Remember Lucas' Lesson! (Longish)
By
AmazingMOO,
Posted on: 2009-09-20 18:39 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
Right, him I remember. I LOVE the Operative from Serenity. With that example, I actually have to say you were right and I was wrong in a lot of respects. The operative is a clear and unambiguous BAD GUY in what he does, but once you get past the hostility of his actions, he is actually quite human, and maybe even a little good at heart. He is not a hypocrite like most "saviour" villains, and in fact when he realises he's being used and the world he's trying to create isn't at all what he thought it would be, he does the right thing, because he truly does believe in doing the right thing. Good example of actions vs. consequences vs. the person. Well played!|
Originally Posted by Kitsune Knight
Take the The Operative from Serenity (I'm not sure I'd call him morally gray, but he does make a good example for my point
 ). He was trying to hunt down to kill a young girl because he was trying to create the world a "better place" which he believed he could do. In a conversation he had with Mal at one point, Mal tried to make him question himself by saying that what he was doing was evil so his entire plan was contradictory, and the Operative responded by saying that he knew quite well he was a monster, and had knew full well that he can never live in the world he's trying to create. |
Quote:
|
He actually somewhat reminds me of what Scirocco attempts to accomplish in his patron arc (unfortunately I forgot the details), which I really enjoyed (I didn't want to betray him, either!). The main example I was thinking of before remarked how he'd already 'signed a deal with a demon', and referred to himself as a demon on occasion. He never had any sort of (non-temporary) changes of heart about what he was doing, although the means shifted. If he did redeem himself, it was only through making the entire world see him as a demon, so that the immortal ideal would be able to arise again and slay the demon. I see him as a morally gray character (I can't really decide if I'd call him a hero or not) because of his utilitarian nature: he acted selflessly in the interest of the common good. It wasn't that the end made the means okay, it was that the character accepted what their actions were wrong or even evil, but they were willing to accept their fate in exchange for what they believed was the good they could bring about. |
Quote:
|
Even though I'm really not familiar with Red X, that's actually a great explanation of what exactly you meant and definitely quite different than the way I meant it. They're definitely better than the cliche pure evil or pure good characters that'll alway do what is evil/good regardless of the situation (unless an editor decides they should arbitrarily switch sides), it's just far more realistic and human, something a lot of the popular western media has been sorely lacking (instead, they'll do the conflicted hero that still does pure good unless an editor says otherwise, or something similar but still safe).
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Must say that I agree with the OP here. Was in a team with 6 defenders (worked real well to) and the combinations of colored effects was a bit oddish to say it mildly.
I will stick more closely to the original colors chemes unless the costume really screams make me bright pink! To those of you who will team with Pink Magician, my apologies. It WILL hurt your eyes.
Quote:
There's also the fact that after stopping his plan to brainwash half the world, which is morally ambiguous AT BEST, he becomes a huge and utter ******* to you and pretty much everyone around him. His claims of really just being a misunderstood, cursed good guy are so flimsy and weak that after foiling his plan, he immediately breaks down and ever-so-begrudgingly accepts his status as villain and as far as I can recall, spends the rest of his arcs being all "I hate you, $player!" Real team-player, that Scirocco.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I have a problem with Scirocco, myself, at least in the "liking him" part. The real tragedy about him is that he firmly believes he is under the curse of some demon making him evil, but the fact, as far as I can deduce, is that he is deluding himself and inventing excuses for why he can't be good, when he himself is just falling more and more towards the path of evil. This is actually very well depicted in his second arc, when he attempts to change the whole world by force, turning his rude, obnoxious partner into STUPID wishy-washy misplaced her. I CANNOT STAND to hear her speak when she's being controlled, and I couldn't wait to beat the guy upside the head. It might have helped that I was playing a particularly cynical, unmoved villain at the time, but generally he is painted as a "woe is me" self-delusional fool who REALLY wants to be good, but just simply isn't. I have more sympathy for Ghost Widow, who did nothing more than DIE to become what she is, whereas Scirocco is where is he by choice, even if he can't admit it to himself.
|
Me? I like Black Scorpion the most, if only because before the last mission, he tells you "Oh, and $player? Good luck." Made me go all "d'awwww" in my cold, black heart.
Quote:
| Star Wars |
Then in Episode III, Anakin kills a bunch of kindergarteners, and twenty years later, the Jedi and their super force powers are just a myth? Do historic records really suck this much in Super Future Land? It's like saying twenty years after WWII, Jews are just a myth.
