Poll of the Day > H1Geek1

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tusk obvs

---

Zeus posted...

So I watched Cop Out last night, which -- despite being a bomb -- supposedly had the highest box office return of any Kevin Smith film: a measly $58m! I never realized that Smith's career was *that* low-key, given all the attention he's received over the years.

I know that Smith trash-talks working on the film (especially concerning Bruce Willis) and a lot of people have a low opinion of it, but it was pretty funny... well, in the first act, anyway. It was also interesting for the casting, as I found myself doing double-takes while spotting a younger Rashida Jones (and thinking, wait, she kinda looks like Rashida Jones... and then remembering when the movie came out) and realizing Michelle Trachenberg (sp?) played Willis's daughter.

The surrounding controversy kinda supports my decreasing opinion of Kevin Smith, a high profile whiner who has thus far squandered most of his lucky breaks while still being fortunate to live a pretty awesome life. Granted, I imagine he makes more money off his cult of personality (including paid appearance like "An Evening with Kevin Smith") than he does legitimate ventures at this point.

I also realize that while I've seen a lot of Kevin Smith films, I think Cop Out is probably the only one I liked (with Dogma being my previous "favorite").

A kind of "controversy" is probably some random idiots screeching about nothing on Twitter.
---

I think you're the first person I've ever heard -- online, offline, and anywhere else -- express a shred of praise for Red State >_>

---

Zeus posted...

I think you're the first person I've ever heard -- online, offline, and anywhere else -- express a shred of praise for Red State >_>

I think it's his Citizen Kane tbqh.

---

Zeus posted...

I think you're the first person I've ever heard -- online, offline, and anywhere else -- express a shred of praise for Red State >_>

Autocorrect fucked up. I meant any, not a.
---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Lol, PO just doesn't want anybody to know he sounds like Mickey Mouse.

My dark secret is that I'm actually a sexy lady pretending to be a guy. That's why I never post pictures of myself either.



shadowsword87 posted...

There's a level of roleplay that's lost in the physicality, and more importantly, emotion that talking in character. No amount of raw text can fill that I've seen from online games.

You need to find better online games.
---

And you need to learn that voice is the best way of convoying emotions.
Almost like it's human beings talking to humans, weird.

---

shadowsword87 posted...

And you need to learn that voice is the best way of convoying emotions.
Almost like it's human beings talking to humans, weird.

Maybe if you have a shitty imagination. My guess is you also only listen to audio books.
---

I like my audio fiction, yeah, I recently learned LeVar Burton makes a podcast reading short stories (mostly scifi) and it's great. Audio gives much more of a finesse and precision in my opinion. I still read books for heavier histories, or stuff like House of Leaves where you can only work in text.

There's a reason why communication through text mirrors voice, with italics and bold. Humans beings have a good portion of our brain devoted to just that. Throwing it on the floor because you don't want to put the effort in speaking in a different intonation is wild to me.

Besides, you still get the precision of wordchoice while speaking anyway. You just can't edit it after.

---

shadowsword87 posted...

Throwing it on the floor because you don't want to put the effort in speaking in a different intonation is wild to me.

Some people are so self-conscious about speaking in character that they shut completely down. Text can create a buffer where they can play in character while they'd never be able to do so in person. Especially if they're playing with strangers or other people they feel are more likely to be judgemental. For those sorts of people, the difference between text and speaking is going to be the difference between playing as your character and playing the entire game saying things like "My character does this" and "My character says that he's interested in hearing more" or "My character describes the battle to the merchant". And trying to force them to speak in first-person or describe their actions in first-person isn't going to encourage them to get better/more relaxed as much as it's going to encourage them to stop RPing entirely.

Though in my case, it's not that as much as the fact that I'm and old man stuck in a 90s tech mindset and I hate anything more advanced than AIM or ICQ. And I tend to find group chat with cams/mics can be distracting in its own way because it can be a cacophony of noise, which is more of an issue over mics than it is in person. Especially if the tech involved is being kind of shitty. Or if you're using older/less powerful hardware (which you very well may be, if you're notoriously anti-PC gaming and only ever use your computer for e-mail and message boards).

