Lothic

Sadly this is a situation which really only affects maybe (if you're really pushing it) 5% of the playerbase tops. A full 95% or more of the people playing this game will never even come close to the 2 billion cap.

So while the Devs could eventually come up with some scheme to address the current cap they would only do it if it became clear that a significant portion of the playerbase needed it. As long as it's just a few random OCD people like us they won't bother. Besides the Devs finally gave us the ability to shift our hordes around with email so the "pressing need" to raise/remove the cap has been mitigated for the foreseeable future. I have around 10 billion spread over several alts and it's easy enough to manage via email.

Basically I wouldn't assume they will change the cap soon (or ever) at this point. *shrugs*

Were all those bodies lined up in that make-shift morgue out behind the hospital in the first episode shot in the head by the military? It's possible but we weren't shown that specifically. There have been a few other times where we've seen bodies simply lying in the street at random. Yes I suppose we can assume that all these random people were put down with head shots as well but that would just have to be a guess on our part.

Clearly this show is not following the comic book 100%. As this thread mentioned earlier it'd really be impossible for it to match it exactly anyway. But because Robert Kirkman is directly involved I have no misgivings whatsoever if he wanted to change how HIS zombies worked for this TV show. They have established that these zombies are caused by a virus and as such it's totally believable to me that the virus involved would not affect EVERYONE. Some people could be immune to it.

Besides when you think about it's actually more creepy if the idea of becoming a zombie was not totally certain. It'd mean that if you practiced Daryl's approach of burning/smashing every body you find you might be doing it to people who you didn't need to do it for. Uncertainty is always more frightening and unnerving than a "always happens" situation.

You're obviously a fan of Daryl then.

Yeah there's something to be said about being "safer than sorry" during a Zombie Apocalypse. On the other hand it's easy enough to (for instance) tie up potential new zombies and watch them to see whether they turn into zombies or not isn't it?

They've left the details of how the zombie virus in this show works a bit vague but it's pretty clear that not 100% of the people who get infected start walking around. We've seen plenty of bodies lying around of people who are just plain dead - not zombies.

So as far as how they handled Amy and Jim I don't really have a problem with it. With Amy there was apparently no guarantee she was going to become a zombie so why waste a bullet (or brutally smash her head) if they didn't need to? I agree they probably should have at least tied her up but Andrea handled it well enough. And with Jim they quickly knew he had the fever but they gave him a reasonable chance to get better before they agreed to let him go.

As Innovator said it was cool to have Daryl expressing that "get them before they get us" point of view, but he expressed those things just to help develop the other characters as being "better" and more humane than that.

I suspect that Rick's faith in the CDC is doomed. Somehow something will go wrong and they'll have to move on to somewhere else. They obviously haven't found the "Sanctuary" they were looking for with this one half-insane CDC doctor guy. This encounter with this guy will allow them to learn a few things about the "bigger picture" and have some safety for a little while, but eventually they'll have to keep moving.

I haven't read anything about any new TP beacons coming with I19. I'm not 100% positive on that, but I've been following the forums on I19 for months and don't recall a mention so my current guess is no.

Since this TV show has one of the guys who created the original comic book (Robert Kirkman) involved with it I have little problem with it being a bit different because it's being overseen by the same creative hand. You can't really get "upset" with a show like this because the guy who wrote the original also had a hand in the "new" version too.

Where I usually have a problem is when shows like this start changing things without any "buy-in" from the original creators. When completely different people start to "reimagine" a story just for the sake of mucking around with it things rarely go well.

Sorry never heard of Kurzweil. The idea that the very definitions of what is "machine" and what is "human" becoming increasingly hard to separate in the future don't really rest with one specific author.

It doesn't really matter which way is easier for the process to happen. You could very well be right that we'll become Star Trek Borg-like before we see something purely inorganic become sentient (like a HAL 9000). But once we make that step the next steps towards the "full blur" between machine and organic will only be that much closer. It might take a few hundred years to happen completely, but once the technological singularity happens who's to say how long afterwards anything like this will happen.

