battlewraith

There are certainly people that view humans killing animals solely for sport as evil. The cutoff line for most people seems to be sentience. Hunting other human beings for sport is absolutely regarded as evil and killing off helpless populations is monstrous. One thing that I think the movie got wrong is that Galactus doesn't just eat planets--he needs to consume worlds that are able to support biological life. The Silver Surfer is, imo, a rebuttal to the idea that Galactus is just some inscrutable entity that can't be regarded in moral terms. As a herald, the Surfer is far beyond a human being in terms of abilities, perspective, etc. The Surfer has seen the vast scope of the universe and has the most insider perspective on what drives his boss. Yet the Surfer, after spending a brief time on Earth, decides to revolt on behalf of humanity. It's hard to view the Surfer's cross-species empathetic sacrifice as heroic without conversely seeing Galactus's complete indifference to other beings as evil. Not to mention Galactus's thuggish dealings--be my herald and I won't eat your planet. I remember the whole John Byrne trial of Galactus thing where they tried to redeem Galactus--he has some higher purpose, etc. But I default to the initial idea of Kirby and Lee, which I take to be "what if you ran into a godlike being that was just hungry and didn't give a shit about morality." All that said, I agree with you that the depiction of Galactus was not great. I had two ways that I think they could've resolved the situation that were lore appropriate and better than Sue hulking out:

At what point is it no longer really Tron? When you bring these characters into the real world and give them superpowers--doesn't it change everything? Even your notion of time:

Depending on how you define evil, Galactus is evil. He's utterly indifferent to the suffering of sentient beings on the planets he consumes.

A 53 SO? Dang that's rough. There's this rich dude that keeps telling me that all I need to do is play the game and it's like raining merits. There is no grind and nobody cares about your build and everything is wonderful. Sounds like you're not buying it either.

Actually it's not. The playstyle I'm describing is not bizarre or incomprehensible at all. It probably relates to people who have been min/maxers, plers, pvpers over the course of the development of the game. If you think it's that weird you probably have not strayed that far out of your own niche. The "so many people" you're referencing is a subset of the forum population, which is a miniscule sliver of the actual playerbase. The people that I've know for a long time that play like me don't bother with the forums aside from things like patch notes and technical questions. Sure. But hopefully aside from the sneering kneejerk dismissals and rank incredulity from people who don't understand why you play that way, there would be some actual critical thought. My first question would be "how does teaming negatively impact you experience as a solo player?" Depending on what that circumstance is, maybe there would some fix that could improve the experience for players like you but not sink the boat for everyone else.

This is the crux of the issue. People want different things from the game. There are hardliners that view their playstyle as "the way" and can't relate to anything else, even when people explain it to them repeatedly. They then turn around and act like they've been dissed when they aren't treated as the measure of all things. Note that this discussions was originally about enhancements. Now it's about everything. Being "unwilling to level up" and every other boogeyman hiding in the closet.

So all of the characters you had set up on that server would be gone and you would have to repeat the rigamarole to set each of them up again. Who would care? People in general. No matter how little or how much time you had invested in that server, you would be paying a penalty for playing there. So there would never be a significant population there, which entails a second penalty--joining a MMORPG and having a single player experience.

Just saw it. I think I'd give it a "b". The cast was good. The design and the special effects were good. The early part of the movie struck me as more in line with Kirby stories that were tales of wonder. The second half became focused on "we have to defeat this world ending threat" and it kind of dragged. I'm really wondering if what ended up being the resolution of the film was entirely different that what was initially supposed to happen.

Sorry, some people are actually like that. I've known some. I'm avoiding the conversation at hand because I've spent days on the other one, about making things free.

Earlier in this thread you described yourself as someone with no life outside the game. If people are willing to spend all of their leisure time playing this game, indefinitely, then I think the claim is true. People should not be spending all of their leisure time playing this game.

There are longterm players that act like this is the case. Just play the game and you'll get whatever you need.