Though it's also worth noting that people who are frustrated theater majors are much more likely to want that direct personal interaction (similar to why the Crit Role cast play up the blatant acting aspects of RP), whereas people who are frustrated writers may absolutely prefer to lean heavy into text because you can convey a hell of a lot with descriptive writing. You can talk about things like tone of voice and body language all you want, but if you're not a skilled actor you probably aren't conveying what you want your character to be thinking/emoting most of the time anyway. Because YOU aren't personally feeling what your character is most of the time (especially if you're playing any sort of character who is different from your actual personality). Whereas, if you're dealing with GOOD writers, they can introduce a lot of subtly and nuance that is completely lacking in face-to-face games (I can honestly say I've felt far more emotion from some of the text-based games I've played in than I've ever felt in any face-to-face game ever).

A lot of that admittedly depends on what sort of game you're running, though. A more casual or comedic game doesn't really need Academy Award level acting to convey meaning or tone, and quick-witted humor works better verbally than written. And players are more likely to feel comfortable enough to speak in character with a group of long-time friends than they are with total strangers (especially ones that are already somewhat extroverted). So there are definitely games where being face-to-face (or at least cam'd up) helps. But that isn't always the case.



shadowsword87 posted...

Besides, you still get the precision of word choice while speaking anyway. You just can't edit it after.

That's very much a question of individuals, though. I'd argue that almost every RPer I've ever played with in my entire life have never been as eloquent or well-spoken in-character in a live game as they are/can be in a text-based game where you can at least have a few seconds/minutes to think about your response in advance before sending it.

I know players who would never choose to play an eloquent or talkative character in a live game because they would never be confident enough to speak in character. Or, at the very least, they wouldn't speak in-character/first person, but would default back to third-person "My character says this" speak. There are also people who would refuse to play any character too different from their own personality or gender or preferences because they wouldn't feel comfortable acting it out, but text gives them time to think about how that character would react to things, and the buffer they need to describe their actions/words/thoughts in ways they feel comfortable with.

I've actually played in LARPs, and I definitely noticed myself changing how I designed and played characters there than I did when I was on text-only SeaChat sites. Because I felt way more pressured into making a character who was physically and mentally closer to my actual self, who I would be better able to play in that sort of setting, without feeling too awkward or overwhelmed. Whereas in text games I've had a MUCH wider range of characters and personalities.

I'd never say that text-based RP is always objectively better than the alternative, but I also would never say that face-to-face is better than every other style either. Ultimately it depends on the players and what sort of game they want to play. In some cases, for some people, text will absolutely be 100% better. In other cases, it won't be.
---

I'm going to interrupt this dispute about vocalizing or the written word to say teo things.

1. The Bravely Default 2 demo is up on The Switch. (Damn demo killed my battery.)

2. Starting to hate humanity. (The local government issued a curfew and a closing of non essential businesses on Friday night. People are upset and foaming at the mouth because things are more closed to save lives.)

The longer this pandemic goes on the more hate grows in my heart. Like The Grinch.

---

Fear and ignorance makes people dumb, Wave. Just best to roll with the punches and keep you and yours safe.

As for the DnD debate.


---

EvilMegas posted...

Fear and ignorance makes people dumb, Wave. Just best to roll with the punches and keep you and yours safe.

I mean, people are dumb without these things. Indeed just make your home as safe and as sane as you can for yourself and those you care about most.

---

The Wave Master posted...

2. Starting to hate humanity. (The local government issued a curfew and a closing of non essential businesses on Friday night. People are upset and foaming at the mouth because things are more closed to save lives.)

The newfound level of silence is eerie the first few days, but you start getting used to it.

...and then the jackasses on the next block that didn't get the memo start holding their own unofficial block party...

---

Congrats to Shadow on the engagement! Or condolences, as Zeus puts it.

