Durakken

Just to point out... physically women prefer a less diverse look in men however are also less attracted physically to men in general so the argument is scientifically inaccurate. The muscle bound guy is an objectification of men. It's just that you think you can argue that since you don't judge primarily on looks it's not objectification.

You could make quite the argument that it's only objectification physically, but we could probably look at all the characters mentally and i'm willing to bet that more male characters fit the stereotypical male that fit all the wants of women while most of the women in comics don't... but I haven't gone and done the research so i don't know 100%


As far as it's male fantasy... actually that's not true. Everyone wishes they'd look awesome, but in general men don't care about other male physical appearance because women don't look at physical as the primary and so there isn't this over whelming drive to be the best physically... so it's a non-starter from the aspect that people are taking it from, however... if we're talking other factors... Bruce Wayne is a power fantasy from top to bottom and is totally objectified. Most of the heroes that come to mind outsides of Batman are not the same type, but are power fantasies. One could argue that the "rich" is the quality that is being fantasized with Bruce, but it's not... it's the successful part which can be seen across most hero characters and inversed in most villains... ie Reed Richards is successful while Dr. Doom is not (even though he has conquered the world one could make the argument that was unsuccessful too ^.^)

On the other hand because the more "attractive" to fit this ideal of media and breeding instinct is there women who read comics might be having a power fantasy because they are looking at characters that look like they'd want to look in the best condition...not just to attract men but to piss off other women.

So one might say the whole objectification and power fantasy that women accuse comics of being for men is a projection of what they are reading when they female characters >.>

...

I really don't need to say how much I want to tear apart what you just said there do I?

It's realistic that he would snap, but it's not realistic in that his life being that way is unrealistic because no one would be like that. We have natural defense mechanism to protect ourselves from such extreme situations. We call it escape. The kid would have picked up reading books, art, school work, etc... even split personalities. People don't just sit in their room and stair at the ceiling and even if they do they escape into their own mind and are hyper creative and/or into deep thinking which Andrew isn't in any way from what we see.

You aren't giving an example and I'm fairly awesome at figuring out where bugs are even if they don't make much sense for most that they're there so there is no way for me to accurately measure what you call obvious to what i call obvious.

Also that is one of the skills good testers have... guessing where a bug might be based on what they are experiencing in game.

That's semi true, but it comes off as a sorta as he becomes evil because everyone is mean to him. As if it is saying "yeah it's ok to be a jerk just because others are mean to you" it also seems to send the message of "you shouldn't bully people because one day they may be stronger than you" instead of a good message like "Hey you should be nice regardless of how the world treats you"

Conversely though if they had Matt or Steve become all villainy they'd send an equally bad message of "They're only nice to him and good is because they are so popular and have a good life" or "Just be glad they can't do worse because those popular people are psychos"

Overall I think it was just a little too forced with Andrew. Not that it's not realistic, but because the more they pile up on this one character the more they become unrelateable both in and out of the story.

Andrew is a loser who gets picked on in school, abused by his out of work father, while is mother is dying of sickness, who's only friends are the two most popular people in the school which came about by happen stance and he films everything for no reason who is also a virgin who not only has no skills but also recognizes he has no skills nor is he that intelligent and he doesn't seem have games or access to the net (or much) and he doesn't do drugs or play sports or read or do art or have any hobby defined.

From what we are told of this character we can only construct that his days are pretty much get bullied all day and sit in his room staring at the ceiling without thinking. You don't get the impression that he's smart or talented or doing well in school or anything that could give him that reality... all you get is him being screwed with and him looking at the ceiling doing nothing else more or less and everything we see other than that is a product of things that happens after the start of the movie.

He's a poorly developed character and doesn't work...

On the other hand Steve and Matt are far more developed and not just "well everything good happens to them" which is really kinda crappy because Steve is only really in there as a warning sign, which isn't utilized well at all either.

Matt, on the other hand, has a lot of deeper character. He's popular, he's nice, but he's not just popular and nice. He's also probably the smartest of the 3. He reads philosophy, has a girlfriend, has other friends, he's adventurous, and is thinking about the consequences of the actions that these powers might allow them to do.

now if you would have had Matt or Steve go evil and have Andrew as a tertiary background character you could have told better and more cerebral story imo. You see yourself in Matt or Steve because they are relatable and charismatic, plus they are completely different in their philosophies and I could see where they'd do this or that for their reasons. They would act like a hero or villain because there is so much you could do with the whole "fun loving politician" vs "Philosopher but slacker" positions no matter which way you go.

Andrew when you really look at him falls flat as a main character and noone can really relate to him because he acts like a child in his reaction and in his life in terms of throwing a fit and all like that, but he's not innocent in any way and as such his character is static and there is no arc there.

I can't help feel that there should be a if diamond at the end asking "Are you Durakken" and if yes should point to <stop>

btw... just because it is needed


"In Soviet Russia, Shark jump show!"