Also: Vader never said "I find your lack of magic super-bacteria disturbing", so that's my stance on Midichlorians.
Quote:
To be fair, he is written pretty well. Being aggravating in his attempts to find excuses, failing and then accepting his faith as a villain is actually the point. It's designed to make you feel guilty, like you took away a man's last, desperate hope. Of course, it would work better if Scirocco didn't act like a self-righteous bully, turning foul-mouth criminals in what has to be the most offensive vision of what a misunderstood, misguided hero should be. His idea is generally very well, but pulling it off requires us liking the character, and Scirocco isn't terribly likeable.|
Originally Posted by Noxilicious
There's also the fact that after stopping his plan to brainwash half the world, which is morally ambiguous AT BEST, he becomes a huge and utter ******* to you and pretty much everyone around him. His claims of really just being a misunderstood, cursed good guy are so flimsy and weak that after foiling his plan, he immediately breaks down and ever-so-begrudgingly accepts his status as villain and as far as I can recall, spends the rest of his arcs being all "I hate you, $player!" Real team-player, that Scirocco.
|
To hear Ghost Widow talk about him, you'd think he were the only kind heart in a court of ********, but seeing his end of the deal, he's just using her when all else fails and trying to lord over her like some kind of omniscient mentor. I liked Ghost Widow's vision of him better, that of a kind man. He isn't, which makes screwing him over much less heart-breaking that it probably ought to be.
Quote:
|
On another note, what I also find funny is how in the new trilogy, there was an entire, galaxy-wide known Jedi Council, and their super bacteria powers weren't even used discreetly, either. Their Force powers were public knowledge. Then in Episode III, Anakin kills a bunch of kindergarteners, and twenty years later, the Jedi and their super force powers are just a myth? Do historic records really suck this much in Super Future Land? It's like saying twenty years after WWII, Jews are just a myth. Also: Vader never said "I find your lack of magic super-bacteria disturbing", so that's my stance on Midichlorians. |
That, and the law of conservation of ninjutsu means that they suck progressively more as more and more of them are introduced in larger and larger numbers. This isn't quite as evident in the actual movies, as those stick to just a select few council members, but Star Wars: Clone Wars and Star Wars: The Clone Wars (did we really need two cartoons on THE SAME SUBJECT MATTER?!?) introduce a lot of younger, less experienced jedi and old ones in greater numbers, muddying the waters and destroying the boundary between jedi and "kind of strong ordinary dude," specifically when they start throwing in inhuman monsters.
The morticoccus or whatever that thing that gives them the Force is is just the final nail in the coffin, in my book. The jedi worked best as single, notable, exceptional individuals with mysterious powers which border on philosophy as much as on technobabble.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
"We have always been at war with Eastasia."
|
Originally Posted by Noxilicious
Then in Episode III, Anakin kills a bunch of kindergarteners, and twenty years later, the Jedi and their super force powers are just a myth? Do historic records really suck this much in Super Future Land?
|
Now, I want to apologise for starting back on this again, but I have a REALLY slow Saturday at work.
Now, I remember this discussion we had, and I actually rather enjoyed it before it slowed down. However, I just got done with reading the article on the uncanny valley on TV Tropes, and I am... Let's say "amazed" at how much I disagree with the sentiments expressed there. Obviously, they are people's opinions, so I can't claim they are false, but it's staggering how much I disagree with what constitutes creepy.
Reading this gave me a better understanding of the sort of things people spoke that I previously couldn't even comprehend, but many of the examples of what the uncanny valley of creepy characters encompasses are just... Odd. Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? Shrek? AI? Seriously? I mean, yeah, I can kind of see certain drawbacks to all of these, and I can see the uncanny valley intent in AI, but I never really found any of them creepy. In fact, the comment on Shrek specifically taking a more cartoony approach actually explains why it's all but impossible to find convincing, realistic CGI movies these days. Just about anything Pixar make these days is 3D Cartoons.
I will admit that The Spirits Within had a host of artistic failures, such as lack of quite good enough facial animation and two of the lead characters being almost identical, but the movie overall strikes me as a very serious achievement in the field. Obviously, commercial success might disagree, but there are other reasons for this than the uncanny valley. Seriousl, all I saw bad in the movie, plot aside, were technical problems. Nothing strange or weird. No more strange than watching Lara Croft bob her head without opening her mouth to speak in Tomb Raider 3, at any rate.
