@Derppool said in Obsidian Reverie - Discussion thread:
This place used to be pretty decent, but recently the Beast and Changeling STs, Dark Souls and ZeroFoxGiven kind of give VASpider a run for their money.
Dish. Usually we get the deets before we ever get any names, but I'm fine with it being the other way around. Still, deets!
Vivarium is good, creepy sci-fi. Don't watch it if the isolation and feeling of inescapable solitude of quarantine/pandemic life gets to you easily, though.
@Pyrephox said in Game Pitch: Three Letter Agency (modern horror setting - X-Files, Fringe, Control, SCP, etc):
@Coin For some people! For me, honestly, I found it almost impossible to fire up a separate client and do things the old way when I tried to go back to a 'regular' MU*. It was just constant, low-level frustration that made the experience a lot less pleasant.
And, I mean, I'm someone who started MU*ing with a raw telnet connection (and did that for about a year or so until someone introduced me to clients), so it's not that I haven't 'roughed it', before. I just don't want to NOW.
My point is that there's a difference between 'trying to go back' and 'not having a different option'. If there's still Ares games around offering the possibility, that may be enough to make using a client or whatever too uninviting for some. But if web-based functionality disappeared again altogether, I think a lot more people would be willing to eventually go back to clients than we think --and some would not, obviously.
Not saying it will happen, just a hypothetical.
@Pyrephox said in Game Pitch: Three Letter Agency (modern horror setting - X-Files, Fringe, Control, SCP, etc):
@faraday Once you've had a taste of how user-friendly something CAN be, it's very hard to go back to doing it the other way.
Until the option disappears (which it sometimes does) and it takes a relatively short time to get back into the old swing of things.
Fox by contrast created a number of individually decent movies that had almost nothing to do with each other.
Be fair, they also made X-Men Origins: Wolverine, The Wolverine, X-Men: The Last Stand, Apocalypse, and Dark Phoenix.
<.<
Never mind that this is the 21st century and we have things like, you know, camera angles and milk cartons.
If it worked for Robert Downey Jr. for ten fucking years...
Just saying.
I just finished my rewatch of James Roland's Blood Drive.
Such a good show canceled before its time. ;_;
@insomniac7809 said in Good TV:
...also oh my god the fucking diaper babies in the Amazon reviews giving it a 1-star for doing half the show in weekly releases instead of a bingable dump.
While I wouldn't review bomb it, I was very annoyed by this decision, myself.
@Ifrit said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@Roz said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Yeah, I think this is pure business. "People aren't gonna wanna watch a movie about a pandemic during the midst of COVID-19, so let's do something else, because what we are doing is making a movie to sell and make money."
This is actually one of my biggest problems with this idea of 'cancel culture'. Really, as far as I can tell, it's just capitalism in operation. If I don't like an author, I don't buy their books. If enough people do that, they become unprofitable. If a movie's themes don't interest me, or I have moral issues with some part of it, I don't go and see it. If a studio thinks that a certain theme won't make enough money, they just won't make the film.
No one's getting cancelled, they're just not making money.
Yes, inasmuch as we use the word "canceled" in its most literal and traditional sense. But when it comes to the cultural phenomenon that is cancel culture, the word "cancel" obviously takes on the connotation and definition of "banding together to stop supporting someone, be it with attention, money, or any other currency we control".
I mean, that's just how language works.
@Arkandel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I don't mind some aspects of the cancel culture. I do dislike this immense effort to preemptively not possibly do anything that can be taken as offensive, though, regardless of intent.
Case in point was a potential plot for a new Star Trek movie (... for some reason that's on my newsfeed a lot lately) where a virus was killing large parts of the galactic population, which was nixed due to Covid-19.
We can't make movies about pandemics now? Would someone think they were too pro-virus?
This has nothing to do with cancel culture at all, IMO.
It probably has less to do with that and more to do with not wanting to grind people down with a plot about something they are actually going through at the moment.
I didn't want to see a movie about someone losing their loved one to cancer when I lost my grampa to cancer, for example; many MUs don't include COVID-19 in their modern, contemporary settings because escapism is about escaping reality.
