Premonitions
-
Posts
1141 -
Joined
-
I'm always VERY concerned about tops and bottoms when I go to my local bordello.
-
Quote:"Physically"(In terms of what abilities they have on paper) Batman, Superman and Spider-man couldn't be more different, yet they are the three most recognizable Super heroes in America., and the ones most readily recognized as super heroes. The things the have in common are much more numerous and much less superficial than the things Goku and Superman have in common. By the same metric,The Ultramen, Kamen Riders, and the Super Sentai have more in common amongst each other(and with American Superheroes) than they do with quite a few of their animated Japanese contemporaries. All six have more in common amongst each other than Goku shares with any of them.Originally Posted by starphoenix
Goku and Superman have died before, fly, and can shoot energy from a body part. So physically, Goku and Superman are similar, but mentally, you might be right in Ultraman being Japan's Superman. -
Quote:Huh?Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
Not really, again it's still the same basic story with one critical difference. In the case of Recluse he was killed at the Well of Furies instead of drinking from it. As with most of the other major characters it's a single point that radically changes his life without affecting much else.
-
Quote:That's really only proving my point that at this stage Super heroes are no longer a Genre or Archetypical character and has devolved into a catch-all term for "Strong dude". And if we include "Mentally or emotionally strong" so that characters like batman and such can fall under the umbrella then pretty much every Main Character in any story is now a "Super hero"(which that dictionary definition, does in fact, do by stating that being successful makes one a superhero) And I just think that dilutes a good concept.Originally Posted by Xzero45
Superhero - A fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers;
also : an exceptionally skillful or successful person
I don't think it's lost any meaning, tbh.
I would think of Ultraman more as Japan's Superman, personally, and that's really stretching the comparison. Goku is only like Superman in two very superficial areas,(barring that he is heroic in nature, like most heroes) He's an alien and he's strong. He was orginally designed as, and continued to be a Fantasy/Sci-fi adventurer and martial artist who went on grand quests much like Frodo or Hercules. Ultraman was designed to be a normal man who defended his home from catastrophic threats by taking on a different identity and using unique abilities. While also possessing the "Alien and Strong" aspects.(this can vary from one Ultra series to the next but I'm not as big on Ultraman as I am on Kamen Rider)Quote:By definition Godzilla fits, as he's a hero who has extraordinary powers. He's just a different culture's kind of hero. Much like Goku is Japan's Superman, Godzilla is their Hulk.
Godzilla didn't save the world because he was heroic, and he wasn't really the "hero" of the movies he "Starred" in, it was always the random dude or dudette who carried the plot. Further, Godzilla evolved as and more often than not continued to be a Sci-fi monster more than anything resembling a "hero"(granted I never considered The Hulk to be a superhero, either, but he at least was the protagonist of his stories.) It's sort of like saying King-Kong was a superhero because he fought those dinosaurs. -
Quote:In that case the concept of superhero really has lost all meaning.Originally Posted by SuperFerret
He has superpowers. He's saved the world. He's got his own rogue's gallery of villains. Sure, he's gone on a rampage and destroyed some stuff, but the Hulk's a superhero too.
Godzilla and the Doctor are my two favorite non-American superheroes. -
I love Godzilla and all but why is he on that page?
Edit: also, that site is way less informative than a Wiki page, or a TV Tropes page. -
Well after that whole "eve" incident Apple's been pretty bitter.
-
I thought those were UFOs?
-
Them actually being exactly the same is a matter of personal taste. I can exactly copy someone else's build and costume in this game.
-
Quote:You can already make a character that is the same as someone else in everything copyright actually covers(in so much as we can pretend it applies to the game), though, appearance, e.t.c.Originally Posted by St_Angelius
Actually, it's not a bad metaphor In copyright law, 2 thing of the same nature cannot be called the sdame thing. for example. I can't decide to make a new chocolate bar and call it 'Snickers' as there is already one out there copy written. Same with coke and soft drinks. Mobile phones and IPhone etc. the same with this game and character names on each server. that is where the metaphor is and it is valid!
Rocks: The most creative things ever. XDQuote:Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
I get that one too.
See rocks were around longer than fish, so they got the name first, and fish had to wait until they died and turned into rocks but by the time that happened they had to settle for Fossils. 
-
Quote:This man/woman knows what's up.Originally Posted by Hopeling
Personally, I like the local@global system a lot, and I think a lot of the objections raised against it are nonsense and/or are overblown (as in, the things people are worried about do not actually happen in places where the system exists, or happen incredibly rarely). Still, a significant fraction of the opposition to the idea stems from people who just don't want someone else out there with the same name, even if they never encounter or even hear of that person. This would make them unhappy.
I think that doesn't make sense. It doesn't affect them in any way. But, y'know, I've come to realize that it doesn't matter whether it makes sense. There are things that upset me in ways that don't make sense. If I sit down and think about it and try several times I can maybe come up with a halfway-coherent explanation of exactly why it upsets me, but that's not the point here. The point is, a significant number of people would be unhappy with any non-unique naming system, just as people are currently unhappy with a unique naming system. Telling them that their unhappiness doesn't make sense will not make them less unhappy. And the existence and apparently substantial size of this group of CoH's players means that a change in the naming system would not necessarily make more players happy, it would just make a DIFFERENT group of players happy. And such a significant change should be a lot better justified than "Well, we would end up collectively about as well-off as we currently are, except now you get to suck it up and deal with it instead of me." -
You know, I originally wanted to say "fish and rocks" but for some reason went with the classic. Doh.
