I had a friend who seemed to get really into the first .hack game, Infection, but petered out pretty quickly into the sequel. I think it was just a matter of too much too quickly. People today question the wisdom of annualized Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed games, but Namco published four full-priced .hack RPGs in the span of eleven months.
Speaking as a casual observer, if they were to resurrect the .hack franchise, I'd recommend planning the sequels at least eighteen months apart. Developers need time to generate new art and music assets, smarter game play mechanics, and to respond to whatever criticisms people had about the previous entry.
I intended to buy the Wizard's Edition back when it was available for regular preorder. I distinctly remember this article here on GamingTrend and thinking, "Oh, I keep forgetting. I really have to get on that!" And then I didn't.
Fortunately, pouting for four months turned out to be a sound strategy, and thanks to davidrobots' tip about the restock, I was able to get in an order for the Wizard's Edition. When will it arrive? I chose Standard Shipping and, as others have already pointed out, the estimated shipping date is vaguely "After January 22nd," so I've got my fingers crossed for sometime before March.
That's fine with me. As great as this game looks, I'm actually not kidding when I talk about feeling more invested in Gratch's playthrough than my own. It's no different than watching Harkonis dive into a new military shooter or Tim Turi start up a survival horror game for the first time. Some people are simply masters of their respective genres, and it's a rare pleasure to see them enthralled by something fresh.
Quote from: EddieA on January 19, 2013, 10:05:09 AM
Quote from: Gratch on January 17, 2013, 10:28:51 PM
I have no idea what that is referencing, but it made my afternoon.
Oh my god. Someday you'll have to share how you've managed to miss every commercial break in every medium for the last two years.
It's a reference to this commercial for an Alicia Keys song in which Some Guy learns that true happiness is not found in our carefully cultivated relationships with others, but in momentary brushes with C-list celebrities financed through crippling credit card debt.
It also reflects my desire for your friends and family to abandon you over your refusal to play Ni No Kuni more promptly. Unfortunately I have no way to encourage that directly, so please tell everyone to do that. Thanks!
Quote from: Gratch on January 18, 2013, 08:36:56 PM
Sad thing is, the core concept of the game actually has some potential. Unfortunately, it was implemented in the absolute laziest and greediest way possible.
Isn't the core concept of the game to swish your finger around without any regard for strategy or timing? The Penny Arcade and Game Informer articles make it sound less interactive than a Three Card Monte table. At least there you have the challenge of trying to figure out how the scam works.
Is there any truth to the rumor I've started that the GamingTrend channel is the official home of Gratch's long-form RPG playthrough series Better Off Gratch, starting with a three-hour debut centered on Ni No Kuni with new one-hour episodes airing every Tuesday and Saturday in perpetuity?
Chopped David's Leg Off - I and 84% of players chopped his leg off Tried every other option at my disposal first. There just wasn't any other way.
Shot Jolene - I and 87% of players had Donny shoot her.
Helped Kill Larry - I and 68% of players didn't help
Killed both the St. John Brothers - I and 82% of players didn't kill both brothers
Stole Food From the Car - I and 44% of players didn't steal
Episode 3
Spoiler for Hiden:
Did you shoot the girl in the street - I and 40% of players shot her.
Did you abandon Lilly - I and 42% of players left her You're goddamn right I did. That bitch shot Carley in cold blood - I wasn't going to let her back in the RV with Clementine!
Did you fight Kenny - I and 44% of players talked him down
Did you shoot Duck - I and 79% of players shot him
Did you help Omid - I and 43% of players did not help Omid This was an honest-to-God mistake. Maybe I jinked the controller, but the camera swept past Omid so fast, I didn't know grabbing him was a possibility.
Episode 4
Spoiler for Hiden:
Did you kill the boy in the attic - I and 74% of players killed him
Did you lie or threaten Vernon - I and 66% of players were honest
Did you bring Clementine with you to Crawford - I and 74% of players brought her One of the hardest decisions I can remember being asked to make in a game. I'm amazed the results are so weighted.
Did you let Ben fall to his death - I and 67% of players pulled him up Ben has Clementine to thank for this. If she hadn't spoken up on his behalf....
Did you reveal your bite to the group - I and 19% of players hid the bite Under other circumstances, I would have fessed up immediately. In the immediate aftermath of Clementine's disappearance, though, I couldn't risk having everyone get distracted with an argument about me.