My Wednesday night D&D group has moved to Roll 20, and the results have been ... difficult. My laptop can barely run it, everybody has microphone issues, etc. Going to keep trying until the lockdown lifts, but I do not enjoy playing D&D this way. I mean, going from what PO says above, I'm a writer, and I used to do a lot of text-based online RP (in IRC, if anybody remembers that), but nothing can replace the in-person tabletop experience for me.

---

EvilMegas posted...

As for the DnD debate.

Well you can do it with text to speech which would be hard to take seriously.

Watched Polar (2019) last night, a NF original (?) based on a web comic. My first thought during the opening credits were recent discussions of the "infantalization (sp?) of adults" where ostentatiously high-brow pundits argued that the success of things like comic book movies (although when I was considering the concept, I realized it might have more specifically been referring to superhero films) is demonstrative of a loss of either maturity or intellectualism in adults. And, sitting through something like Polar, I somewhat have to agree that the film insults one's intelligence... although it's still a fun ride!

I'm happy that I slogged through the awful opening minutes where we see a team of hitmen carry out a stupidly convoluted kill, followed by an introduction to the film's protagonist (Duncan Vizla, aka "The Black Kaiser" -- a nickname so silly that it could only be at home in a comic book) as he goes to a doctor's appointment, runs errands, and meets with his soon-to-be-former handler (because the assassination group arbitrarily retires agents at age 50, at which point they can collect their pension). The early going is dull, but later on we get a lot of enjoyable, over-the-top comic nonsense between the outsized personalities of the hitman team seen earlier, the organization's Austin Powers villain-esque leader (ie, a bad clone of a Bond villain played more for laughs), "colorful" minor characters, etc.

Of course, one of the highlights is the hot assassin chicks and, after seeing one bounce around in various cute outfits throughout the film, we do eventually get to see her nude which was a pleasant surprise. (Up until then, we already had several softcore scenes involving nudity as well, but it didn't involve characters I cared about.)

Polar, for the most part, is as goofy and convoluted as the opening kill sequence. We have a few plot threads that don't go anywhere (like the discussion of... well, what seems like the sale of the organization), although they might exist only to provide pointless exposition as to the motives (which themselves are suspect given how highly paid the assassins are in the first place.)

Speaking of things not going anywhere, you also Camile who is kidnapped and drugged towards the end of the movie... but that's all that happens to her. I kinda expect that she was probably raped and heavily degraded in the original comic but, because she's played by DIsney star Vanessa Hudgens, the more extreme stuff was omitted to protect her career since otherwise Disney might not use her.

I also should mention the ending, which I suppose no matter how they handled I wouldn't like. For starters, there's the barely-foreshadowed revelation that Camile is a child that Duncan let survive after a botched hit and had been paying money to all this time. Had it been set up better, I might have enjoyed this twist. However, my bigger issue is the handling thereafter. If Camile had killed Duncan, that would be a pretty cool conclusion to the story arc when you consider how much shit he'd avoided all along and that this is what finally gets him. I'm not sure how much I'd actually enjoy that ending, though -- and I guess it also ties back into the "infantalization of adults" schtick since happy endings are viewed as being more kiddy and -- to some extent -- less thought-provoking. Instead, they talk it out and he agrees to help her get revenge against whoever hired him to do it. Coincidentally, that's the kind of conclusion I imagine I'd want to see had she actually killed him instead.

shadowsword87 posted...

And you need to learn that voice is the best way of convoying emotions.
Almost like it's human beings talking to humans, weird.

Actually, body language is supposedly the best way of conveying emotion. Vocal intonations make up a surprisingly smaller amount of emotional conveyance, probably because it's easier to mask voice than it is body (excluding by not letting somebody see you)

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Some people are so self-conscious about speaking in character that they shut completely down. Text can create a buffer where they can play in character while they'd never be able to do so in person. Especially if they're playing with strangers or other people they feel are more likely to be judgemental. For those sorts of people, the difference between text and speaking is going to be the difference between playing as your character and playing the entire game saying things like "My character does this" and "My character says that he's interested in hearing more" or "My character describes the battle to the merchant". And trying to force them to speak in first-person or describe their actions in first-person isn't going to encourage them to get better/more relaxed as much as it's going to encourage them to stop RPing entirely.