I don't know. Maybe I'm biassed? I grew up on cartoons and video games and, yes, I will admit I'm a fan of anthropomorphic creatures. I enjoy the weird, the unusual and the strange, and the only way I can see something as "creepy" is if I actually felt it was sinister and threatening, which stems not from any degree of strangeness, but from a balance point between potential danger and degree of trust. Here's my big problem with the whole uncanny valley concept, in fact - I don't believe it's a question of appearance. It's a question of trust.
We know people are dangerous. A knife-wielding wacko could walk up to you and gut you at any moment, and even the people you know, if they flipped out, could cause SERIOUS damage to you, maybe even kill you. But we don't think about these things, most aren't even aware of how fragile we are and how deadly EVERYTHING can be. We trust people not to hurt us, and stay away from those we cannot trust. Machines, on the other hand, are MUCH more dangerous than people. Something as simple as a woodchipper can be the stuff of nightmares. But we don't HAVE to trust machines. Machines can't think, they only do what they are made to do, so practically speaking, if we follow safety precautions, everything should be fine. It's when you combine the deadliness of a machine with the proactive decision-making of a human being that you start having to trust the machine, and you just can't. That's what makes it creepy.
Except, in movies and fiction, nothing is real and nothing can walk up to you and punch you in the face. Maybe in the future when we invent the Matrix, that could be a more pressing problem, but right now in fiction, all of these "dangerous" things are perfectly safe. With that danger our of the way, I can't help but see the weird and wonderful as endearing. Even when they are written to be evil and sinister, I still at most see them as cool, provided they are written well. In fact, this is the only way I can make and play villains at all - by continuously reaffirming the notion that they're fake and they can't touch me. Because lemme' tell 'ya! If any of the villains I've created ever made it into the real world, it would NOT be fun.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
The Uncanny Valley effect is probably the best example of how subjective reactions can be. I'm very sensitive to it, but my fiance isn't. The video of the Big Dog robot gives me a major case of the creeps, but he just thinks it's a nifty machine.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Now, I remember this discussion we had, and I actually rather enjoyed it before it slowed down. However, I just got done with reading the article on the uncanny valley on TV Tropes, and I am... Let's say "amazed" at how much I disagree with the sentiments expressed there. Obviously, they are people's opinions, so I can't claim they are false, but it's staggering how much I disagree with what constitutes creepy.
|
Character index
Quote:
That... Is so... COOL! |
Originally Posted by Silver Gale
The Uncanny Valley effect is probably the best example of how subjective reactions can be. I'm very sensitive to it, but my fiance isn't. The video of the Big Dog robot gives me a major case of the creeps, but he just thinks it's a nifty machine.
|
I remember watching a movie about the Big Dog back a year or two ago, but it seems they've improved on it a LOT since then. I just love how well that thing deals with uneven, rugged terrain. There's a reason humans and animals can look beautiful when they move - the technique is just so effective.But, yeah, I'll have to agree with your fiancé on this one - I think it's a nifty machine which can solve a lot of really difficult problems if it ever turns into a reliable technology. I tried to make myself get creeped out by the thing, imagining it like half a dog with machines on top or a very awkward spider, and I CAN see where that would come from, but it just didn't work on me. I was too busy being utterly amazed at the things it can do.
Essentially, I never saw this as anything more than a machine. Some people make self-guiding jeeps, some people make self-locomotion quadrupeds. Until they give them an intelligence which actually has will and opinion, I just can't take them as real creatures. Heck, I'd love to have one of those, even with the HORRIBLE droning noise
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
See Big Dog had me worried for reasons other than the uncanny valley, the same reason that the MKV hoverbot has me worried, the MKV stands for Multiple Kill Vehicle by the way.
seriously, do a google search, there's videos of this thing in an unweaponized state currently...