Episode 5
Spoiler for Hiden:
Did you cut off your arm - I and 70% of players removed Lee's arm
Did you argue with Kenny - I and 27% of players calmly argued with Kenny
Did you turn over all your items - I and 58% of players surrendered Lee's weapons
Did you kill Clementine's captor - I and 56% of players didn't kill the stranger
Did you keep Lee from turning - I and 62% of players made sure Lee didn't turn After the fact, a friend made a compelling point that Clementine needs to conserve ammo. I hadn't thought of that - I was focused on ensuring she would be left with the knowledge that she was strong enough now to kill someone she loves as an act of mercy.
Quote from: Ironrod on January 08, 2013, 03:01:06 AM
Quote from: Teggy on January 07, 2013, 05:45:03 PM
I think all you guys are doing is arguing over the definition of "religious".
Pretty much, yup. Thankfully nobody has invoked the dictionary yet.
Well here's a good rule of thumb: if you endorse or engage in behaviors or beliefs on the grounds that they will influence what happens after you die, that's religion. Example: accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savior.
Quote from: JuniorDan on January 06, 2013, 04:56:13 AM
I did contemplate updating but I am actually scared to mess with it since its actually working as is right now.
Well, for what it's worth, Patch 5 rejiggered a lot of the underlying mechanics and, I believe, added several new features. Tom Chick did a thorough write-up of it at the time but it was lost when Sci-Fi took down Fidgit and destroyed all his work.
Dark Cloud 2, no question. I bought a PS2 for that game and played is obsessively for weeks afterwards. Rogue Galaxy was good, but didn't quite capture the same magic of bouncing around in time, building towns and leveling up my weaponry.
Am I allowed to vote for Persona 3 and 4 if I technically played them on my PS3?
Quote from: pr0ner on January 06, 2013, 03:42:56 AM
Quote from: Autistic Angel on January 06, 2013, 03:33:55 AM
Quote from: pr0ner on January 06, 2013, 02:51:06 AM
Quote from: Arclight on January 05, 2013, 06:35:45 PM
1. Being a Christian is not the same as being Religious.
Um...what?
Dude, he *specifically* said he'd like to explain it but it's impossible. Sometimes you just have to accept things on not-faith.
-Autistic Angel
My comment to him still stands. I find it especially ludicrous because I am a Christian.
I am very sick this weekend, so it is even more likely than usual that my sense of humor is poorly calibrated for the situation. Please accept the explanation that I was not actually chastising you, but having some fun with the idea of Arclight pre-refuting any questions about his unusual outlook by saying it's too sophisticated for the written word.
"It's just interesting that Conservatives are so casual about publicly mocking a government policy they only wish to expand."
I don't even know what this means.
When Conservatives need an example of expensive government regulations that have failed to completely eradicate an endemic societal problem, they reliably turn to the War on Drugs. Example:
Quote from: ATB on January 01, 2013, 02:10:09 AM
Quote
No access to those kinds of weapons will also severely limit the black market
Worked for illegal drugs!
Then, whenever Liberals discuss the most modest rollbacks of the War on Drugs, like decriminalizing marijuana, Conservatives start screaming about moral corruption, gateway drugs, and stoners who put roasts in the high chair and babies in the oven.
In other words, when giving examples of how well Conservatives understand the limitations of governmental regulation, you might not want to start by reminding everyone how miserably Conservative-led regulations have failed.
No access to those kinds of weapons will also severely limit the black market
Worked for illegal drugs!
Ever notice how swift the Conservative movement is to cite the War on Drugs as an example of failed government policy while discussing anything except the War on Drugs?
"We can't promote responsible (gun ownership / energy efficiency / healthcare / literacy)! Look at the failed War on Drugs!"
"Maybe you're right on that one. It would remove a terrible burden on our justice system if we legalized marijuan-"
"OVER MY DEAD BODY!"
There are lots of problems with the comparison. Guns are not addictive narcotics, compelling rational people to sacrifice every penny they have to finance a black market, and are more difficult to smuggle as relatively few people can smuggle boxes of hollow point rounds in a body cavity. It's just interesting that Conservatives are so casual about publicly mocking a government policy they only wish to expand.
Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 29, 2012, 05:10:05 PM
My wife just read me an article that says sales of ammo and weapons have dramatically skyrocketed in anticipation of a ban.
Did she happen to note which year the article was written in? Panicked ammunition stockpiling has been the status quo for about four years now, with the NRA and weapon vendors exploiting every newmurderspree and harmless U.N. treaty as a blockbuster marketing campaign.
You might think that after years of falling for the exact same scare tactic, gun owners would start to wise up. Fortunately, Wayne LaPierre was on hand to explain that President Obama's complete disinterest in gun control was actually damning evidence of his desire to repeal the Second Amendment:
Quote from: The Washington Times
While delivering one of the liveliest and best-received speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said the president's low-key approach to gun rights during his first term was "a "conspiracy to ensure re-election by lulling gun owners to sleep."
"All that first term, lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term," he said.
"We see the president's strategy crystal clear: Get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms' freedom, erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution."
So there you have it: the only thing more dangerous than a Democrat seeking something as innocuous as closing the gun show loophole is one who spends four years relaxing existing gun control laws. What a happy coincidence that the gun industry has not only been able to expose Obama's weirdly circuitous plot, but to rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in the process.
Quote from: Knightshade Dragon on December 29, 2012, 03:12:07 AM
Ok, let's pretend we ban all firearms and some sort of insane secret police action removed all guns from America.
Why? I don't know of anyone, politician, pundit, or average citizen, who is proposing such a thing, and if such a person exists they have not been posting in this thread. We might as well pretend M. Knight Shyamalan's The Happening came true and gunfire was the only thing that could slay the wind.
Canadian, Australian, Japanese, and European gun control laws actually exist. We don't have to pretend what their effects might be; we have decades of data to show us that...
Quote from: Knightshade Dragon on December 29, 2012, 03:12:07 AM
The next mass killing will be when somebody chains the doors of a movie theater and sets the place on fire, or perhaps a pair of glass jars with nails mixed with explosives, or maybe etc., etc. etc.
...has no statistical precedent to back it up. Those societies have lots of lewd music videos and violent video games too, so unless someone would like to argue that Americans are uniquely primal and depraved among the cultures of the world, I don't know why we'd assume such a thing.
Quote
Banning weapons is not going to stop people from doing bad things. Banning clips of any size won't stop people from doing bad things.
Yes: cashiers will still steal from the till, cars will still be driven drunk, and gay teens will still be bullied. We'd just have fewer mass murders.
Quote from: Autistic Angel on December 25, 2012, 08:23:51 PM
Quote from: Isgrimnur on December 25, 2012, 07:31:19 PM
AA, my point isn't about the skills of a shooter, trained or otherwise. The point is that there is little difference that the choice of weapon makes regarding whatever ability the shooter does have.
It's more to illustrate why a ban of a certain type of weapon frame is irrelevant to the amount of damage that a shooter can inflict.
Yes, and I'm saying the damage per second curves between a Colt .45 revolver, a Glock 9mm, and an M16 carbine only start to flatten out at the highest tiers of training and natural talent.
Quote from: Isgrimnur on December 25, 2012, 11:41:52 PM
AA, I'm not concerned about an open field. Most of these incidents are at close range. Without some sort of citation or evidence, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that the weapon selection would make any difference, especially when the rampages are generally over when the gunman ends himself or law enforcement arrives.
Jared Lee Loughner exhausted a 33-round magazine to shoot nineteen people in Tuscon, Arizona. He was stopped, not by Wayne LaPierre's "good guy with a gun," but by victims on the scene when he was forced to reload. It would have ended 23-bullets sooner with the Glock 19's default magazine.
I've tried to determine the logistics of you using a Colt .45 revolver to shoot nineteen rounds into nineteen separate targets, moving or not, within about thirty seconds. While no one I've spoken with is prepared to say it's strictly impossible, they all agree they'd be fascinated by the attempt. Either way, in Loughner's place, I doubt any amount of dexterity with a speed loader would have afforded you a seventh shot.
As far as other citations or evidence, I would submit that SWAT teams gearing up for close range engagements do not seem to agree with the idea that weapon selection makes no difference. They deploy with an array of shotguns, submachine guns, and carbines on the grounds that the tactical benefits are worth the added weight and expense.
Quote from: Teggy on December 28, 2012, 05:06:17 AM
Something I read today that was interesting was that the expansions are not canon. In the case of Extraction Point, I think that's a good thing.