That and there's the immersion-killing dissonance when somebody is playing a character vastly unlike themselves.

EvilMegas posted...

Fear and ignorance makes people dumb

Ignorance is more a state of being dumb rather than "making people" dumb >_> As for fear, it can actually *heighten* the senses and help you react more quickly, a notion more typically associated with intelligence.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Some people are so self-conscious about speaking in character that they shut completely down. Text can create a buffer where they can play in character while they'd never be able to do so in person. Especially if they're playing with strangers or other people they feel are more likely to be judgemental. For those sorts of people, the difference between text and speaking is going to be the difference between playing as your character and playing the entire game saying things like "My character does this" and "My character says that he's interested in hearing more" or "My character describes the battle to the merchant". And trying to force them to speak in first-person or describe their actions in first-person isn't going to encourage them to get better/more relaxed as much as it's going to encourage them to stop RPing entirely.

Promoting roleplay is, weirdly, a GM issue. If someone says "I want to use deception to get past the guard", it's a simple "all right, what do you say". So if they don't want to go further, it's super easy to just say they don't do anything. If they want to keep not speaking in character, that's also fine, they just need to give a broad description of what they're saying. It's really easy to work around it, and move the game forward.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Though in my case, it's not that as much as the fact that I'm and old man stuck in a 90s tech mindset and I hate anything more advanced than AIM or ICQ. And I tend to find group chat with cams/mics can be distracting in its own way because it can be a cacophony of noise, which is more of an issue over mics than it is in person. Especially if the tech involved is being kind of s***ty. Or if you're using older/less powerful hardware (which you very well may be, if you're notoriously anti-PC gaming and only ever use your computer for e-mail and message boards).

I_Abibde posted...

My Wednesday night D&D group has moved to Roll 20, and the results have been ... difficult. My laptop can barely run it, everybody has microphone issues, etc. Going to keep trying until the lockdown lifts, but I do not enjoy playing D&D this way.

There's a baseline level of technology required. Yeah. Taking a physical game and moving it online is awful unless you know every single person has the technical skills to operate a microphone and not leave it on while munching on chips. Microphone etiquette is required.
However, starting out online, and making everyone comfortable with microphone etiquette before, is actually just fine.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Though it's also worth noting that people who are frustrated theater majors are much more likely to want that direct personal interaction (similar to why the Crit Role cast play up the blatant acting aspects of RP), whereas people who are frustrated writers may absolutely prefer to lean heavy into text because you can convey a hell of a lot with descriptive writing. You can talk about things like tone of voice and body language all you want, but if you're not a skilled actor you probably aren't conveying what you want your character to be thinking/emoting most of the time anyway. Because YOU aren't personally feeling what your character is most of the time (especially if you're playing any sort of character who is different from your actual personality). Whereas, if you're dealing with GOOD writers, they can introduce a lot of subtly and nuance that is completely lacking in face-to-face games (I can honestly say I've felt far more emotion from some of the text-based games I've played in than I've ever felt in any face-to-face game ever).

I don't know about you, but I naturally do a little bit of acting while roleplaying. I sit differently, move my hands differently (or not at all). It takes a tiny amount of practice, but it's a skill that's honestly one of my favorite things to do, it's fun as hell to inhabit someone else's ticks. It doesn't require a lot, just sitting up straight with quick, precise hand motions. Or slouching to the side and making exaggerating sweeping gestures.
Even just talking loudly and laughing with people makes all of the difference in the world.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'd never say that text-based RP is always objectively better than the alternative, but I also would never say that face-to-face is better than every other style either. Ultimately it depends on the players and what sort of game they want to play. In some cases, for some people, text will absolutely be 100% better. In other cases, it won't be.

Me neither, I just judge you for being wrong.

EvilMegas posted...

As for the DnD debate.

