Amentep

I dunno, the Warden still stopped the 5th Blight. Corypheus is a different problem entirely. DA2 is mostly stage dressing for DAI, IMO. Some pieces get moved around the board but its nature as starting out as a side story is completely evident to me. Frankly I have no interest in ever playing a Grey Warden again, so I have no issues with them not forcing us into that role again.

Best wishes on his future endeavors. I'll certainly be curious to see where he lands in game-making-land and what said game from game-making-land is (assuming he's staying in game-making-land, of course).

^Corphyeus wasn't behind the Blight in DAO; its cause was the bumblings of the Architect (himself a fallen Magister like Corypheus, but one who doesn't remember his past). Arguably the Architect and Corphyeus - as magisters - seem to have caused the Blight with their goofing around back in the day, but that doesn't make them the sole cause of everything that happened, either.

I was totally hoping for a Martin Van Buren life sim. Maybe we'll at least get Martin Van Buren's sideburns in the game.

I wouldn't mind if that was the way it worked. For example, if in POE setting your gaining a spiritshift is specific to an animal encounter (like Hiravias and the Stelgaer) then in theory the form for your spiritshift could be randomly male or female depending on what you encountered when acquiring the form as the form would be based off of that specific animal with respect to gender You probably want to avoid the Boar shapeshift as well then; its canine teeth are, based on the direction and size, too large to represent a female boar from my understanding.

In my opinion, it seems a bit insulting that instead of creating an interesting character of whatever ethnicity/race(black most of the time) they insist on changing a white character into a black character. Like putting on blackface and saying that's good enough. I notice you guys have conveniently ignored my solution to this whole Magneto issue. Why can't he be a black Jewish character? You do get black Jewish people...yes I don't think any black Jews were kept in concentration camps but its a comic...we do allow artistic licence ? Because your solution doesn't fix the perceived problem (which is that Magneto, tied to WWII concentration camps is at least in his 80s) that led to the suggestion to move the character to the 50s/60s and anchored by the US Civil Rights movement. However, as I indicated, this only swaps an 80 year old Magneto for a 70 Year old Magneto, so the issue of age and being tied to a specific point in time is still at play. There are only a handful of WWII era characters around in the Marvel U, and all of them have backstory explanations for why they aren't 80 to 90 in their physicality (Captain America - frozen in ice, Spitfire - vampire, Human Torch - Android, Winter Soldier - Kept in stasis, Namor & Namora - Atlantean Physiology, GA Vision - alien from another dimension, the remainder of The Twelve - kept in stasis, Wolverine - can't age due to regeneration, Mystique - aging irrelevant due to powers, etc). There are ways to deal with this issue that doesn't require changing Magneto into a different character, though. Edit: wrote "Magento" at least once. Totally different character.

John Steed - 100% Figured you for Dr. Keel, personally.

I get what you're saying and understand the logic behind it, I just think it's a bad idea that doesn't really address representation of (insert whatever here) in media. Granted I've been disillusioned with capes for a while as is, and find myself gravitating towards comics that aren't capes. I read whatever piques my interest. Don't care about the genre. Favorite comic out right now is Manifest Destiny, but there's a lot to like from the major publishers. Comic book sales in the US actually prove you wrong. Most comic book readers will not buy brand new characters. The new characters who sell are generally using older names or relaunches of older properties. Two of Marvel better selling new books are Ms. Marvel (new character using an existing name) and Gwen Stacy Spiderwoman (aka Spider-Gwen) an alternate universe take on existing character Gwen Stacy being the one who got Spider-powers. Understand that the market for comic books is primarily a fan market and it makes sense how the market is going to favor retreading old ideas (because they're not in the same position of yesteryear where they have a growing and changing market). In comics, the characters don't suddenly change race or gender - although it does happens too, usually in reboots. Usually a new character of a new race adopts an old moniker. For example the aforementioned Ms. Marvel is a fan of Carol Danvers - the previous Ms. Marvel. Danvers now uses the name Captain Marvel, previously used by three generally deceased members of the Vel family of Kree warriors. Adaptions usually just cast a minority (like James Olsen in Supergirl, Pete Ross in Smallville, Perry White in Man of Steel) so they were always a minority in that universe.

^Not 100% sure what scenario you're talking about, but there are two forces at work when introducing new characters in US comic books: 1) Most readers will read the adventures of All-Ready-Published Man whereas they won't read the adventures of Brand-New-Never-Heard-Of-Him-Before Boy 2) Companies have to continue using trademarks to have them continue to be considered trademarks for governmental protection. If Established-Character Lass didn't sell well the last time around, you can rebadge Established-Character Lass' trademark name to a new character and strike both birds with one stone - a name the reader recognizes and use of an established trademark. If the comic fails you can always bring back original Established-Character Lass (because the fans demanded it!) or create a third Established-Character Lass the next time the trademark needs to be trotted out.