-
I was hoping that was another Nick Cage one :<
-
Quote:Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
And yet this topic has NOTHING to do with copyright law.
Let me say it again. That "simile" involves two different things which have nothing to do with the thing being described.Quote:It was given as a simile...and not a statement of fact regarding CoH names.
In other words, it's a bad metaphor.
I don't use hubristic highfalutin misconstrued arguments. I use facts, it's a bad metaphor because the two concepts involved don't have anything in common.Apples and oranges. Using copyright as the basis of your argument is wrong.Quote:Instead of trying to use the web to back up your hubristic highfalutin misconstrued argument... try using common sense. Common sense: The name is mine and you cannot have it.
Also: The name isn't yours but I still can't have it.(I also don't want it, I'm more or less happy with the names I get) -
Copyright allows for duplicate names.
edit: Or, as I said, Copyright deals with ownership. And not what you are talking about. -
Quote:Because I... did?
Because you give us those little gems without actually explaining why they're different, or why it's not a valid point. I can say "It's this way, and that's all there is to it", but without evidence no one will pay that any mind.
Toast is exactly right with what I was saying. If you really don't think that my post has any value and that I'm wrong, why don't you stop with the one-liners and tell me why?
Here?Quote:Copyright law has nothing to do with this discussion as it (copyright law)deals with the concept of ownership. You don't own your characters in this game. They are fanfiction. You can make another character for some other thing(movie, game, book, e.t.c.) that has all of the elements of the game stripped from them, but shares a (non-copyrighted) name and appearance. But then that's not the character in this game, and, again, has nothing to do with this conversation, I.E. the Naming system within this game. The person who has a name in this game first doesn't own it. There may be a case to saying they are renting it, but that still has no comparison to copyright.
edit: Let me pretend for a second, to humor you.
Arguments based in how X name "belongs" to someone just because they were able to "get" it are false because you don't actually own any of the things you "Have" in the game. It's not yours, it's not mine, even if you made it up yourself or bashed your own personal head into your own personal keyboard(both things you actually do own). It technically, belongs to Paragon Studios because all of the things that make it what it is belong to Paragon Studios. Many players, myself included, tend to view the game as a medium or a tool in which to express their ideas. This is not the case. The character creator isn't a pencil or a camera or a microphone, it's a game. You are allowed to use X name to play X character made up of X costume pieces and powersets in Paragon Studio's game pretty much entirely at their whims. -
Quote:Yes, I could see how you think that's a valid point.It's not, but I can see how you'd think that.Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
Except I do have a claim over my character's names.... Don't believe me?? I suggest you have a GM take my name away and give it to you then
Oh you can't? Why? Ahhh... ok then
Except it doesn't, actually work like that. It's completely different.Quote:He wasn't saying CoH names are copyrighted... he was giving an example of how copyright's don't work...and how the naming system does not/should not work
How players individually view their names and how they actually work are completely different. Which is what I said. concepts of ownership(coyright) have nothing to do with this discussion, because they are completely different things. He's comparing apples to oranges in order to troll someone who he feels has trolled him.Quote:He was making an assimilation between copyright and how players feel/view about their character's names....not saying we (players) have a copyright on our character's names. -
Copyright law has nothing to do with this discussion as it (copyright law)deals with the concept of ownership. You don't own your characters in this game. They are fanfiction. You can make another character for some other thing(movie, game, book, e.t.c.) that has all of the elements of the game stripped from them, but shares a (non-copyrighted) name and appearance. But then that's not the character in this game, and, again, has nothing to do with this conversation, I.E. the Naming system within this game. The person who has a name in this game first doesn't own it. There may be a case to saying they are renting it, but that still has no comparison to copyright.
Quote:Man, you got me.It was actually YOUR statements that had nothing to do with the conversation -
Why is the captain talking to himself?
-
Quote:I can post things that have nothing to do with the discussion too.Originally Posted by Nalrok_AthZim
It's hilarious because that's how the world works.
If you try to file a copyright that someone already filed, you won't get told "We'll just put Copyright@JohnSmith at the top so we know it's your version of something someone's already done." -
Alternate Answer: Your character might do that, but mine wouldn't
-
I'll hope that I'll get some Tokusatsu style costume peices, but this is most likely no differen than the Disney acquisition of Marvel, at best it brings more funding, at worst it changes nothing.
-
Quote:Nah, just me. I'm the prettiest.Originally Posted by Alevan
Your both pretty!
-
This is kind of interesting, because double-crossing the villains to try and save Foxy(and then act like it was an accident or purely selfish intentions) was exactly the kind of thing Mobilise would have done, but I just opted not to go for that for a lot of reasons.
-
the other option for a RPvP event to have any kind of storyline and also be dynamic in that way is to treat the PVP aspect as legitimately important.
Either "stage" the PvP to the point that you are Playacting at PvP (I.E. I conceptually should/want to/ have to have my character lose this fight so I'm going to sit here and not attack and only do my tier one attack every twenty seconds so it at least looks like I'm fighting while you hit me with everything) which is an idea I've been mulling over
or
Just let fly with the actual combat and let whatever happens decide what happens and hope the other guy isn't some uber leet xbox live kid,or that both of you are the same uberleet xbox live kid, or you both suck equally, and also that PvP in this game isn't broken and imbalanced, and that the game itself actually represents the full depth of your character's conceptual abilities, and the nuances of actual combat, and that no mitigating circumstance occur, such as bad connections or interruptions, e.t.c. which is stupid.