high-pop server specifically banking on probability helping to mitigate some of that; probability in the sense that because there are more players on a given server, your chances of finding teams - whether through random groups or SG interactions - tend to increase as well. The difference may be marginal but it's more than conducting the same search on a lower-pop server.

Even so, this doesn't negate the fact that I'll still need to be rather selective about teaming. Some of that effort requires a trial-and-error type of approach, wherein you're unable to make a solid conclusion until you've teamed with a group so you can see how they handle their characters during actual gameplay. You could argue that this is, in itself, wasting more time but I find the pursuit to be worth it.

I've had my share of experiences with this, too. The simplicity of your stated point is altogether beautiful and encouraging. Undesirable elements don't have to remain present. Not only that, but following up on forming your own team or finding an SG to team with helps build social connections. To some degree, that's what we're all doing here anyway.

This is a very real consequence of said exploitative power-leveling, to be sure. It's annoying, unattractive and only serves to incite the ire of seasoned players that actually worked at exploring the game, discovering its contents and leveling through challenges rather than around them.

However, this also demonstrates why social networking is so crucial in this game. As far as I know, and as long as I've been playing, that's an element which has persisted despite some of the setbacks and challenges presented by design changes and/or new feature implementations in City of Heroes.

Just as we're referencing players that choose to use the AE system in such a manner, we can also reference other players that are more concerned with things like friendships, leveling pacts, SG recruitment, etc. I only hope that non-farming groups and players prove to be the majority, consistently, rather than a steady or marked decline that would empower cheapened leveling by players that don't understand form or function amongst the various ATs the game has to offer.

Fair enough. I think we can both agree that, regardless of player intent or developer intent, there was a mechanic in the very system we're referring to that wasn't working as intended. It's since been corrected and we can all move on to other things.

Personally, I'm glad to know that it's been fixed.

Perhaps I read too much into your previous statement. It seems that I'm the one that owes the apology. To you, sir.

I disagree.

The fact that the development team would include content/functionality that allows players to craft their own missions is, by definition, an extension of crafting as a whole. This demonstrates that the development team is interested in giving players the ability to apply a little change to their respective game world. Whereas you choose to see that as something negative, I choose to see it for what it is: Offering flexibility and choice.

This is entirely subjective and meaningful only to you. While you might feel this way, there are plenty of folks I know, and play with, that feel differently about AE and its presence in the game. It's not perfect but it's a nice option to have when paper missions, SFs and regular missions run dry.

Steeler fan here, too. I have been my whole life, and it's been in my family longer than that, even. Kinda helps when you're from Pittsburgh, too.

I only wish I could have seen them play when they changed football forever ...