Both is actually the worst of the two.
It mixes the slowness of typing, with the logistics of timing.

---

Was a little surprised to learn that the WWE did finally cave on WM36, although really it had got to the point where they might have had to switch states otherwise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WrestleMania_36

Given that the event was already held (but has yet to be broadcast), I'm surprised that the wikipedia page doesn't have the results yet. I'm sure that the news *had* to have leaked somewhere already.

---

EvilMegas posted...

As for the DnD debate.

To be fair, that's exactly what I'm arguing. I'm not saying online RP through mics/cams is universally terrible, just that it isn't for me. And that every individual player and group has to decide for themselves.

For some people/groups, online play is awesome and great. For others, it's terrible. Some people will love it, and some people will hate it so much they wind up turning off of RP entirely. Neither group is wrong.

It's similar to how some groups will focus on acting/characterization/narrative to the point of bordering on freeform, while other groups will ignore those facets of RP in favor of focusing on combat, optimal builds, and synergistic interaction to the point of bordering on wargaming (and most groups in general will fall somewhere between the two extremes). Neither group is wrong for playing that way, even if someone who likes playing the one way would be absolutely miserable playing the other way.

Ultimately D&D, like all RP, is a group experience, and it's up to the group to decide how best to play it to maximize enjoyment. If you're having fun, you're doing it right. If you're not having fun, you're doing it wrong.



shadowsword87 posted...

Promoting roleplay is, weirdly, a GM issue. If someone says "I want to use deception to get past the guard", it's a simple "all right, what do you say". So if they don't want to go further, it's super easy to just say they don't do anything.

I agree, but:

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Some people are so self-conscious about speaking in character that they shut completely down. Text can create a buffer where they can play in character while they'd never be able to do so in person.

Every player is going to have different levels of comfort with formulating in-character dialogue. Like I said, some players will bust out an elaborate off-the-cuff flowery speech with accents and flourishes, some will awkwardly default to "my character says this", and other people may feel so intimidated by being in the spotlight that they shut down completely. A good GM can coax players out of their shells to some degree, but not every player wants to be out of their shell, or will resist being coaxed. And repeatedly trying to force them to do more than they're willing to do might drive them away from RP entirely.

If that kind of player can open up in text in ways they never feel comfortable doing in person, there's nothing wrong with that. And there's the possibility that developing your skills there can actually extend to other aspects of play - when my gf started RPing she was exclusively playing online and didn't feel comfortable in a tabletop sense, but she eventually got to the point where she was LARPing pretty regularly. Essentially, the slower response times of text-based play gave her the practice she needed to get inside a character's head and play them, when then helped her when she needed to do so in person.

Some people will never make that step, though. And if they're comfortable with text RP and enjoy it, there's no reason why they shouldn't stick to it.



shadowsword87 posted...

I don't know about you, but I naturally do a little bit of acting while roleplaying. I sit differently, move my hands differently (or not at all). It takes a tiny amount of practice, but it's a skill that's honestly one of my favorite things to do, it's fun as hell to inhabit someone else's ticks. It doesn't require a lot, just sitting up straight with quick, precise hand motions. Or slouching to the side and making exaggerating sweeping gestures.

And that's fine... for you.

Plenty of people don't feel comfortable playing that way, though. Other people would argue that's not going far enough. Everyone has different comfort levels, different expectations. There is no "one style over all" that is the universally correct way to play.

I'd also point out that, if you're in a good online text-based game, you can easily inhabit a character and change your style of speaking, describe physical gestures and body language cues, and other emotional context that the vast majority of players never feel comfortable enough or skilled enough to convey at a table (and even less so over a mic/cam). It's why I said "You need to find better online games" - I get the impression you're basing your entire opinion of text-based RP on half-assed AOL-chat style play where almost no effort is being put into play (just like I always assume you're biased against Alignment because you've only played in games where it was misused by bad DMs).