I distinctly remember the evening I finished F.E.A.R. and was so amped up by the amazing finale that I immediately jumped into Extraction Point...and quit forever after about thirty minutes. The expansions were farmed out to TimeGate and it really shows.
Sadly, F.E.A.R. 2 is also a pretty poor game. Where the first game had a really chunky physicality to it, with powerful weapon impacts and exaggerated particle effects to emphasize the Bullet Time hook, the sequel seemed content to craft the most generic corridor shooter of all time and edit in some a forgettable slo-mo filter as an afterthought. I honestly don't remember a thing about the story.
I'm about halfway through F.E.A.R. 3 as we speak, and from what I've seen, it's built around two core principles:
1) The combat in F.E.A.R. 2 was generic as hell, so let's build the biggest, flashiest 80's action movie game we can, and
2) Nobody, anywhere, cares to comprehend this weird-ass story anymore, so let's build a big, flashy 80's action movie!
To give you a sense of how the third game focuses your attention, every level in the game is built as a Score Attack round with dozens of challenges for racking up kills with specific weapons, nailing enough headshots, killing enough dudes from behind Active Cover(!), spending enough time in slow motion, and finishing the level quickly enough. There's, like, some psychic ghosts too, but nothing you can't solve with enough explosions.
Honestly, it's kind of great, especially for the going rate of $5-$10. Doubly so with a co-op partner to control the psychic ghost who's on your team. Just don't go into it expecting the eerie tension of the first game -- this is the very epitome of rockin' run-and-gun action.
As reading experiences go, I can't recommend the Kindle highly enough. People can try to describe the value of an e-ink display, but ultimately it comes down to the fact that when I'm reading something worthwhile on my Kindle, I swiftly forget that I'm reading it on a Kindle at all.
Get a Nexus if want lots of excuses not to read. Otherwise, get the Paperwhite!
I highly recommend saving the stealth / Low Chaos run for a second playthrough of Dishonored. Doing it well expects a better familiarity with the game mechanics and requires you to forgo the use of half the tools in your arsenal. Grenades, springrazors, rewire tools, ammo upgrades: they're effectively useless when your goal is to evade detection. The High Chaos endings, with the redesigned final level, are also delightfully grim, and there just isn't the same motivation to replay a game after you've already earned the "good" ending.
Playing on Hard, the best encounters are the ones where the enemies are dead before they even know what hit them. Blink around: disable an alarm, repurpose a forcefield, choke a guard out and leave a springrazor prize prize for whoever comes to wake him up -- suddenly, you're the only guy in the room who's more than a glittering coinpurse beside a drift of ashes.
The most important thing to remember when choosing between the two games is that while Far Cry 3 is a shooter with worthwhile stealth elements, Dishonored is fundamentally a stealth game with combat elements. It has a very different flow, and while you *can* run headlong into guard patrols for toe-to-toe combat, the game mechanics are very much set up for springing from the shadows and thinning the enemy ranks one slice at a time.
I finished the game on Hard and, like Gratch, I absolutely loved it. It's the best Thief game since The Metal Age. Still, if I were in the mood for a less deliberate run-and-gun experience, I'd much sooner reach for the open world pyrotechnics of Far Cry 3.
For an opposing viewpoint, I know the entire staff at No High Scores found Dishonored to be a thoroughly "meh" experience. I don't happen to agree with their criticisms, at least not to the point of diminishing how much I enjoyed it, but dissenting opinions might be important if you're on the fence.
Which...um, server or whatever, is SkinyPupy2.3 on? I just picked up Guild Wars 2 in the Amazon half-price sale and I don't know where the cool kids are hanging out.
Quote from: Isgrimnur on December 25, 2012, 07:31:19 PM
AA, my point isn't about the skills of a shooter, trained or otherwise. The point is that there is little difference that the choice of weapon makes regarding whatever ability the shooter does have.
It's more to illustrate why a ban of a certain type of weapon frame is irrelevant to the amount of damage that a shooter can inflict.
Yes, and I'm saying the damage per second curves between a Colt .45 revolver, a Glock 9mm, and an M16 carbine only start to flatten out at the highest tiers of training and natural talent.