There is truth the the problem that Magneto is tied to a time and place that is slowly aging him out of relevance. The same thing happened with DC's EARTH 2 characters who, when re-introduced in the 60s on an alternate universe were in their 40s and 50s so served as slightly older hero types to the DCU of Earth 1. But by the 1990s were in their 70s and editorial (if not fans) had trouble seeing them as being viable and killed them all off. The solution, IMO, isn't to turn around and tie them to a date that isn't that far removed from the one that is problematic. For example Magneto in the Singer movies (cited in the article) is about 13 years old (not 10 as the article suggests). The date given is 1944, meaning Lehnsherr was born in 1931. Since the suggestion is to tie Professor X and Magneto into the US Civil Rights movements, you have to consider that Malcolm X was killed in 1965; assuming that both Xavier and Lensherr should be adults, this would put them as being born anywere from 1935 (30 when Malcolm X was killed and able to be there for much of the 50s and 60s history points) to 1945 (20 when Malcolm X was killed). This means a character who is anywhere to 4 years to 14 years younger than a Magneto tied the concentration camps. So you're trading an 80 year old for a 70 year old. To me the solution would be to not tie them to any dates at all, if you could avoid it - that is if you were going to worry about it at all. BTW Marvel claims that the Secret Wars isn't a reboot, so there's no telling if there will be any continuity fixes out of it or not.

The two Flint films are fun (but then I tend to like anything with James Coburn in it). That said, I also like the Matt Helm films i've seen. The sequence at the end of THE SILENCERS with Stella Stevens and the trick gun is hilarious. That said there are loads of Eurospy and Spy Parodies in the 60s and 70s. Some good, some bad. Take KISS THE GIRLS AND MAKE THEM DIE: I'm blanking on the last one I saw - I think I mentioned it here. For this Weekend I watched INSIDIOUS 3 (2015) - Its a bit tamer than the first two by virtue of being a prequel, but manages a few creepy images and a couple of surprises. Hopefully they'll go back to the present though now that they've got an origin story out of their system. THE STING II (1983) - this is one of those films that lurched to production; one of those things where I think it got made because the process had started despite almost everyone connected to the previous film had dropped out. There's two ways to judge it - against the previous film in which case it does not live up to expectations - or as a separate story that takes some basic ideas (two con men who'd conned a 'bad guy' in the past teaming up for a new con). There's a lot of carry over ideas (Jake gets chased by a policeman, but to little ultimate point). Its true that the Lonnegan of the first film would have just found Gondorf and Hooker and killed them, so you almost have to see this as an alternate reality adventure. On its own, it has its charms; Jackie Gleason is game and Teri Garr does well as the mystery woman. Karl Malden is hilarous cast against type and it works (Gleason one-upping him in the restaurant is a hoot). The ultimate payoff and the con itself are less memorable though and never really manages a place alongside the original even as a companion movies instead of a sequel.

Thor 23% Hawkeye 21% Black Widow 21% Nick Fury 14% Captain America 7% Iron Man 7% Hulk 7%

Yeah I read "doctrine" as "definition" so I may have been ass-u-me-ing us all.

It doesn't? Then what does the doctrine of capitalism say? AFAIK unless there's some newfangled definition, Capitalism only states that means of production, trade and industry aren't controlled (or aren't majority controlled) by the State, that generally private ownership and accumulation of capital are expected. There is wage labor, competitive markets and negotiation of prices. There's actually nothing in that that inherently says anything about profit (or for that matter, treating people ethically).

I'm fairly sure they have a good grasp of who gave it to them and how it reached their hands, though obviously they can't go into the specifics because they have to protect their sources. And that may be true; my guess since the leak was casting call sheets the most likely source for the leak was from someone connected with voice actors/talent agents. But all I'm saying is that what Kotaku offers as proof that the SarahReed post isn't how they got the material is the statement "Those documents did not come from anyone at Bethesda Game Studios." One, at some point the documents DID have to come from Bethesda Game Studios or else they wouldn't have any bearing on Fallout 4. What they mean is that they weren't given the material by someone directly at Bethesda Game Studios. Two, the SarahReed post never claims she gave them to Kotaku - "I leaked some of the first Fallout 4 info by accident, and it ended up in the hands of Kotaku. Oops." In other words, were the SarahReed post true - lets say she accidentally sent the casting call sheet to someone who wasn't bound by a business contract or a NDA while trying to email to a talent agency and that person gave it to Kotaku - then technically both her and Kotaku's statements would be true. So Kotaku's claim doesn't refute hers (although I'd argue Kotaku is probably more reliable as a claimant than an anonymous person on Reddit).