Personally, I've LARPed. Even when I played pure tabletop, I'd bring props and personal items that would let me better get into character. But I've also GMed for players who are way too self-conscious to play that way, and either won't or can't play that way, who prefer text because it gives them a chance to feel like they can speak in-character without feeling completely stupid or messing up what they're trying to say because their character should be more eloquent than they are as real people.

And again, a lot of that depends on how comfortable you feel writing. Someone who can pour passion and descriptives and personality into their writing and do it quickly/somewhat stream-of-consciousness are going to enjoy that style of play a lot more than someone who almost exclusively writes in emojis and memes.

Ultimately, it's all about what the individual and the group are comfortable with.



shadowsword87 posted...

Me neither, I just judge you for being wrong.

Which is, ironically, the thing that makes you objectively wrong, as opposed to just being opinionated.

What you're essentially saying is "There is but ONE TRUE WAY to enjoy this, and anyone who disagrees is wrong". Which is what I'm kind of calling bullshit on.

I've played tabletop. I've played LARP (both frustrated theater major style like the White Wolf kids love, and the PVC pipe boffer/beanbag spell type with nerds beating each other up in the woods). I've played solely by microphone. I've played in a chat room. I've played on a message board. I've even played a "letters game" where people are essentially writing pen pal letters to each other via e-mail in-character. All of which have their pros and cons, all of which can be enjoyable in their own ways. And all of which can absolut

The "Good Hunting" episode of Love, Death, Robots was pretty neato.

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

The "Good Hunting" episode of Love, Death, Robots was pretty neato.

Beyond the Altaris Rift or w/e is definitely my favorite one.

Fun fact, that series came into being after the creators tried to write a new Heavy Metal movie for years, and it basically turned into this.

---

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

Beyond the Altaris Rift or w/e is definitely my favorite one.

Was that the super-realistic CGI one? I liked the twist in that one at least.

Fun fact, that series came into being after the creators tried to write a new Heavy Metal movie for years, and it basically turned into this.

Honestly that is not difficult to believe at all, considering all the blood and boobs in so many of the animations

---

Watching Iron Man 3 atm. First, I had a major spoiler revealed to me ages ago and then, while just confirming that an actor was who I thought, had that same spoiler spoiled even more explcitly. So that sucked. However, the bigger thing I was thinking about the fact that, as far as superheroes go, guys like Tony Stark are pretty frequently helpless when away from their gear. A great many superheroes always have their powers. Other heroes like Batman have martial arts prowess, but somebody who relies on an external device is pretty SOL without it.

And so far IM3 has been less awful than IM2, even though the whole thing has a very different direction from the other films.

After this, I'll probably watch AoU (or maybe I'll check to see which other phase 2 films I haven't seen). Going to finally watch IW and EG down the road.It was that or binge either Punisher, Legend of Korra, or... I forget the third thing.

---

Unfortunately all this virus has done to my life is make grocery shopping harder. I still work like normal. Well its a good thing over all but doesn't help my backlog of games at all.

Breath of the wild
Bayonetta 1 and 2
Doom 2
Doom 3
Doom 64
Marvel ultimate alliance 3
The latest bloodstained game
Prison architect
Assassins creed 3
Assassins creed liberation
Assassins creed rogue
Several shantae games
Final fight 2
Link between worlds

And im sure I'm missing a few

---

As of yet, my shopping's been mostly the same (in spite of being in one of the three states Trump wants to wall off like in Escape From New York). There's a couple things here and there that you can see being blatantly sold out (TP obviously, but I also had trouble getting butter and pulled pork last time I shopped), but almost everything else is stocked exactly the same as it always has been.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

As of yet, my shopping's been mostly the same (in spite of being in one of the three states Trump wants to wall off like in Escape From New York). There's a couple things here and there that you can see being blatantly sold out (TP obviously, but I also had trouble getting butter and pulled pork last time I shopped), but almost everything else is stocked exactly the same as it always has been.

Yet I live in a area with no confirmed cases and I cant even buy a pork chop. Literally bought steak cause it was all they had left

---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Yet I live in a area with no confirmed cases and I cant even buy a pork chop. Literally bought steak cause it was all they had left

You poor thing.

