WC movie toys... and Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?!
Death
and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
characters.
My thoughts on the subject can be summed up by 3 letters: WTF?!
God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
beautiful lines of the game Rapier? As for the Dralthi, my first
though was they recycled the flipping BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
itself. One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
merc with equipment as big as he is. Still, that Roberts would let
them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
SubCrid Death
ICQ UIN: 3908950 <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
LOAF's Merry Guild: <http://www.loaf.pi.se/loaf/guild.html>
Kris Vanhecke
Death heeft geschreven in bericht <3673702f...@news.mindspring.com>...
>Ok, I just zipped by WC CIC (http://www.wcnews.com) after a few days,
>and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
>including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
>characters.
>
>My thoughts on the subject can be summed up by 3 letters: WTF?!
Same here...
>God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
>beautiful lines of the game Rapier? As for the Dralthi, my first
>though was they recycled the flipping BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
>And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
>something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
>versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
>movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
>itself. One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
>character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
>went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
>merc with equipment as big as he is. Still, that Roberts would let
>them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
>movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
I immediately noticed that Dralthi, or should I say that "object". It wasn't
until I loaded the picture that I knew what it was. The dralthi has evolved
a bit during the long WC history, which is perfectly normal and acceptable.
But come on! This doesn't even remotely look like a pancake.
>What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
>claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
>probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
>
>Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
>wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
>before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
I'll still go see it ASAP, probably twice. First the cats, now the ships.
I'll try to keep an open mind and enjoy the big picture, but it won't be
easy, I can tell you that.
Kris Vanhecke
Kris.V...@village.uunet.be
http://www.strategycommand.com
ICQ #5504559
Pyw2
>
>
really? i was pretty impressed with what I saw. as far as toys go, the artist
behind the design of the figures did a great job. reminds me of the awesome
quality of those spawn figures that McFarlane designed himself. plus the face
of the kiltrathi general looks like it came right out of the wc3/Prophecy VDU.
sure the ships look different, but I'm betting that the shots in the movie will
be incredible.
Christopher Reid
>
> God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
> beautiful lines of the game Rapier?
I think it looks kinda cool.. in action they're really neat.
> As for the Dralthi, my first though was they recycled the flipping
> BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
I think it looks pretty much the same as normal Dralthi.. they change
slightly in looks from product to product.
> And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
> something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
> versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
> movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
> itself. One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
> character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
> went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
> merc with equipment as big as he is. Still, that Roberts would let
> them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
> movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
I fail to see how a two-inch plastic gun means certain doom for Wing
Commander.. :)
> What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
> claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
> probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
Microsoft isn't connected to the movie at all.
> Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
> wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
> before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
You'll be missing out. :) I'd never base my opinion of a movie on the
toys that come out for it..
Chris Reid Wing Commander CIC
Chri...@wcnews.com http://www.wcnews.com
Christopher Reid
>
> I'll still go see it ASAP, probably twice. First the cats, now the
> ships. I'll try to keep an open mind and enjoy the big picture, but it
> won't be easy, I can tell you that.
One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
deal of today and think it was a great movie..
Christopher Reid
>
> really? i was pretty impressed with what I saw. as far as toys go,
> the artist behind the design of the figures did a great job. reminds
> me of the awesome quality of those spawn figures that McFarlane
> designed himself. plus the face of the kiltrathi general looks like
> it came right out of the wc3/Prophecy VDU.
Yeah.. in the actual magazine pictures I hear the figures look very
detailed.
> sure the ships look different, but I'm betting that the shots in the
> movie will be incredible.
They are. :)
John P. Wilson
>God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
>beautiful lines of the game Rapier? As for the Dralthi, my first
>though was they recycled the flipping BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
Well, you have to remember how toy spaceships work. Remember the Star Wars
X-Wing Fighter (the orignial)? Little wings, short lasers, enormous
fuselage to hold that big honkin' muscular Luke Skywalker figure... Take a
look at the SW toys and you'll see what I mean.
I acutally thought the Rapier looked cool, but I can't see the wings...
And that Dralthi is AWESOME! What were YOU looking at?! It looks straight
out of WC3!