I cannot guess as to your level of skill, but if you were to place me in a soccer field with differently-sized mannequins and thirty seconds to plug as many of them as possible, I can assure you that my score would be dramatically improved by a shoulder stock, muzzle break, and a magazine large enough to forgo reloading.
Quote from: Ironrod on December 25, 2012, 04:32:39 PM
Plus some states, including my own, already have weak gun cultures and more restrictive laws. Tellingly, though, we do not have appreciably less gun violence than the permissive states do.
State-by-state gun laws worked a lot better in, say, the 1930's when people did not have such abundant access to personal vehicles and cross-country freeways. Today, the difficulty of quietly acquiring a firearm is measured in little more than gas money, while restrictive gun laws only come into play after law enforcement has already been engaged.
Australia had exactly the same problem back in the 90's, with gun enthusiasts simply crossing state lines in search of the fewest restrictions. It's something they addressed in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre, passing federal legislation requiring fairly uniform gun laws across the county. Aussies still have guns for hunting and self-defense, but their use in homicides dropped nearly 60% over the following ten years.
Make no mistake: I know America is not going to enact gun control laws similar to those in Australia, Canada, Japan, or Europe. We are not going to enact any new gun control laws at all -- we're going to sit around chat about this short while longer, watch Republicans in congress demagog, filibuster, and vote down the most milquetoast of reforms, and meet up again the next time a mass shooting captures the national dialogue for a few days.
I'd just like to move past the part where, as TiLT points out, we have to open with a long conversation with Wayne LaPierre-types about whether Americans are simply too primal and violent to benefit from the same strategies we've seen working around the world.
Quote from: Isgrimnur on December 25, 2012, 01:57:06 AM
Wouldn't know from any accurate sources. But rate of fire is rarely an issue. In a close quarters rampage, it's not the weapon selection that makes a difference.
If you can honestly tell me there's a significant amount of damage that can be done in a short period of time based on semi-auto weapon selection, you have a more discerning eye than I do.
The trained shooter in your videos is identified as Special Agent Bruce Bonsai. I suspect he has somewhat more expertise in his craft than the perpetrators of these mass shootings, including his ability to line up targets, count his shots, and reload in a heartbeat.
A good friend of mine made a similar point when the Tuscon shooting put extended capacity magazines in the spotlight for a few days. If an expert shooter has seven targets to hit, he said, it wouldn't much matter if he has nine bullets or thirty. It makes a world of difference if he has nineteen targets and only hits the mark about half the time.
Discussing the capabilities of elite marksmen isn't very illuminating when a tiny percentage of these massacres are committed by people with such a degree of training and no one, regardless of how the NRA tries to spin things, is saying that responsible gun owners are monsters.
I bailed on the first Witcher game around Chapter 4 and on the first Witcher book...I don't know, at some point after reading it would put me to sleep mid-chapter. That's not hyperbole. Anyway, by the end of The Witcher 2, I still felt like I had a pretty firm grasp of all the major players and Geralt's backstory with Yennifer. Stick with it and you'll be fine.
As far as checking FAQs, I had to look something up for an Act I sidequest because I knew *what* I was supposed to do, but no idea how the game wanted it done. There was also an especially obtuse optional quest in Act III that I couldn't make heads or tails of, but everything else I was able to figure out by searching around and examining the in-game material. The books you find about monster species really are helpful in learning how to take them down.
I can't wait to hear more about how the story unfolds for you. The Witcher 2 is rife with major decision points, often so transparent that you don't even appreciate how much difference they make until you try to talk to another player and realize their situation is wildly different from yours.
See, this is why I'm always saying Gratch needs to be live-streaming his games. Not only would it be a massive draw for the site, but a simple on-site moderator could help him poll live chat participants for help without fear of spoilers.
It sounds like you're in Act II? That's where most people feel the map lets them down. I found the world designed in a way that I quickly learned to find my own way around, but you may have wound up on a completely different path....
Sorry for the confusion: I was referring specifically to theohall's claim that Adam Lanza should have been institutionalized at some point prior to the shooting. I cannot find any evidence to back him up on that, and according to this article dated just three days ago:
Quote from: Slate.com
And even if we could know all the disturbing details of a killer’s psychiatric history—as we know some of the details about James Holmes, who killed 12 people in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater—it still wouldn’t likely help anyone prevent a future crime from happening. These cases are outliers, hardly typical. Unless a psych patient literally tells you of a homicidal plan that he intends to act on, it is often impossible to predict who is actually a threat and who isn’t. Many psychiatric experts have said that this shooting represents a deficiency in our mental health care system, but though we certainly have such deficiencies, it hasn’t been shown that Lanza was resisting treatment or even that if he was being treated properly, he wouldn’t have committed the murders.