Quote:
Essentially, that it can be weaponised and used to further military goals sort of like the Predator UAV? Yeah, I would agree that's a valid concern, but this is actually part of my problem with the uncanny valley - a lot of the things that make certain concepts creepy aren't their being uncannily similar to humans, but rather the presence or lack of a human operator on the controls, which goes back to trust once again.|
Originally Posted by Dr_Mechano
See Big Dog had me worried for reasons other than the uncanny valley, the same reason that the MKV hoverbot has me worried, the MKV stands for Multiple Kill Vehicle by the way.
seriously, do a google search, there's videos of this thing in an unweaponized state currently... |
In fact, to reiterate that point once again, I recently went through Resident Evil 5, and despite the fact that all of the characters land squarely into the uncanny valley (aside from Chris Redfield's humongous neck), motion capture cutscenes and amazing facial animation make them quite enjoyable to watch. Japanese game producers have this tendency of making their characters as ultra-realistic as they can, with realistic, flawed skin with moles, spots, pimples and so forth, and what has failed them in older games like the original Silent Hill was the fact that they all basically had a single, unbelievable expression.
And odd as it may be for me to say this about a game that very much is the definition of creepy, the facial animation did not creep me out (nowhere near the grates over bottomless pits, unexplained wheelchairs fog sirens), it just make me feel like someone dropped the ball on the FMVs. Granted, with them being so stiff, I couldn't really attach to the characters and care TOO much about them (then again, it's been like 10 years), but again, that's more bad quality than unsettling creep.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I don't think so. When I look at the Big Dog I don't think "uh-oh, a piece of military hardware with potentially dangerous applications", I think "holy **** it's a headless deer brought to unlife and it's out for blood, get it away from me". It's not a conscious sort of "creeped out", it's just... visceral. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Essentially, that it can be weaponised and used to further military goals sort of like the Predator UAV? Yeah, I would agree that's a valid concern, but this is actually part of my problem with the uncanny valley - a lot of the things that make certain concepts creepy aren't their being uncannily similar to humans, but rather the presence or lack of a human operator on the controls, which goes back to trust once again.
|
I'm not saying you're wrong in your assessment of "nifty robot", I'm just saying it's one of those things that's hard to convey until we can find a way to transfer qualia directly between each others' brains.
Character index
Quote:
Hey, snap... I recently created the younger sister of my main toon (energy/energy blaster) Who is a FF/energy defender with pink bubbles instead of the dark yellow of her older brother. For both toons the powers are manifest through a mix of over abundant bio-kinetic energy that their "mutant" Bodys produce mixed with latent psionic abilities. There are no rules for what those things should look like, so his were coloured to match his glowing yellow, tendral aura, eyes colour, and pink just fell in on her costume as I created it, so I let the powers follow suit and will add the aura as soon as I unlock it with her.
|
Originally Posted by Thunderspark
I have pink forcefields because... well, they're forcefields. Whos to say what colour they're supposed to turn out? Besides, the character who wields them has a penchant for pink fashion, so it works on there too!
I do like to associate power colours with the chararcter though, either with their personality, as in Little Jenny's case, or the source of their energy (Like sinister red storm summonings). For me it has to make some kind of logical sense to be a certain colour (or little colour at all in the case of my regen) since ultimately the power customisation is an extension of who they are. I give it a week before we start seeing Jar Jar Binx as a player character somewhere in Atlas Park... |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
Then it's time for them to get off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.
 |
I always found the 'uncanny valley' to be things that look really freaking close to being human, but lacked anything even coming close to resembling facial expressions. I.E. they were just a moving photo.
This seemed to be a problem from around 4-6 years ago with CGI, but more recent stuff is far better. A good comparison is FF The Spirits Within to FF Advent Children. I enjoyed both myself, but when you compare the people in Spirits to Advent Children, you'll notice a huge difference in how human and realistic they feel. I could see how the people in Spirits would feel really creepy, as they look quite realistic but they lacked the technology to make them feel close to as human as they did in Children.
I don't think Spirits is the best example (I can't really think of any good ones right now), but I think it somewhat shows the point via comparison. Honestly the list on that page on TV Tropes seems really... random.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowNate
;_; ?!?! What the heck is wrong with you, my god, I have never been so confused in my life!
|
Quote:
In Enchanted Arms, Devil Golems' regeneration is depicted as glowing runes, and then the creation of whatever part was missing. One such Golem has a yellowy-green glow.