- John P. Wilson :|:
- Computer Renaissance http://www.computerrenaissance.com/
http://www.austincr.com/
- Downshift http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Garage/1123/index.html
- Ten Cylinders, Six Gears, Four Wheels, Two Wings, and one Brave Heart.
Ben Lesnick
>
> Ok, I just zipped by WC CIC (http://www.wcnews.com) after a few days,
> and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
> including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
> characters.
try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
> My thoughts on the subject can be summed up by 3 letters: WTF?!
>
> God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
> beautiful lines of the game Rapier? As for the Dralthi, my first
> though was they recycled the flipping BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
I dunno, I guess I don't really like the Rapier look that much, but
we've
known about it for quite a while:) I *DO* like the Toy Rapier, mainly
because it looks *just* like the movie Rapier:) Very detailed... the
Dralthi looks no different from a normal Dralthi than the Dralthi IV
did the WCI Dralthi, or the Priv-a-Dralthi... and the picture shown at
the CIC isn't even the toy -- it's an 'early rendering design' according
to the subtitle:)
> And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
> something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
> versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
> movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
> itself.
They *all* seem to have one normal gun and one big-ass-gun :)
Personally,
I don't mind... having the guns isn't going to hurt me... I *do* like
the
actual figures themselves, though... they're very detailed, and their
faces look pretty good (and the Kilrathi general looks like a cat,
that's
a good thing;). You can see things like Blair's (and the Pilgrim)'s
Pilgrim
Crosses, which is neat...
> One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
> character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
> went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
> merc with equipment as big as he is.
Hehe, almost all non-StarTrek/StarWars toys seem to do that...
> Still, that Roberts would let
> them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
> movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
> What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
> claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
> probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
Hmm? Roberts simply sold X-Toys the right to make WC action figures...
How could he have any idea that they'd have big guns:)? And what's the
problem with them having big guns:)?
> Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
> wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
> before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
Wow, that's odd...
> SubCrid Death
> ICQ UIN: 3908950 <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
> LOAF's Merry Guild: <http://www.loaf.pi.se/loaf/guild.html>
--
Long live the Confederation,
Ben "Bandit" Lesnick
The Wing Commander CIC
http://www.wcnews.com
"You go, Loaf! Get some!" - JPG
Ben Lesnick
>
> >My thoughts on the subject can be summed up by 3 letters: WTF?!
> >
> >
>
> behind the design of the figures did a great job. reminds me of the awesome
> quality of those spawn figures that McFarlane designed himself. plus the face
> of the kiltrathi general looks like it came right out of the wc3/Prophecy VDU.
>
> be incredible.
According to the magazine the company that's producing the WC toys was
started
by somebody who left McFarlane's company... WC will be their first
series of
toys...
Death
<bles...@erols.com> scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
alt.games.wing-commander:
> Death wrote:
> > Ok, I just zipped by WC CIC (http://www.wcnews.com) after a few days,
> > and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
> > including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
> > characters.
>
> Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
> try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
> access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
I noticed the resolution thing, but the items pictured ain't gonna get
any less lame.
> > My thoughts on the subject can be summed up by 3 letters: WTF?!
> >
> > God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
> > beautiful lines of the game Rapier? As for the Dralthi, my first
> > though was they recycled the flipping BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
>
> I dunno, I guess I don't really like the Rapier look that much, but
> we've
> known about it for quite a while:) I *DO* like the Toy Rapier, mainly
> because it looks *just* like the movie Rapier:) Very detailed... the
> Dralthi looks no different from a normal Dralthi than the Dralthi IV
> did the WCI Dralthi, or the Priv-a-Dralthi... and the picture shown at
> the CIC isn't even the toy -- it's an 'early rendering design' according
> to the subtitle:)
Picky, picky... :P Anyhow, that BatJet thing was the first thought
that popped into my head when seeing it, what with the 'pincers' on
the nose, and the way the wings look a bit like scimitars (the sword,
not the WC fighter) with their flowing curves.
As for the Rapier, all I can say is 'Thank God the game takes
continuity precedence over other products." That gatling-gun thing on
the nose looks, to put it bluntly, butt-ugly... and I mean some nasty
ass with chancre sores and such on it. (Disgusting, I know, but so is
the Rapier pictured in the scan.)