Glorious!

While I think that Kotaku's right and the SarahReed post is phoney, their reasoning is wrong. SarahReed doesn't claim she gave the material to Kotaku, she claims she accidently leaked it and it ended up in the hands of Kotaku. So Kotaku saying "Nuh-uh, we didn't get it from SarahReed!" doesn't prove anything as she didn't claim she gave it to them, only that it was her leak that allowed them to get it.

BTW everyone, quote pyramids are the devil's work. THE DEVIL'S WORK I SAY!!!!11111onetwothreeisthisthingon? I think a valid point to be made with respect to the article written and with respect to Polish/Slavic culture is that in the US there were bigotry and abuse to the Polish, the Italian, the Irish and other non-Anglo-Saxon and/or Protastant groups. Limited housing, limited jobs, ethnic slurs. Was it as bad as Africans or Native Americans or Asians had it? No...but that doesn't make their treatment good. Just as the Page Act of 1875 was created to curb Asian immigration into the United States the Emergency Quota Act (1921) sought to curtail immigration of Jews, Slavs, Italians and generally speaking those from Southern and Eastern Europe deemed undesirable for the US. The Immigration Act of 1924 further restricted immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, as well as Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Indians because, again, WASP types didn't want them in their neighborhoods. While I know a lot of people aren't fans of his work, Tauriq Moosa is of Middle Eastern descent. I'm not sure they're always lying. I would say that people parrot things they've heard, believing they're true because they don't know better very easily on the internet. Even better on Twitter where its easier for an untruth to volly around the twitter-sphere in a quick, pithy comment before the truth can even get started (part of why I think twitterage is so endemic on social media now).

Well that and the idea that growth can be eternal rather than planning for how to deal with fluctuations and downturns, IMO, are huge problems with businesses.

I did want to point out something that I see as a logical issue with these two arguments, and I'm curious as to what other think. Making the argument that "African descendants in a game based on Slavic mythology" /= "European descendants in a game based on Indian mythology" is fair, but to me the argument should be "African descendants in a game based on Slavic mythology" vs "African descendants in a game based on Indian mythology" - if the idea is that Africans need better representation in games, in both cases they'd be minorities underrepresented by the "mainstream" culture of both locals that the stories are based on. To use an example, do people complain that Dynasty Warriors doesn't allow you to create an African player in their create a character soldiers? You could counter that its based in history, but just like the Witcher's relationship with Polish history, Dynasty Warriors is a fictional world - one with magic. 'But there are no monsters, and the original stories are based on history," could be an argument (although the Witcher is based - supposed fairly faithfully - on a book series itself), so what about Warrior's Orochi then? Magic, other worlds, demons and warriors pulled from around the world. But nobody from Africa? Are there complaints about this? What about Jade Empire? Final Fantasy? I ask, because from my perspective this is where the feeling that these complaints are essentially throwing Polish/Slavic culture/myth in with Anglo-Saxon/Celtic/Norse myth as being something that is "from white people" and therefore not as important as something from some non-European locale. Unless, of course, there are cries for Warrior's Orochi, Final Fantasy or other Asian based series to add African based characters that I haven't seen - which is possible - it seems strange to bring the charges against this game as opposed to other games that come from fairly homogenous societies (as I understand Poland and Japan both are) which don't allow for characters from world cultures outside their own. I could clearly be missing something; and its possible there are debates I've missed or this is the start of something that seems rather arbitrary because it is just beginning, but from the outside (having never played a Witcher game) I admit the article left me rather confused as to why it, ultimately to me at least, seemed rather arbitrary in its choice of games to criticise (ie something mainstream popular and "white" rather than niche and Japanese) ore even why there was a need to make an example of any particular game at all.

Congrats! Gainful employment is always a plus (unless you're filthy rich, in which case its a clear minus).

Weird that there's an issue with Dwayne Johnson and Daddario's respective ages (Johnson is 14 years older than Daddario) but not Gugino's and Daddarios (15 years and assuming Daddarios is playing Gugino's and Johnson's characters child)

The console title, FALLOUT: BROTHERHOOD OF STEEL did suck IMO. And I say that as someone who generally likes action titles of its ilk.

"An RPG is what I say it is" With apologies to John W. Campbell (who said it first, regarding Science Fiction), I doubt you'll get an agreement on anything else.

I think it is pretty safe to assume it will be Wasteland II with swords. No way this will be a first person game...IMO anyway. But it is InXile so I am pledging no matter what. A lot of this will become more clear when we show our prototype footage later, but no, this game's exploration is in first-person blobber mode. Looking forward to it!