Amentep

Supposedly the reason Colossus wasn't used much in the X-Men franchise was the cost of making his armor reflective and chrome-like. They went with CGI mo-cap colossus because Miller wanted comic accurate sized Collosus. My guess is to keep expenses down they dulled his reflectiveness. I'd imagine any stiffness to the animation is due to the tight budget. EDIT: Originally posted on phone with big thumbs

They're ever so slightly less annoyed?

Sure I can, I haven't paid attention to them in years! And they're so glad!

It'd have to have been a manual ignore.

But again, having an item that is priced ridiculously doesn't change the game's nature. It is still a roleplaying game - you're just complaining that developers allow you to play a murder-hobo, when it is your choice to play a murder-hobo. Even accepting a chaotic evil party would most likely BE murder-hobos, you're not prevented from roleplaying something else. You would - theoretically - always get more money for playing a CE/murder hobo party whether it was 100s of gold or 1000s of gold being the only difference. With you also achieving any and all penalties to reputation a CE party should have under the BG system. And that's fine, but (IMO) you're laying an awful lot of bad feelings on the game that has nothing, actually, to do with the game and a lot to do with how you feel about the development and modding communities. When the GBA revamp of Eye of the Beholder came out, I actually enjoyed the new combat system better than the one in the original game. So I guess I'm not terribly beholden to the originals when they get updated. YMMV. From what I've played - and this appears to be a lot of patches from when you did - the experience doesn't seem substantially different from when I played the original game back in the day. But without me having to pull out all my discs to install them.

I'm guessing they changed the base price of Rasaad's boots (+2AC), just tested them and only got offered 125 for it. 225 for Neera's staff. The +2 AC ring I have, by comparison is worth 4500, so 12.5k seems like it had to be an error.

I'm not sure how murdering, looting and selling is substantially different from recruiting, looting and selling but to be clear, I'm using murder-hoboing as a shorthand. At any rate, you're still asking for the developers to prevent you from looting people of stuff that only they can use so that you can sell it. I can't say that I considered selling Neera or Rasaad's stuff, just like I usually don't sell any NPCs NPC specific item (unless they permadeathed). Now having said that, I'm not arguing that what you're saying isn't a legit way to feel. Certainly you're entitled to your opinion. What I'm saying is to me at least developers are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Option A: Give an NPC a magical item and let that item have its normal value; the magical item speaks to the characters pre-PC adventures or character Risk - Player Murder-Hobo's NPC for free loot (or just steals their stuff and kicks them out of the party). Player complains that the economy is now broken by allowing player to mudrer-hobo companions. Option B: Give an NPC a magical item (again speaking to character's unique pre-PC history) but have its value not be reflected Risk - Player complains their "immersion" is broken by objects not being valued properly; they then proceed to complain bitterly about how games "dumb down" so as to prevent a small percentage of the playing population from being incentivized to murder-hobo. Option C: Don't give any of the characters anything special that makes them unique or speaks to their individual backgrounds Risk - Player complains new companions are bland and offer nothing new or interesting to game over listening to Minsc talk about butt-kicking for goodness the seven millionth time. I'd disagree that an "enhanced edition" shouldn't have additional scenarios - particularly when you're talking about an RPG. I wouldn't say its a requirement either, but it seems to be a legit way to take the game. But maybe that's me. Anyhow I think its probably overly dismissive to claim its "fanfic". That said, I'm not entirely sure how difficult it is to just ignore Neera, Raasad, Dorn and EvildrowdudewhosenameIcan'tbebotheredtoscrolluptolookup. Its like four forced minisceens that end with you turning each down and ignoring the rest of the game. YM very obviously MV, of course.

Saw the trailer before DEADPOOL. It looks like it could be fun. Might also trigger motion sickness.

I actually only murdered him because I knew he was a new party member and I really didn't like that he was there. I don't normally play that way. And now that I think of it, I think the other new party member, the wild mage girl, had a staff that was worth the same amount, and you could find her even *earlier* than him (she was in Beregost, if I recall correctly, and he was in...Nashkel near Minsc? Real creative, putting them in places where you can already recruit other party members, guys...), and also, I am pretty sure you can get both of them to join your party immediately (I know you can at least the girl) so that part about being a murder-hobo-psycho is kinda irrelevant, . In my opinion, party members that you can recruit immediately at the beginning of the game simply shouldn't generally have items that are worth a ridiculous amount of gold. Doesn't matter why you murdered him, you're complaining that because you murdered someone you had a broken experience. So the question is, if you're going to play a murder-hobo (intentionally or not) should you expect the game to be balanced towards you? Also the companions are in bottleneck places; Dorn is at the Friendly Arms Inn (although he won't join until later when you trigger a "random" encounter traveling to Nashkel Mines. Neera in Bergerost, Rasaad in Nashkel and Baeloth in Larswood (if you're over lvl 5). I think other than Baeloth, they made the companions "unmissible" since they were part of the new experience - which seems fair to me.

You can't ignore Moderators.

I only ever died of Dysentery in the Oregon Trail. I did starve to death in Sorcerer though.