> > And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
> > something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
> > versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
> > movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
> > itself.
>
> They *all* seem to have one normal gun and one big-ass-gun :)
> Personally,
> I don't mind... having the guns isn't going to hurt me... I *do* like
> the
> actual figures themselves, though... they're very detailed, and their
> faces look pretty good (and the Kilrathi general looks like a cat,
> that's
> a good thing;). You can see things like Blair's (and the Pilgrim)'s
> Pilgrim
> Crosses, which is neat...
Yeah, I know toy makers take liberties with the characters they're
portraying, and usually put in stuff to appeal to gun-nut kids, but
still, how the hell would he even fire that thing short of having it
mounted in a flipping turret? (I wouldn't imagine any tripod-type
support having the rigidness, btw...) And then there's still the
"marine" thing... I just hope that's a toymaker's 'creative license'
and not representative of the movie Blair. (Again, the Ian Malcolm
thing.)
> > One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
> > character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
> > went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
> > merc with equipment as big as he is.
>
> Hehe, almost all non-StarTrek/StarWars toys seem to do that...
I haven't been in a toy store (or toy dept of regular stores) for
quite a while, although I do remember back from when I did of that
being the case. Even back then I thought it was lame. :)
> > Still, that Roberts would let
> > them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
> > movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
> > What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
> > claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
> > probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
>
> Hmm? Roberts simply sold X-Toys the right to make WC action figures...
> How could he have any idea that they'd have big guns:)? And what's the
> problem with them having big guns:)?
The "big guns" isn't the only thing I was referring to by my "what was
Roberts smoking" comment. Sorry I didn't make that clearer (it was
kinda clunky, in retrospect). I meant the gawdawful designs
themselves, both movie and toy.
(Yes, I know pics have been out, in varying degrees of completeness,
for a while now. I just didn't really start looking till recently.)
> > Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
> > wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
> > before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
>
> Wow, that's odd...
No, it's not just the toys that made me decide that. I also looked
about at the various movie stuff out and about on the web, as I was
kinda 'nudged on,' as it were, by the pictures and their accompanying
news blurb.
Besides, the "premier" theaters around here suck, even with the fact
that they are UA theaters (as in United Artists... the Bond people ;)
), who generally have nice movie theaters, from the various ones I've
visited here and there.
Kris Vanhecke
>Kris Vanhecke wrote:
>>
>> I'll still go see it ASAP, probably twice. First the cats, now the
>> ships. I'll try to keep an open mind and enjoy the big picture, but it
>> won't be easy, I can tell you that.
>
> One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
>see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
>CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
>it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
>deal of today and think it was a great movie..
Like I wouldn't notice the hairless cats or the weird ships...
I'd make just as big a deal about it.
Death
<CRei...@aol.com> scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
alt.games.wing-commander:
> Death wrote:
> >
> > God, does that Rapier look UGLY!!! What the hell happened to the
> > beautiful lines of the game Rapier?
>
> I think it looks kinda cool.. in action they're really neat.
I've not seen them "in action," but I definitely disagree with the
former part of your statement. At the very least, that cannon-thing
in the nose looks ridiculous. How the heck can that thing be
atmospheric, as Rapiers were shown to be in End Run? Shields will
only carry you so far, you know...
> > As for the Dralthi, my first though was they recycled the flipping
> > BatJet from the Batman (1989)!
>
> I think it looks pretty much the same as normal Dralthi.. they change
> slightly in looks from product to product.
At least until the movie Dralthi, the changes had at least some 'cool
factor' to them. But the movie Dralthi? Ugh.
> > And "marine Blair" with some huge-a**ed gun that looks more like
> > something to mount on a fighter turret (which other characters have
> > versions of, apparently, like Angel)? PUL-EEEZE!!! (Yes, I know that
> > movie toys almost never match up with the 'reality' of the movie
> > itself. One need only look at what was done to the Ian Malcolm
> > character from Jurassic Park and The Lost World, where the character
> > went from a movie/book scholar [and cynic ;) ] to an action figure
> > merc with equipment as big as he is. Still, that Roberts would let
> > them get away with that doesn't bode well for DA in general, and the
> > movie in particular. What else did he green-light?)