---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

You poor thing.

Steak aint cheap. I ain't bitching too hard though. Im gettimg by but I like a cooked meal once in awhile.

---

Personally, I'm just glad I always shopped like a hoarder. I always have like a month's worth of food (at least) in my house even before any of this started. I've got like three bags of frozen chicken, multiple pounds of ground beef, and so on.

It helps that I have my own house, though. And that said house has a full storage/utility room/pantry (where I've got two full-sized floor-to-ceiling cabinets full of food and an extra refrigerator/freezer). I am aware that most people don't stock 20 boxes of mac & cheese or 4 large boxes of cereal just for the sake of never running out of food.

(Though that backfired during Hurricane Sandy - after 10 days with no power all my frozen food wound up getting tossed, and that was probably like $300-$400 worth of food. But on the other hand I was never worried about starving even while all the local stores were closed, either.)
---

Age of Ultron was surprisingly good. The opening fight was incredible and the first 30 or so minutes were all great... after which it really drags at times. By the last moments of the ending fight scene, I was waiting for it to end. My only other major issue was the fact that it rehashed a lot of shit from the first film, between the mind control, a Hulk rampage (which was pretty damn cool this time) that once pit hero vs hero, and the inevitable team arguments/possibility of disbanding.

As with pretty much every other role he's done, James Spader was amazing as Ultron. (It's weird to think that he was once Daniel Jackson in Stargate... well, in addition to his earlier roles.) And this version of Quicksilver was really cool, although I think I might still prefer the X-Men films.

Happy I held off watching Black Panther now, which I also realize I should watch *before* IW. I still haven't seen the full Thor 2, but I guess that probably doesn't contribute much to the continuity that I haven't seen (although it would have been really relevant before I saw Thor 3)

mooreandrew58 posted...

Link between worlds

I envy you, because I wish I could play that again for the first time =x

---

I need to rewatch Thor 3.
---

Zeus posted...

Age of Ultron was surprisingly good.

"Ok, look, the city is flying, we're fighting an army of robots, and I have a bow and arrow. None of this makes sense."

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Was that the super-realistic CGI one? I liked the twist in that one at least.

Yeah. It was a cool twist at the end.


---

Not-so-fun fact: Disney+'s recommendation system doesn't have the good sense to suggest things in order. After AoU, it's suggesting I watch EG. You'd think they'd put a *little* effort into things that are series.

Starting to watch Black Panther (again, technically). Love the opening sequence. (Although "the Panther Goddess Bast"? Really?)

Also was thinking about favorite films, rewatching things, etc, and realized that *most* MCU films I'll probably only ever bother watching the once. (Meanwhile most of my favorite films I've seen at least 5 times, a few quite a lot more than that.)


---

Zeus posted...

Not-so-fun fact: Disney+'s recommendation system doesn't have the good sense to suggest things in order. After AoU, it's suggesting I watch EG. You'd think they'd put a *little* effort into things that are series.

It's probably not smart enough. Odds are it's designed to notice when certain things are in the same series/loose grouping via keywords, but it doesn't have a means of prioritizing by release order and so it just defaults to "most recent first" and "most popular first" because those are the ones most people are going to be most likely to want to see/impulse watch from a recommendation.

YouTube's the same way - you basically have to bypass those limitations there via pre-constructed playlists. Otherwise if you just rely on autoplay or recommendations you'll often wind up missing episodes, watching episodes out of order, or getting bounced to an entirely different series that may not be all that much more than peripherally related to what you were watching.
---

It doesn't need to be super-smart, they just need to manually create a list for each series (or at least two, in the case of franchises with a lot of supporting films) and then have the first suggestion be the next thing in the series or franchise.

For instance, if I watched IM2, the first two listed suggestions should be Thor (the next film in the franchise) and IM3 (the next film in the series). Or, in the case of AoU, my next recommendations should be Ant-Man (franchise) and IW (series). Granted, it's not a perfect solution by any means, but it makes a lot more sense.