@Ganymede said in Good or New Movies Review:
Watch the new She-Ra.
That’s how you stay true to the original while flipping everything on its head.
I saw the new She-Ra when it dropped. 
@GreenFlashlight said in Good or New Movies Review:
@Arkandel said in Good or New Movies Review:
Should I be yelling at the damn kids to get off my lawn?
Not precisely. The contention here isn't age, it's either that you think you have a greater right to dictate what Star Trek is than the people who own it have, or that you think Star Trek can only be one limited thing.
I'm not judging, though. I haven't liked a Star Trek movie since First Contact.
Pretty much.
I didn't even watch Voyager or Enterprise. I didn't care for them and that was fine. I got a lot of my speculative sci-fi fixes from Stargate during that time.
@Wizz said in Good or New Movies Review:
I wasn't speaking for you, I was playing off your words.
But as for giving it a rest, nah. I'm as free to express my distaste as you are to disagree, and jumping down my throat about it is just fuckin' rude. Chillax, my dude.
Because implying people who don't need things to conform to their expectations are just lowering them isn't rude at all.
I just find it annoying how people are unable to broaden the narrative possibilities for a franchise/fictional universe; it's always "omg they're ruining iiiiiiit". Every single time. It's tiresome and old.
@Wizz said in Good or New Movies Review:
@Coin said in Good or New Movies Review:
@Arkandel said in Good or New Movies Review:
Should I be yelling at the damn kids to get off my lawn?
Yes.
Let Star Trek be something that doesn't conform to your expectations.
Sheesh.
In other words, "lower your expectations."
Oh, for fuck's sake, give it a rest.
And don't put fucking words in my mouth, you don't know me that fucking well.
@il-volpe said in 'The Magicians' again -- time period?:
@Derp said in 'The Magicians' again -- time period?:
How? FS3 doesn't handle magic at all.
How not? I need to hammer out the details but as far as I can tell, rolling attribute Personal Magicalness + action skill Spellcasting tells you if it worked, and a bunch of different other skills tell if it's within your power, without them you fail without a roll.
What people mean when they say that is "it doesn't integrate magic well into the combat system".
But it hardly stops anyone from using the basic attribute+skill system to make magic rules. You're just going to have to go through some stuff to finangle integrating it into the combat code.
Hardly impossible, depending on both your coding ability and your desire for what magic can and can't do.
See:
Spirit Lake
Gray Harbor
The Savage Skies
@Arkandel said in Good or New Movies Review:
Should I be yelling at the damn kids to get off my lawn?
Yes.
Let Star Trek be something that doesn't conform to your expectations.
Sheesh.
@il-volpe said in 'The Magicians' again -- time period?:
@bear_necessities said in 'The Magicians' again -- time period?:
If you're looking for a way to get rid of the canon characters (which I would highly recommend), there's already a convenient plot device to do that without having to go back in time.
Yeah, no canon characters. I don't find it necessary to do anything to explain why they're not present, though. "I don't like canon characters so it's an alternate-reality to the source material even though it's the same place and time" strikes me as perfectly adequate.
Keep in mind that if I ever complete enough to open it, it'll be a Gashlycrumb production, and I happily let a lot of 'theme' rulings hang until it's actually relevant to the game and make the rule to suit the players involved. So a bunch of other questions that might seem like they need to be resolved really don't.
I was just toying with the historical idea, and/or with having a sort of double-grid where the students have, say, set up a semi-permanent time portal so they can go party for hours in 1968 and return three minutes after they left.
I think the contemporary setting folks have good points. The question that leaves is how much so -- setting it five years in the past strikes me as more flexible (doesn't ask for a 1:1 rl:mu time ratio) than setting it at now-now. Though the show was set in the near-future relative to filming so the last season is set in 2020 but with different disasters, and I don't think this wants doing anything about either.
Lots of people don't like time passing at a different pace than 1:1 for a lot of reasons, but chiefly, my aversion to it is that I just... feel left behind, constantly, because I may am not logging in every day. It's hard enough to keep up on games that have 1:1 a lot of the time.