>
> I fail to see how a two-inch plastic gun means certain doom for Wing
> Commander.. :)
That's a bit of a stretch of an interpretation of what I said,
Chris... :) (Granted, I didn't really specify which "that" I was
referring to... It wasn't just the gun thing. Or even the characters.
I meant the whole enchilada, so to speak. *stomach grumble* Damn...)
> > What, in short, was Roberts smoking??? Or did M$ brainwash him to
> > claim responsibility for that gawdawful drek when the real source is
> > probably some marketroid that thought Microsoft Bob was a good idea?
>
> Microsoft isn't connected to the movie at all.
M$ is connected to DA, though. Hell, how do we know that M$ isn't
looking to extend their empire into movies? ("Why hide it then?" you
ask? Two words: Plausible Deniability. If it flops, they can slip
away unharmed.)
> > Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
> > wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
> > before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
>
> You'll be missing out. :) I'd never base my opinion of a movie on the
> toys that come out for it..
It wasn't just the toys that made me say that. (Yeah, I know, toys
can't 'make' one do anything... :P ) I also looked around a bit at
the other movie info, toy related and otherwise. Quite frankly, I
haven't seen much to make it worthwhile to go slogging through the
cinemuck at the local "premier" theaters and plunk down 5 bucks for.
Death
<CRei...@aol.com> scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
alt.games.wing-commander:
> Kris Vanhecke wrote:
> >
> > I'll still go see it ASAP, probably twice. First the cats, now the
> > ships. I'll try to keep an open mind and enjoy the big picture, but it
> > won't be easy, I can tell you that.
>
> One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
> see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
> CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
> it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
> deal of today and think it was a great movie..
If you use that as a justification to shut down CIC, we'll hunt you
down and do all sorts of painful things to you, Chris. Likewise to
the other CIC staffers.
Ever heard of Vlad the Impaler?
<j/k, btw>
Christopher Reid
>
> Yeah, I know toy makers take liberties with the characters they're
> portraying, and usually put in stuff to appeal to gun-nut kids, but
> still, how the hell would he even fire that thing short of having it
> mounted in a flipping turret? (I wouldn't imagine any tripod-type
> support having the rigidness, btw...) And then there's still the
> "marine" thing... I just hope that's a toymaker's 'creative license'
> and not representative of the movie Blair. (Again, the Ian Malcolm
> thing.)
Isn't it like the gun he carries on the tentative book and novel
covers..?
> The "big guns" isn't the only thing I was referring to by my "what was
> Roberts smoking" comment. Sorry I didn't make that clearer (it was
> kinda clunky, in retrospect). I meant the gawdawful designs
> themselves, both movie and toy.
I really don't see how any movie design is any uglier than any WC1
design..
Christopher Reid
>
> Christopher Reid wrote:
> > One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people
> >to see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was
> >no CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd
> >go see it after it came out barely noticing these things you're
> >making a big deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>
> I'd make just as big a deal about it.
it. If the CIC had been around and posted a picture of Melek from WC4
in late 1995 I know there'd be all sorts of posts talking about how much
WC4 would suck.
Christopher Reid
>
> In the Tome of Sivar, below "Killjoy was here," Christopher Reid
> <CRei...@aol.com> scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
> alt.games.wing-commander:
>
> I've not seen them "in action," but I definitely disagree with the
> former part of your statement. At the very least, that cannon-thing
> in the nose looks ridiculous. How the heck can that thing be
> atmospheric, as Rapiers were shown to be in End Run? Shields will
> only carry you so far, you know...
How can those boxes they call shuttles fly in an atmosphere? Wait
until you see a flight of these Rapiers peel off a flight deck. They do
look cool, "peel" is the word to describe it.
> > I think it looks pretty much the same as normal Dralthi.. they
> > change slightly in looks from product to product.
>
> At least until the movie Dralthi, the changes had at least some 'cool
> factor' to them. But the movie Dralthi? Ugh.
Yeah, those dark lines and sharp points. I really like the red
panels highlighted on black panels.