While i agree that you should use use new stuff for medium and taking the strain off the model. I don't see how any of that goes against why you should use models that are not all that pretty... in fact it somewhat goes to show why you should use live models that aren't "good looking" because you can't be certain that what you see in the picture is what you would see and also sense of space and such might be altered by using other references... ie tech can help with quick references, but for learning I think it is best to go with the classic approach.

That spacial thing is kinda important as it translates to figuring out how bodies interact with things around it as well as helping to make things look 3dimensional rather than a flat image.


Also I'd have told your professor that not only is it cheaper, provides a decent result, but it also allows you to work on another artistic talent that most artists lacks I find... Framing, composition, and focus that is taught heavily in photography.

Actually skipping a stone works via surface tension. The spin of the stone + the velocity of it combine with surface tension so that when a stone drops into the water never submerges, but when it snaps back it launches the stone upwards combining that with spin and velocity keeps it going forward, repeating the process till there isn't enough energy in the stone.

Fish work like you say...


Super jump in theory works more like a rocket where whatever force your powers are generating thrusts downward... so really super jump would work like that...

The shield absorbs energy if i remember right.

You are probably right. I just think that regardless of whether it is true that they said it or not it is easily shown to be not true that is impossible or it is able to be over come.

They probably sad it just to shut people up about it or something.

The shield is like 2.5-3.5' in diameter... He can probably protect most of his body pretty easy... the maximum amount unprotected body Cap would have is like 4-6" if crouched as best he could.

It's not about what you draw. It's about learning how skin folds and flaps stretches and wrinkles. It allows you to see more detail and thus when you draw all those young curvaceous and muscle bound bodies they much better drawn. I despise most comic book art and westerners who draw manga/anime style because most of them don't have a clue how to draw properly. They are what i call surface artists, who make it look pretty on the surface, but if you give them something even a little outside what they are used to they fall apart.

Contrarily, most manga artists are generally really good artists who have a style. Which what a lot of people argue about the surface artists that I'm talking about. Those surface artists may have a "style" but they can't seem to draw slighting, proportions, or any number of other things right and any real artists knows that you first learn to draw the basic then you can pick up a style...

I'd like to point out that I don't like what he tried to do there either.

And that I just think that what you are saying is no exactly right with what is the true situation which is more along what was recently said and I pointed out that it's not to do with that is "impossible" but the devs don't like the way it'd look, which has been a constant argument from them with certain things, even though its the way it'd look is exactly how the comics shows it always in the first place.

Research that is horrible for learning art. Life art teachers will tell you that you should use ugly/old/overweight models because more lines and creases and such are better to learn from.

And I'm the ridiculous one...

So he didn't say anything about this bull about the engine not being capable.

I don't even see how it's possible to believe that they couldn't make a power that made it so the animation is a character moved. That's kinda a silly notion. It's also silly to believe that there is no mapped walls because all the buildings are not just squares. The have parts you can jump onto which means that the rest has to be mapped as well... Not to mention the teleport targeting system flips horizontal and vertical so it must be looking at something.

What they said is "We don't want to do it because it wouldn't look right to us" and that's the same thing they've said about a lot of stuff that they have now put in the game and loosened their restrictions on. I admire the whole notion of don't do something if you can't do it "perfect" but at the same time there should be a little give in there...especially with this when the whole "the line goes nowhere" is well known thing for it

Now it seems that the restrictions are that the game can't move you (for some reason) and it can't be a swing animation... You know there is an easy solution to this...

Target with the teleport mechanic.
Line shoots out and attaches to a building or what not
Players has to press and hold forward to move at great speeds
If the player stops pressing forward at any point they start to fall like they were super speeding along and then the bottom dropped out but you can continue pressing forward and it will make you travel in a straight line to the "anchor point"

That alone would make a ton of people happy and would add any new mechanics to the game. Now if we wanted to actually add in the swing part which if the devs go that far they'd want to. That's just using a physics calculation because everything is already figured out at that point and it is no different than making a character drop vertically.

The problem then would be "but how would you get to a place where there is nothing to grab onto or over large water areas" you don't. You swim or walk. Or use another form of transportation like the people who want this would want to do anyways.

Patches and updates. That's what they're for. It's not a ton more work.
The other game uses an upgraded version of CoH's engine
And part of the benefit of going Freemium is so that all these things that they couldn't do because they couldn't justify it are now possible because they can justify it under the new model.

I don't buy that for a second.

All it is is movement through 3D space while doing an animation.
With an item in the character's hand
With a line coming from that

That last part would be the only conceivable problem with implementing and that's only because the code doesn't exists as far as i know to do something like that quite completely, but I would argue that that could easily be changed.

I think it's more along the lines of the "we don't want to make the line shoot off into nothing" which I think is a cop out personally, but whatever.