I think it's relatively easy to make that kind of clear-cut, black-n-white decision in 2010 because it's pretty easy to tell the difference between organic lifeforms and technological machines right now. But I suspect there will come a time when the lines between what is a "person" and what is a "machine" will start to blur. Those are going to be fun times indeed.

So sounds like the only new Winter Event badge is Cold as Ice?
That's fine - I have a feeling I'll be too busy with Incarnate stuff in the next few months to worry about a huge update to this year's Winter Event.

That's actually what many people think may be the outcome of this. It's not that we are going to create a separate non-human "artificial" intelligence as much as create a way to transcend our own biology and gain a form of technological immortality for ourselves. Machine-based intelligence won't be alien to us, it'll eventually be "us" as Humans: version 2.0.

I personally don't think it's a matter of IF the Technological Singularity is going to happen.
I think it's really only a matter of WHEN.

Some experts believe it might happen in as little as 20 years.
But even if it's 20, 50 or 100 years from now its still very likely going to happen in some form or fashion whether we are in "control" of it or not.

The only question I'd have (just for curiosity's sake) is whether this stealth change was intentional or not. Could always just be a bug that's now letting it happen...

More than likely though enough people whined about it that the Devs finally decided to change how it worked. Between this change and the general reduction in the required number of HPs needed for these badges I'm almost surprised the Devs don't just give everyone these badges as soon as they create a character.

I agree that does sound a bit, uh, excessive.

But while you, me or anyone else you can think of might think that's a "dumb/silly" way to spend time logged into CoH who are you or I really to judge what someone else considers "fun" here? Frankly I couldn't care less if any given individual here likes to RP instead of do missions 0%, 50% or even 100% of the time. It's their money paying for the monthly subscription - they can spend it however they want. *shrugs*

Yeah this current round of AE exploitation is a bummer.

But as a 78-monther who still manages to play fairly regularly I barely notice the "spam" as being any different or less ignorable than it's always has been. Sooner or later the Devs will plug the current exploits and (sadly) other exploits will likely crop up in the future. This is the way of things. I personally think it's silly to PL characters up to 50 using exploits but it's not my job to punish or prevent people from doing it. As such I don't really let it bother me and will continue to play the game the way I want to.

I know it's relatively pointless to say but I'd try to not let it bother you so much. *shrugs*

Yeah if you notice I actually posted in that thread a few days ago...
I figured it would pop back up soon enough with having to mention it.

That would not really surprise me. It's hard for movies/shows to stay 100% true to an origin story.

I guess the only question I'd have is whether or not the original comic book author is either directly working on the TV show right now or at least publicly endorses the changes that'll be made. If that were the case I'd have no misgivings about changes at all. Otherwise there's always the chance things can go bad.

There have been a few recent examples of TV/movie adaptations which have been handled that way. For instance Charlaine Harris (the author of the Sookie Stackhouse novels that HBO's True Blood is based on) has strongly supported the changes they've made to her original storylines and I'd have to agree the TV show is better than the books in a number of ways. Another good example is the recent American movie remake of the Swedish "Let The Right One In" (called "Let Me In") which was endorsed by the original author of the novel as a faithful adaptation.

Hopefully any changes to The Walking Dead will also be done in ways that fit within the original vision of the story.

Well there's always a "chance" for that outcome, with Depp involved.

But ironically Depp is such a versatile actor that I could see him playing Tonto from any point across a large spectrum of characterizations ranging from "quirky" to "serious" or anything in-between depending on the tone of the movie they are trying to make. Once again I'm just hoping that any humor from Depp's Tonto will at least appropriate for what we'd expect from a stoically loyal partner of the Lone Ranger and not be geared toward being overtly "silly".

No, you simply choose to assume I didn't know how actors and directors work together to make movies and decided to be picky about my choice of words despite the very obvious point I was making.

But to be perfectly clear so that you don't get confused again:
"I hope Depp will give Tonto one of his more serious, non-clowny efforts because the Director involved will allow him to do so."

Was that good enough for you that time or will I have to use extra words to over-explain everything just for your benefit?

And like I said the people making the movie CHOSE him for the role for some reason.
If they want him to play it serious he will.
But if they want him to play it campy that's what he'll give them.

I never implied or suggested that the way he'll play the role was a decision that he himself would have complete control over.