> > I fail to see how a two-inch plastic gun means certain doom for
> > Wing Commander.. :)
>
> That's a bit of a stretch of an interpretation of what I said,
> Chris... :) (Granted, I didn't really specify which "that" I was
> referring to... It wasn't just the gun thing. Or even the characters.
> I meant the whole enchilada, so to speak. *stomach grumble* Damn...)
I'd assume the whole enchilada included the movie? You've read the
script for the movie? :) (and if you have.. don't forget the
novelization..)
> > You'll be missing out. :) I'd never base my opinion of a movie on
> > the toys that come out for it..
>
> It wasn't just the toys that made me say that. (Yeah, I know, toys
> can't 'make' one do anything... :P ) I also looked around a bit at
> the other movie info, toy related and otherwise. Quite frankly, I
> haven't seen much to make it worthwhile to go slogging through the
> cinemuck at the local "premier" theaters and plunk down 5 bucks for.
Wow, I find that amazing coming from you. :) I'm camping at the
theater the night before..
SX Glory
>Death wrote:
<snip>
>> Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
>> wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
>> before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
>
> You'll be missing out. :) I'd never base my opinion of a movie on the
>toys that come out for it..
I'm gonna agree with Chris on this one, you can't base your opinion of a
movie on the toys, imagine if you did that based on the Terminator 2 toys.
More often than not the toys have little to do with the actual "story" their
based on, look at the Batman action figures out there, 98% of them have
little to do with the movies, cartoons or comics. You should consider that
even though toys are greatly collected by adults these days, kids still play
them, that's why they'd want the 2-inch gun (harder to lose, and it looks
cooler than a pea-shooter). For you typical WC collector they may not be
what they want, but if the figures are succesful we can expect a line of
ones that are more oriented to the collector (perhaps even based on the
games).
SX Glory
Realm Of The Privateer
http://www.dsuper.net/~sxglory
"And so it was a kingdom was lost, all for the want of a nail."
SX Glory
<snip>
>> > Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
>> > wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
>> > before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
>> Wow, that's odd...
>No, it's not just the toys that made me decide that. I also looked
>about at the various movie stuff out and about on the web, as I was
>kinda 'nudged on,' as it were, by the pictures and their accompanying
>news blurb.
I'd suggest waiting for the trailer, at least then you'll know what the
movie will 'really' look like, stills and 'news blurbs' don't do anything
justice.
>Besides, the "premier" theaters around here suck, even with the fact
>that they are UA theaters (as in United Artists... the Bond people ;)
> ), who generally have nice movie theaters, from the various ones I've
>visited here and there.
Hmm... so basically the discount theaters over there have better quality?
Edward Pang
>Death wrote:
>>
>> Ok, I just zipped by WC CIC (http://www.wcnews.com) after a few days,
>> and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
>> including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
>> characters.
>
>Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
>try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
>access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
Heh. Will a 300 MHz one do? ;) I can do scans if
I can get photos...
---
"Clippy?? CLIPPY??"
"You mean I've been afraid of getting my ass chewed out
by a freak who liked being called Clippy?"
- Lt. Max 'Maestro' Garett, Wing Commander: Secret Ops
SuperPoder
>Date: 12/6/98 12:34 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <366ACE...@aol.com>
Chris, have you eversaid ANYTHING bad about wing commander? You are always
making excuses or coming to defense of things that other wing commander fans (I
guess we're not the TRUE ones like you) see faults and things that they would
liked change in the wing commander games/movie.
I guess you're just praying that Origin still reads this newsgroup and they
will see what a good ass-kisser you are and will get a job for origin and then
you can OFFICALLY defend anything bad that someone says about your beloved
company.
SuperPoder
<Poder Omega>
ICQ: 15072716
So cold..... so very cold.....
Ben Lesnick
You're making an ass out of you and me...
> I guess you're just praying that Origin still reads this newsgroup and they
> will see what a good ass-kisser you are and will get a job for origin and then
> you can OFFICALLY defend anything bad that someone says about your beloved
> company.
I know, you're just trying to draw attention to yourself, but I must
point out that
your logic is flawed -- Origin has nothing to do with the WC Movie...
> SuperPoder
> <Poder Omega>
> ICQ: 15072716
> So cold..... so very cold.....
