je_saist

George Lucas.

Actually, to be honest, some of this stuff probably has taken this "long" to recover. When the prequel trilogy was announced, LucasArts started work on recovering the original Star Wars film: http://savestarwars.com/filmpreservation.html

I'd actually recommend picking up the DVD release of the 1938 Adventures of Robin Hood: http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Rob...4419920&sr=8-1

The bonus disc has a segment on the history of Technicolor and how it compared to other film technologies. As best as I can research, Star Wars: New Hope, nor the other 2 movies, were filmed in a Technicolor strip format. Although color was by Technicolor, the 1970's were a turning point towards the film industry using the Kodak-Eastman format: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technic...or_and_decline

The 1974 GodFather II was the last film to use Technicolor's Dye Transfer format... which meant that Star Wars: A New Hope and the following two movies had to be filmed in the Kodak-Eastman format.

From a physical film standpoint the Kodak-Eastman format lacked the longevity of even the 2-strip Technicolor dye transfer format. The result that was just 2 decades later, the original source footage for Star Wars: A New Hope had lost a great deal of quality. Darth Vader's cloak, for example, was blue instead of black.

For the 20th anniversary, LucasArts worked on restoring the original films to their original color qualities: http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html http://savestarwars.com/filmpreservation.html

It there-for, is possible, if not likely, that many of the side-cuts of various filmed scenes, deleted scenes, and shots of the set, were also in a similar deteriorated state. It isn't entirely unreasonable to assume that these side-cuts required similar levels of restoration that the original film required.

It also is not entirely unreasonable to assume that George Lucas and LucasArts are paying for the restoration of these side-cuts out of their own pocket, where-as the restoration of the original films was largely paid for by 20th Century Fox. Assuming that George Lucas and LucasArts are footing the bill themselves, and doing the work on their own time, it not entirely unreasonable to assume that any restoration work is being done off the clock, or being done as part of the experimental process of creating new technology to recover and remaster deteriorated films.

Ergo, it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that it really would take over 30+ years for such side-cuts to be made available.

The fact is, many side-cuts from the big motion picture films are often discarded, and simply written off. Deleted scenes from the films of Cary Grant, Bob Hope, Bing Crosby, or Douglas Fairbanks Jr are likely never going to be recovered or restored. We know that the estates of many a Hollywood Star also sit on footage that has never been released to the public, often because that film is not in a condition that it could be released to the public (Fred Astaire and Frank Sinatra stand as two examples).


Now, on the subject of using footage as a retail prop? Well, yeah. At this point, it is more than a little tacky of LucasArts to still be trotting out never before seen footage.

Actually that only happened because Wal-Mart threatened with not promoting or stocking Star Wars unless Wal-Mart got to sell DVD editions of the original, pre-special edition trilogy. LucasArts countered with requiring that the DVD prints be sold as bonus discs with the special editions, rather than allowing Wal-Mart to sell the originals without the special editions.

Or did you just forget the whole thing with those DVD editions of the original, pre-special edition trilogy being a Wal-Mart exclusive: http://jediinsider.com/index.php?catid=243&itemid=9773

so? Somebody at the fortune cookie factor watched Lost. Hardly a big deal.

with all the timers for all of the rewards?

there's a reason I just said "once a day"

It's a heck of a lot easier to remember!

Vanguard terminal in Rikti Warzone.

Also: you can only purchase one Gr'ai Matter a day.

okay then. Depending on how much risk you want to take:

• unplug your computer from the network.
• Uninstall AVG
• Try installing service pack 1 again

Because none of those other games use OpenGL for their graphics API.

City of Heroes does.

It is very possible for OpenGL support in Windows to be crippled or damaged and for the DirectX portions to be perfectly fine.

Okay: code 57. If my memory is correct this problem is caused by Windows update not recognizing that you have a valid service pack installed.

To get around this you will need to install the updated service packs redistributable directly, without using Microsoft Windows Update:

Start with service pack 1 redist: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/e...displaylang=en

After installing that, then install the service pack 2 redist: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/e...displaylang=en

If the redist files do not install, they should generate their own internal error.

Wrong on all accounts? Maybe you missed a couple of critical words in that. Let me highlight them:

How in the world did you turn Rumors and For all we know turn into I am making a definitive statement that I am wrong about on all accounts.

More importantly, how did repeating what I've heard other players claim turn into speculation of my own?

On top of that, if you are claiming that I'm wrong on all accounts on the subject that NCSoft had different development houses develop sequel titles to their games...