The movie GtG was based on the 2008 version of the team, that team included a few characters who didn't make it into the movie but most of them duplicate what you have here (Mantis would make a second monk, Bug a second rogue, etc). You could probably make Adam Warlock to a Wizard class, Moondragon would be a definitive cipher and Phyla-Vell as Martyr would make for a Bleak Walker Paladin. If you're not already familiar with the characters: http://marvel.com/universe/Warlock,_Adam http://marvel.com/universe/Moondragon http://marvel.com/universe/Quasar_%28Phyla-Vell%29 Personally I'd pick Moondragon; besides having a soft-spot for the character she's Drax's daughter in the comic continuity so connects to one of the other team members.

Guys I have to support Meshugger around this point, it would be imprudent to Ignore my posts....I do occasionally post real inspiration Took me three reads to realize you wrote "imprudent" not "impudent".

The inside of the mailbox is dark. Your are likely to be eaten by a grue. If it was an Enchanter game, I'd: >Cast Frotz on grue You died of dysentery. It was either that or drowning while trying to ford a river. That's just the way the Oregon Trail rolled.

You can still read messages from people you put on ignore. For example you can still read posts from Hitler BruceVC (or whoever you ignore) if it seems worth doing so. I admit I use the Ignore list, even though usually its because they're people who post large volumes of what is, to me at least, dribble and I was getting carpal tunnel scrolling past walls of text.

The inside of the mailbox is dark. Your are likely to be eaten by a grue. If it was an Enchanter game, I'd: >Cast Frotz on grue

I don't think he's always asked and/or makes himself available for non-Marvel films. That said, for FOX, he was Willie Lumpkin in Fantastic Four and cameod in X-Men and X-Men: The Last Stand, and portrayed himself in Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (riffing on the comic scene where Stan and Jack Kirby try to get into the wedding of Reed and Sue). Anyhow, saw Deadpool and it is really good. Very funny and over-the-top. Might be worth seeing again, sometimes the audience laughed so much I think I missed a couple of jokes.

>Open Mailbox

Problem with IWDII - as I understand it - is they kinda had to do a lot of workaround to get the Infinity Engine to do 3e D&D (sorta kinda) which would have to be redone to Infinity+ for them to make IWDIIee. That said, I'd be okay with them ditching 3e since IWDII was originally supposed to use 2e and kits (yes, I never got over losing the Landsknecht kit ) but that may actually be JUST as problematic.

I haven't found them to be terrible. Nor necessarily great either. Servicible, I'd argue (but to be fair, they have moderately more detail to them than the vast majority of BG1 joinable NPCs who were basically introductory text and a random skillset in the original). It really depends on what you want, I guess. I'm no BG expert, having only played it a few times and to completion once. Of the new companions, I've really only dealt with Monky Monk and Wildy Mage though, skipping Broody McBrood the Blackguard and Drowy Evil the Sorcerer. Should games be balanced for murder-hobo playstyle? I ask because I'm always intrigued by the dichotomy I see in players, some insisting that everything should be balanced and prevent degenerative choices and others saying if you don't like having boots that break the economy, don't murder-hobo people to steal their boots.

Seem to recall reading elsewhere that PST and IWDII would be bigger undertakings than BG 1/2 and IWD and so would require more work to convert. Which I guess would be why Seige was more appealing as an option in terms of resource investment and return?

From the Titanic script (AFAIK): Jack is American, a lanky drifter withhis hair a little long for the standards of the times. He is also unshaven,and his clothes are rumpled from sleeping in them. He is an artist, and hasadopted the bohemian style of art scene in Paris. He is also veryself-possessed and sure-footed for 20, having lived on his own since 15.

This reminds me that not too long ago, I was on a local university's campus and was looking at the fliers that had been put up on the student boards. One was an advert looking for actors for a horror film. Three guy roles total, two being searched for, and 2 women roles. One guy role was already filled by the producer/director who would be the lead actor and film's star. The 2 women's roles indicated that they required nudity and pornography and that this was non-negotiable. One was a girlfriend role and one was an evil cult leader. A little later the plot synopsis clearly indicates that both women would, at different parts of the story, be having sex in the story with each other and the character who was the lead guy role. The role that already belonged to the actor/producer/director. Surely there's a cheaper way to get women to have sex with you/a three-way than producing a film?

I think the "elegant" would be the objection (if there is one) as it could be an unnecessary physical description (potentially). If the script needs the character to be elegant, it could be shown in the script in other ways. But its certainly a mild introduction. Sure if the writer is the director is the producer you could argue that he'd have control over casting. But you could also argue that if you have control over the casting, you already know who you want so what's the point of describing them instead of just asking for a particular actor or actress? I should also say that one of the biggest flaws of this is it presents these characters without context so its hard to understand whether if there is a contextual reason for the physical description. For example sexy woman introduced in the shower, if its a sex comedy it may be important to establish that context when the character is introduced to the reader (ie the producer). But again if you need the woman to be attractive within the narrative context, you can establish that through the script without hamstringing the production by being overly physically descriptive. EDIT: Typed "acting" for "asking"

I bought BGEE pre-release under the impression it would be an Enhanced version of the original. What I received when I played it wasn't an enhanced version of BG and regret my decision buying it. How people want to define 'enhanced' is up to them but I did not see it as an enhanced version and gave up on it due to a myriad of reasons which I've stated in previous threads and wont go into again. I'm not a BG expert (heck I only beat BG1 once) but BGEE has additional NPCs and class kits, so it is "Enhanced". Whether you like the "Enhancement" is an entirely different matter. Personally I'm not finding my experience with the game to be radically different from the original with the exception of the NPCs, kits and more named magic items found earlier.