--
Ben Lesnick
>
> On Sun, 06 Dec 1998 12:42:13 -0500, Ben Lesnick <bles...@erols.com> scribbled:
>
> >Death wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, I just zipped by WC CIC (http://www.wcnews.com) after a few days,
> >> and saw the pictures for some of the toys based on the WC movie,
> >> including the Rapier and Dralthi, along with some of the movie
> >> characters.
> >
> >Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
> >try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
> >access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
>
> Heh. Will a 300 MHz one do? ;) I can do scans if
> I can get photos...
Hehe, anything above 66 would do, my flatbed scanner is attached
to my old 486 and it takes *FOREVER* to scan anything... I'll have
access to nicer computers and scanners tommorow, though:)
> ---
>
> "Clippy?? CLIPPY??"
>
> "You mean I've been afraid of getting my ass chewed out
> by a freak who liked being called Clippy?"
>
> - Lt. Max 'Maestro' Garett, Wing Commander: Secret Ops
--
Ben Lesnick
> I noticed the resolution thing, but the items pictured ain't gonna get
> any less lame.
They might -- you'll see what's meant by 'early rendering' in the
case of the Dralthi, and you'll see more of the details on the
figures...
> Picky, picky... :P Anyhow, that BatJet thing was the first thought
> that popped into my head when seeing it, what with the 'pincers' on
> the nose, and the way the wings look a bit like scimitars (the sword,
> not the WC fighter) with their flowing curves.
Hmmm, but that's pretty much the first thing that popped into my head
when I saw the Dralthi IV... just like the A-Wing/Arrow and the
Razor/BattleStarGalacticaThing (it's on the tip of my tongue...). But
nobody ever decided not to play WC3 because it had Star-Wars esque
ships, and nobody ever decided not to buy WCIV because of the Razor...:)
> As for the Rapier, all I can say is 'Thank God the game takes
> continuity precedence over other products." That gatling-gun thing on
> the nose looks, to put it bluntly, butt-ugly... and I mean some nasty
> ass with chancre sores and such on it. (Disgusting, I know, but so is
> the Rapier pictured in the scan.)
I dunno if it's even a different look for the Rapier, it's too early
in the timeline for WCI/II's Rapier II to be in service...
> Yeah, I know toy makers take liberties with the characters they're
> portraying, and usually put in stuff to appeal to gun-nut kids, but
> still, how the hell would he even fire that thing short of having it
> mounted in a flipping turret? (I wouldn't imagine any tripod-type
> support having the rigidness, btw...) And then there's still the
> "marine" thing... I just hope that's a toymaker's 'creative license'
> and not representative of the movie Blair. (Again, the Ian Malcolm
> thing.)
Assuming it's a slug thrower...:) But, as long as the characters look
like themseves, I don't mind the big guns... erm, as for 'Marine Blair',
that's from a portion of the movie where they board a kat ship in
armor... (there's a pic on the cover of the novels).
> I haven't been in a toy store (or toy dept of regular stores) for
> quite a while, although I do remember back from when I did of that
> being the case. Even back then I thought it was lame. :)
My brother is a big toy collector... so... I'm semi-familiar with it:)
> The "big guns" isn't the only thing I was referring to by my "what was
> Roberts smoking" comment. Sorry I didn't make that clearer (it was
> kinda clunky, in retrospect). I meant the gawdawful designs
> themselves, both movie and toy.
> (Yes, I know pics have been out, in varying degrees of completeness,
> for a while now. I just didn't really start looking till recently.)
Agreed, I don't particularly like the new designs either... but I don't
really hate them...
> No, it's not just the toys that made me decide that. I also looked
> about at the various movie stuff out and about on the web, as I was
> kinda 'nudged on,' as it were, by the pictures and their accompanying
> news blurb.
>
> Besides, the "premier" theaters around here suck, even with the fact
> that they are UA theaters (as in United Artists... the Bond people ;)
> ), who generally have nice movie theaters, from the various ones I've
> visited here and there.