| 1) Has anyone seen or read a comic in which regeneration is a self created green glowing effect? I cant think of any, maybe there is one or two, but mostly the holes just close up. |
Quote:
You know, it could be an upbringing thing. I don't mean parental guidance in this case, but more the fact that I literally grew up on video games. And I don't mean atmospheric, detailed games like Silent Hill or Sould Reaver, I mean the old, crappy, barely-human-character games like the original Virtua Fighter, Tomb Raider, the Virtua Cop games. Hell, I recently retried Virtua Cop, and my GOD are the people in that game crappy and stiff. They look like people enough, but their heads are a single block without even an inkling of animation, let alone facial expression. And yet watching these people bob their heads and talk to each other, I could still get into the games, even get into romance stories with these jagged characters. Hell, I played as far back as Alone in the Dark 2.|
Originally Posted by Kitsune Knight
I don't think Spirits is the best example (I can't really think of any good ones right now), but I think it somewhat shows the point via comparison. Honestly the list on that page on TV Tropes seems really... random.
|
If I had to make a guess, I'd say I've conditioned myself to accept many things as being human as long as they act human, even if they look a little or a lot like an actual human being. Comound that on top of my fascination with the Furry genre (let's try and avoid making jokes about it, please), which depicts characters of various degrees of humanity, sometimes even things you wouldn't expect, yet I have never had any trouble viewing them as human for the purposes of personality and plot development. I'm predisposed towards seeing anything which acts human as human, regardless of what it actually looks like, not necessarily on a physical level, but always on an emotional level. I guess that's part of why I could never really understand racism as a concept, be it in real life or as a plot point in movies.
To point, the first time I learned that the characters from The Spirits Within were supposed to be creepy or unsettling was when I read about people having that reaction. I watched it back when it came out (on premier night here, no less) and I rather enjoyed it, making no more than a passing comment on how stiff the characters' facial expressions were. Then again, comparing it to something like Soul Reaver 2, which had all in-game cinematics with good, but not THAT good facial animation, it was just about business as usual. To me, The Spirits Within is tantamount to a very well-made game cinematic, minus the actual game, and if I wasn't bothered by the cutscenes in Soul Reaver, I see no reason why I should be bothered by these. Really, voice acting makes these movies, in my eyes.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
What Sam said.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I disagree with the spirit of this thread. The Star Wars prequels sucked because of BAD WRITING, not because of excessive effects. Really, this Luddite notion that effects somehow take away from the "spirit" of a film is something that has always bugged me as a concept, and I see it said by "old school" directors in pretty much every documentary on movie history I watch. So, what, does that mean that animated and 3D movies are inherently inferior? Animation Age Ghetto, anyone? A good movie does NOT require real actors speaking to each other in front of REAL sets. As something like Wall E demonstrated, you barely require actors at all. JUST effects, be they many or few, take away nothing from a movie. If a movie is written well, it will ALWAYS be better with more effects. If a movie is written poorly, it's going to suck no matter how much money you chuck at it.
This carries over to this game, as well. Who CARES why a certain power looks the way it does? Who cares if it makes sense? When people without mouths spit fire, does it matter if it's green, blue or black? When can take a rocket to the chest and not even stagger, does it matter if they glow red, blue or pink? The Rule of Cool applies - as long as something looks cool enough, it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not. Sure, it's nice to have a neat and tidy explanation, but at the end of the day, those are still just making things up. My fire is blue because it's actually a manifestation of the power of destruction. So why blue, then, and not red or black? Because blue looks cool, ultimately. I really, REALLY want to avoid trying to chastise people and corral them into only using certain concepts because they make sense or look good to me. In my experience, some of the best works of art and fiction are those who take the worst, most absurd, most ridiculous concepts and make them work and be cool. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, anyone? Who CARES if it's stupid and doesn't make sense? IT WORKS! In fact, it worked twice over. To make a long story short, I find artistic license to be the most important thing, and something which shouldn't be limited by notions of what things SHOULD be, but only by the reality of what can be made. |
RP is cool. Being a self-righteous RP'er telling everyone else what to do based on what you think is okay? Not so much.
~Missi
http://tinyurl.com/yhy333s
Miss Informed in 2016! She can't be worse than all those other guys!
So Sam...
Is Osmandius (from the Watchmen) a hero, villain, or grey? I always thought of him as a hero, but given what he did, he could easily count as a villain.
But of course, villains can't ever actually suceed, so he must be either a grey or a hero...
TW/Elec Optimization
Quote:
Purely based on the film portrayal (as I haven't read the comic version), I'd call him gray (based on my definition, not Sam's). Many of his actions are bad, but what his (ultimate) goal as well as what he accomplishes is good, putting him squarely in the category of a utilitarian hero (which'd often be portrayed as a always-losing villain in older comics).|
Originally Posted by Combat
So Sam...