This means one of the following:
a) theohall knows something about the case that I do not, which is very possible;
b) he knows something about Adam Lanza which has not yet come to light; or,
c) he has some interesting ideas about the relationship between psychiatrists and psychics.
I have responses teed up for all three, mostly centering on how the NRA's strident opposition to closing the "Gun Show Loophole" makes mental status a non-issue in obtaining a firearm, but I'm curious to see if he's arguing in good faith first.
Quote from: theohall on December 23, 2012, 05:34:57 AM
How come no one is talking about mental health and the steady decline in the numbers of folks institutionalized who actually should be institutionalized. This kid is one of them.....
I just spent a good ten minutes trying to find a source for your assertion and failed. Can you please link us to evidence of the medical diagnosis you're talking about?
Yeah, the patcher is built into the front end and it won't run unless you're logged in with your Stardock account.
Have you ever tried the Fall from Heaven II mod for Civilization IV? It doesn't have the custom unit designing you were asking about, but your units do gain experience perks through combat, each faction is starkly different from the next, and it would be free so long as you have your discs for Civ IV and Beyond the Sword handy.
Yes, what are the circumstances that you're considering playing a copy of Elemental? Fallen Enchantress is fairly enjoyable, but don't let that trick you into believing two years of exhaustive reinvention have been retroactively applied to the original game.
You can indeed customize your Fallen Enchantress troops with different gear and accessories that influence their stats. It even saves your hand-crafted creations and lets the AI put them to use in future games. I've spent the most time playing as the Gilden, a faction of natural blacksmiths that can outfit their troops with superior armors more easily than other kingdoms. Sometimes you'll want to hurriedly rearm them with special enchanted weaponry to target a tough enemy's particular weakness.
I think Elemental had something similar, but I can't pass along any details because I didn't play it long enough to find out. It was a very poor game, full of things you *could* do and absolutely no reason to do them. Several weapons and spells did exactly the same things, monsters behaved indistinguishably from one another, and the AI factions were little more than speed bumps on the path to inevitable victory.
Have those things been patched? I don't know, but under the best of circumstances, it would still produce an experience that played like the rudimentary alpha version of Fallen Enchantress that it turned out to be. It certainly isn't worth your money.
One element of Mockingjay that I did appreciate: by the end of the book
Spoiler for Hiden:
Gale has declared Katniss to be a hot mess and takes off for greener pastures. I know Katniss *believes* the choice between Gale and Peeta is all up to her, but as the only character in the trilogy who consistently seeks out direct ways to improve the situation and never demands a whiff of recognition for his sacrifices, Gale's actual behavior showed he was thoroughly fed up with Katniss' accidental martyrdom and middle-school drama mindset.
It's almost like Suzanne Collins secretly believed her own main character was full of crap and wanted at least one other character to stand in the margins rolling his eyes.
Quote from: Scuzz on December 18, 2012, 10:12:57 PM
Quote from: Lordnine on December 18, 2012, 07:53:05 PM
Quote from: ATB on December 18, 2012, 07:45:57 PM
Oh. My worst book of the year is Mockingjay (book 3 of hunger games).
I got it from the kindle lending library in APRIL and still have not finished it. It's just terrible.
Don't finish it. Imagine your own ending. The real one will just piss you off.
My daughter loved the series but admitted that the third book wasn't very good.
I have never read a book in which the main character spent so much time comatose, drugged, or emotionally catatonic that the entire plot occurs off-screen. It's like reading a Superman story written from the perspective of Ma Kent back in Smallville.
"Why, hello Clark! It's so good to hear from you! How have things been going there in the big city?"
"Fine, ma. Sorry I haven't been able to visit much. Luthor built a Kryptonite-powered mech suit and *somehow* a violent criminal used it to start robbing jewelry stores."
"Oh my! That sounds dreadful! I want to hear all about it, but I have to take in the wash before it starts to rain...can you sum up the entire adventure in a paragraph or less?"
Show Posts