Or, if the concept is taken a step further, I suppose it could "skip" past films I've seen on the platform so instead of suggesting Ant-Man after AoU it could go with CW because it doesn't know I've seen that. That's not terribly more complex and certainly not outside the range of what we know technology can be automated to do.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

YouTube's the same way - you basically have to bypass those limitations there via pre-constructed playlists. Otherwise if you just rely on autoplay or recommendations you'll often wind up missing episodes, watching episodes out of order, or getting bounced to an entirely different series that may not be all that much more than peripherally related to what you were watching.

Youtube is a lot harder to manage from a logistical standpoint because the system has to accommodate a vastly large, user-submitted library. D+ doesn't have those excuses. When something's added to the library, it can be tagged properly or, I suppose, they can add to a playlist if that's easier.

***

As for Black Panther, the first hour really flew by. I hadn't realized how far I'd gotten through it and only checked the time because I was wondering when what I had assumed was the main thread -- T'challa losing the throne -- was going to happen and how much time would be devoted to it. The answer? Not a lot.

Black Panther has a lot of issues (including some flimsy character motivations, like Border boss W'Kabi -- portrayed as one of T'challa's best friends -- suddenly devoutly following Killmonger simply because Killmonger had avenged W'Kabi's dad's murder where instead you'd expect him to be more conflicted than Okoye), but at least the pacing was pretty good the whole way through whereas AoU occasionally had me checking my proverbial watch. That said, AoU was the better film by several miles, even though Black Panther is probably among the better MCU films I've seen so far.

Looking over the list, the MCU films I haven't watched are:
-Thor 2 (DW)
-Cap 2 (WS)
-GoG 1 & 2
-Spidey "1" and "2" (HC and FFH)
-Captain Marvel

GoG 1 & 2 I figure I'll definitely have to watch before IW, probably the same for S:HC. Not sure whether to watch CM before IW or wait until after IW, although it's something I should watch before EG.

It's worth noting that when they were released, I had read detailed spoilers for Cap 2 and brief spoilers for GoG 2, in addition to having a lot of shit spoiled from GoG 1.

---

No recommendations are perfect. Steam still recommends games you already own.
---

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

What was the purpose of retconning Leia into Luke's sister anyway? Was it just an excuse for Han to end up with her? Because even the whole set-up for that is weird and, within the context of the original trilogy, it didn't really add much to the story other than Vader using the fact to provoke Luke.

---

...When you say "retconning", how deep do you mean?
Like, first trilogy?

---

Zeus posted...

What was the purpose of retconning Leia into Luke's sister anyway? Was it just an excuse for Han to end up with her? Because even the whole set-up for that is weird and, within the context of the original trilogy, it didn't really add much to the story other than Vader using the fact to provoke Luke.

Han was gonna end up with her from the beginning

---

shadowsword87 posted...

...When you say "retconning", how deep do you mean?
Like, first trilogy?

Specifically in that it wasn't part of Lucas's original plan, iirc.

Metalsonic66 posted...

Han was gonna end up with her from the beginning

Pretty sure Lucas himself had suggested plans to have Luke and Leia wind up together.

---

Do... do you really think that George Lucas should be the shining heart and soul of the series?
That he alone is what all of Star Wars should strive to be?

Oooor, and go with me here, you judge (and enjoy) the movies by themselves and understand that no singular man can create a movie.

---

In earlier scripting, Luke's sister was supposed to be a different person that would appear in a future sequel as a prototype of Rey of some sorts.

shadowsword87 posted...

Do... do you really think that George Lucas should be the shining heart and soul of the series?
That he alone is what all of Star Wars should strive to be?

I just pretend that there are just 3 star wars movies.

Honestly, that's fair. I just don't think "It's the directors vision for that movie" is the correct interpretation always.

---

What would we have of Trek if it had died with Gene Roddenberry?

---

It was great before it hit the 2000's.
Then.
Uh.
Someone who didn't actually watch the TV show took over.

---

Phantom Menace wasn't great.
---