Is Osmandius (from the Watchmen) a hero, villain, or grey? I always thought of him as a hero, but given what he did, he could easily count as a villain. But of course, villains can't ever actually suceed, so he must be either a grey or a hero... |
I'd say that Manticore is a very mild version of a Utilitarian Hero... he'll often take morally questionable approaches in the name of the end results, but at the same time he never takes it very far like others have/would.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowNate
;_; ?!?! What the heck is wrong with you, my god, I have never been so confused in my life!
|
Quote:
The whole point of Watchmen is that there's no good or evil, just various degrees of "wants to kill people".
|
Originally Posted by Combat
So Sam...
Is Osmandius (from the Watchmen) a hero, villain, or grey? I always thought of him as a hero, but given what he did, he could easily count as a villain. But of course, villains can't ever actually suceed, so he must be either a grey or a hero... |
Character index
Quote:
I'm afraid I don't know absolutely anything about the Watchmen, so I can't answer this question. Based on Kitsune's assessment, though (and keep in mind I know NOTHING of the character), it sounds to me like I'd put him into the category of a villain, under the "cause does NOT justify the means" clause. I'm probably biassed, because I have a villain who is essentially MADE of this clause, seeking to create a world which would be quite literally perfect, but doing so in such a way that is many times worse than leaving the world as it is.|
Originally Posted by Combat
So Sam...
Is Osmandius (from the Watchmen) a hero, villain, or grey? I always thought of him as a hero, but given what he did, he could easily count as a villain. But of course, villains can't ever actually suceed, so he must be either a grey or a hero... |
Then again, I've heard of the Watchmen's theme of no clear morality, so it's very likely I'm very wrong. I'm not a comic book fan in general, and haven't actually read almost any comic books, but I'm continually amazed at what passes for heroes in many comic books, especially those described to me as "dark age comics." Then again, I think I lost my ability to go by accepted public opinion about five years ago, and I tend to stick with my own, so I can rarely claim I'm truly objective.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
SPOILERS
Quote:
Well, based on the world in Watchmen, it's very likely that where the world was going was full blown nuclear war between the US and Soviet Union... So Ozymandias blowing up a few cities and framing Dr. Manhattan, which forced the US and Soviet Union into a truce, could be seen as the more peaceful of the two possible outcomes.
| I'm probably biassed, because I have a villain who is essentially MADE of this clause, seeking to create a world which would be quite literally perfect, but doing so in such a way that is many times worse than leaving the world as it is. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowNate
;_; ?!?! What the heck is wrong with you, my god, I have never been so confused in my life!
|
Quote:
...not many of them, but she did have them.|
Originally Posted by Lyrik
... Although Leia had her moments
|
<.<
Quote:
Except you forget that Dr. Manhattan was the reason for the escalated tensions in the first place. aggravated more by his ending the vietnam war as he did. In the old D&D system i'd have to put him as true neutral. Hero vs Villian? prob initially good then turned to evil.
|
Originally Posted by Kitsune Knight
SPOILERS
Well, based on the world in Watchmen, it's very likely that where the world was going was full blown nuclear war between the US and Soviet Union... So Ozymandias blowing up a few cities and framing Dr. Manhattan, which forced the US and Soviet Union into a truce, could be seen as the more peaceful of the two possible outcomes. |
*nerf* Darn! Oh well.. I will just have to rebuild. Ah.. this works *nerf*
Darn it.. well I will rebuild again.. oh this might *nerf*
Grr.. this is getting annoying.. rebuild agai- *nerf*
I wasn't even finished rebuilding the las- *nerf* But.. *nerf* I *nerf* ......*nerf* *nerf* *nerf*
Quote:
Elitism.
|
Originally Posted by Zekiran_Immortal
hehehe, I got that part. I just wasn't sure where the Lucas "hard work looked better than too much cg" part came in.
|
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I think trying to give an explanation for the force was a down right horrible idea... Mostly because it just left me thinking that someone must have been cultivating those little buggers, growing them in a lab, then injecting a [censored] load of them into a monkey to see what happened. And someone else would have been studying what specifically give the host the abilities.
If they'd left that part out, the Force could have remained a metaphysical ability that required no more explanation... unfortunately they pushed over the first domino, making it only a matter of time before all the rest fall over (*epic spoilers* sort of like this, if the government was suspension of belief).
We've been saving Paragon City for eight and a half years. It's time to do it one more time.