Um. ArenaNet did Guild Wars 1 and is working on Guild Wars 2. Same development house. NCSoft did Lineage 1 and 2 internally with the same executive producer

So, really DumpleBerry, what's the point of your post?

As best as I can tell, you didn't read what I wrote, and jumped off to some kind of conclusion all on your own. Right off hand, you need to issue me an apology for that jump.

!!!!

Woah. Hold up right there.

If a service pack will NOT install because of an 0x800 type error, you got bigger problems on hand than a game simply locking up. Your system problems need to be addressed before we can even think about specific problems with a game.

Do you remember or write down what the error code is when you attempt to install a service pack?

No it's not.

End of story.

All damage causes threat: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Threat

If World of Confusion was generating damage without generating Threat, that would be classified as an exploit and would be fixed without an entry in the patch notes.

Imply nothing! She's a WITCH!!! What more evidence did you need to

*ribbit*


...

*ribbit?* *RIBBIT!* *RIBBIT!* *RIBBIT!*

(translation: mew it! She turned me into a Frog!)

I'm not entirely sure I understand your question here...

As far as I am aware, at no point in time have the Brute and Tank archtypes ever been equal in any of their base statistics. Brutes and Scrappers have always been around 30% lower per defensive power effect compared to the power effect on a Tank.

I think you are getting confused by the history of the game itself.

When City of Villains launched, Brutes had the same resistance and hit point caps as Tanks. The caps are the maximum value of a power effect that can be achieved. The intended game-play design was that on teams Brutes would gain larger amount of protections from Team-Mates, and thus would be able to full-fill the combat role of a Tank.

Something else to consider is that back when City of Villains launched the Villain side had access to two power-sets that boosted resistance values: Sonic Resonance and Thermal Radiation. From the developers point of view the inclusion of two resist armor sets in the Corrupter secondary power pool made reaching the hard-cap resist values on a Brute a more likely event that would occur.


The Hit Point cap was only changed in the recent Issue 18 update. The developers did this in conjunction with the new Bruising effect on tanks, and the change to the Fury Generation on Brutes. The developers have referred to these changes as having been done to balance the archtypes at the "extremes."

Tanker versus Brute

• Prior to Issue 18 in a full-team buff situation a Brute could generate the same amount of survivability compared to a tank, while generating significantly more damage.
• In the post Issue 18 full-team buff situation, a Brute is less survivable than Tank, while still delivering more damage.

Brute versus scrapper

• Prior to Issue 18 in a full-team buff situation a brute could generate as much damage as a scrapper while generating more survivability.
• In the post Issue 18 full-team buff situation a Brute does less damage than a scrapper, while still being able to generate more survivability.

Outside of the full team-buff situation, the changes have had some interesting low level / small effects.

The tanker's new bruising effect enables tanks to knock 20% resistance off a target, thus speeding up a tank's ability to solo various hardened targets.

The brute's new fury enables brutes to reach and maintain 70~80% Fury even in small teams. This has the casual effect that Brutes, in small teams, can out-damage a scrapper. According to somebody else (I didn't do the math), a Brute needs around ~63% Fury in order to dish out the same damage as a scrapper.

nothing.

The developers design for the melee archtypes works like this:

• Survivability

• Tankers
• Brutes
• Scrappers
• Stalkers

• Damage

Tankers are the most survivable with the highest base hit points, highest hit point, and stronger base defenses.

Brutes do more damage than tanks, but trade off for lower base hit points, a lower hit point cap, and lower base defenses, but have the same resistance cap.

Scrappers do more damage than brutes, but trade off for lower base hit points, a lower hit point cap, and lower resistance values.

Stalkers do more alpha strike damage than scrappers, but trade off base and cap hit points. There are some game mechanical problems with how stalkers are supposed to work: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=244076

... because Tanks have more resistances and defenses than brutes.

http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Tanker
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Brute
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Scrapper
http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Stalker

You are getting Tanks confused with scrappers.

Scrappers and Brutes share relatively the same total defensive values.

Tanks do not share defensive values with Scrappers or Brutes.

Tank values are higher.

Tanks used to share the same hit point cap as Tanks. As of Issue 18 Tanks also get a higher HP cap: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Hit_Points

All Tanks and Brutes share now are the same resistance cap values: http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Resistan...age_Resistance

I have a sneaking suspicion this refers to the Nictus Ambush that takes the Oracle platform during the first mish of the ITF.

... there's a dream police parody to be made there...