Do you think you win? Having a good time? Then it sounds like you win. It's not a flex or a gotcha question. What other factual questions about people's playing habits are taboo? "Do you play any tanks?" "Wanna show your e-peen, you first!" "lol?"

I'm going to see it this weekend. I'm a sucker for that populuxe/futurist aesthetic and I'm hearing good buzz about it.

If you check your account profile, it tells you how many days you've won.

Anything would suffice, lol. It wasn't a gotcha question.

People can't fucking read. Or they can't retain what they read. It's weird. I gave you a list of reasons why someone might play this game that don't have to do with loot. You upvoted it. A lot of people are into aspects of the game, but not all of it. Some things are a lot of fun, and some things are tedious time sinks to be avoided. The community is like a spinning spiral galaxy. The diehards are in the hub in the center. The game for these people is a lifestyle. If they're being honest, they would continue playing indefinitely even if there were no more development. Not only that, but they are hostile to any major change. If the game is still here in another 20 years, those remaining will be as hostile to any change in the reward structure as they are now. Moving away from the hub, you get into the arms of the spiral--people that still enjoy playing but have a more tenuous relationship with it. They might have real life time constraints that they contend with. Or they might not like features like the auction house or low level content. A proposal that makes (some thing) free is aimed at people like this--not the ones in the hub who will continue doing the same things they always do until something stops them. I submit that for the health of the game, the move is to try to keep the people in the arms from floating further away from the hub. To this end, you offer concessions. Things like free powers. Double xp that is available all the time. Making travel powers available earlier as well as adding ones that you can get from the vendor. Things that wrecked aspects of the initial coh game design because the majority of the playerbase found those aspects tedious. It is cool to do that.

The thing being discussed was the possibility of making things free. I argued on the "pro" side. To do this I had to explain and defend my interests (making planned lvl 50 builds with good enhancements) against people like Tidge, who denied that grind was a thing, argues that people should be content just playing normal content, etc. I think if he doesn't like making these types of characters (same as the people that stop leveling at 40) then it sets his objections in context. It was really a straightforward question--which set unexpectedly set him off. He said "you first" so I did. Still no answer from Tidge. It suggests that he thinks there's something damning about the answer. Otherwise, it's not important--as you can see other people have chimed in here about how many character they have.

Right so you can monitor and manage different stacks of loot. But you can't manage to count your 50s--just reading off a list from the character select screen. I didn't know how many I had either--it took me a whole minute or two to check.

Tidge when it comes to money: Tidge asked about how many 50s he has: "It's honestly not something I think about. To me, they are characters and not possessions." LOL

Yeah I get it. It's like the parent that can't remember how many kids they have...

If you can't answer a basic question like, how many 50s you have....I doubt it. It is funny though.

Does it? I didn't graduate HS until the late 80s and didn't regularly engage in online forums until the 2000s. Which means what exactly? You want to know how many I have? I have about 50 lvl 50 characters. Of those, I believe 14 are fully kitted out. This refers of course to Homecoming, not earlier iterations of the game. The question is not a flex. I don't care how many 50s you have, although it's amusing to see you drag your feet answering. How much time you spend playing and what you do with the time imo speaks to people's priorities as players and it informs their feedback on the forums.

Why is is such a hard question Tidge? It's just a number.

This came on the heels of the "is it time to make SOs free" thread. That one featured the same kind of intransigence. A bunch of people just saying no. But there was someone that suggested a discount to the upgrade costs. So from a haggling perspective, it was interesting to see if the most extreme position--"make stuff free"--would result in some sort of constructive engagement. It didn't imo, which isn't surprising, but it was still interesting to read the responses.

Lol dude wtf? What was that post? Hahahahahaha. FWIW I do strip 50s that I don't use. And I can certainly use "clever" strategies to get stuff to put in a new character. But all this big brained posturing is moot if the assumption is that you're sinking huge amounts of time into the game. Of course you're going to have a cave full of merits if you're doing that. No shit. But is that the reasonable baseline for player engagement to assume when having a discussion like this? Also, Tidge...how many 50s do you have por favour? Would also be interesting to know how many are kitted out.