Hmmm, that's too bad... I've been waiting almost ten years for this, so
no matter how bad/good it is, WC: The Movie is worth at least $4.50:)
> SubCrid Death
> ICQ UIN: 3908950 <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
> LOAF's Merry Guild: <http://www.loaf.pi.se/loaf/guild.html>
--
Kodiak
>
> One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
>see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
>CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
>it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
>deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>
I don't think so, Chris. When you have a history with a story and
then see a movie based on that story, you already have preconceived
ideas. Then if the movie is substantially different, it is only
natural to have feelings about it. I felt betrayed and was really
PO'ed when I saw how they butchered Starship Troopers, which was one
of my favorite novels when I was young. I expect I will have some
similar reactions to the WC movie. ie: "How could they do that to MY
Wing Commander??"
Don't get me wrong. I will see the film ASAP, and will probably enjoy
it. I think, however, that I will have to play some psychological
games with myself to divorce the movie from the game series. You see,
I KNOW how the Kilrathi war started, I KNOW what a Dralthi looks like
and I KNOW Blair and Maniac's history. If the movie doesn't match up,
then it must not REALLY be a WC movie, but rather a WC-like movie. I
can then enjoy it in that context.
Kodiak
Kodiak
>How could he have any idea that they'd have big guns:)? And what's the
>problem with them having big guns:)?
>
Kodiak
(The devil made me do it)
Christopher Reid
>
> Chris, have you eversaid ANYTHING bad about wing commander? You are
> always making excuses or coming to defense of things that other wing
> commander fans (I guess we're not the TRUE ones like you) see faults
> and things that they would liked change in the wing commander
> games/movie.
Hey Poder.. have you every said anythign about Wing Commander? You
are always coming to the newsgroup and attacking Wing Commander fans..
> I guess you're just praying that Origin still reads this newsgroup
> and they will see what a good ass-kisser you are and will get a job
> for origin and then you can OFFICALLY defend anything bad that someone
> says about your beloved company.
I wouldn't want to work at Origin.. primariliy because then you
couldn't discuss stuff about the games. Then there's also the thing
about your it becoming your job.. you'd be so overwhelmed with it you
wouldn't want to play any more.
Mike Bruner
SX Glory wrote:
> Death wrote in message <366bc614...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
> <snip>
>
> >> > Now, don't get me wrong, I'll go see the movie. However, I think I'll
> >> > wait the few months it'll take (if that) to hit the discount theater
> >> > before shelling out my hard-earned cash for it.
>
> >> Wow, that's odd...
>
> >No, it's not just the toys that made me decide that. I also looked
> >about at the various movie stuff out and about on the web, as I was
> >kinda 'nudged on,' as it were, by the pictures and their accompanying
> >news blurb.
>
> I'd suggest waiting for the trailer, at least then you'll know what the
> movie will 'really' look like, stills and 'news blurbs' don't do anything
> justice.
Speaking of trailer, anybody have any ideas when they're going to issue one?
I'd think the holiday film season is a good place to start if they're still
coming out in February.
--
Mike Bruner...@delaware.infi.net
"But soft, what light through yonder window breaks? It is the East, and
Juliet is AAAAAHHHHH THE SUN!!!!!!!!! *FOOM*
-- Vampire theatre
SX Glory
SuperPoder wrote in message
<19981206145315...@ng-bw1.aol.com>...
>> I really don't see how any movie design is any uglier than any WC1
>>design..
>Chris, have you eversaid ANYTHING bad about wing commander? You are always
>making excuses or coming to defense of things that other wing commander
fans (I
>guess we're not the TRUE ones like you) see faults and things that they
would
>liked change in the wing commander games/movie.
Let me take a wild guess, something bad happened to you again and you've
decided release your frustration in here... again...
> I guess you're just praying that Origin still reads this newsgroup and
they
>will see what a good ass-kisser you are and will get a job for origin and
then
>you can OFFICALLY defend anything bad that someone says about your beloved
>company.
I suppose you're posting to make it clear what an ass you are? Maybe so you
can get a job being a test subject for proctologists?
Christopher Reid
>
> > One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people
> >to see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was
> >no CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd
> >go see it after it came out barely noticing these things you're
> >making a big deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>
> then see a movie based on that story, you already have preconceived
> ideas. Then if the movie is substantially different, it is only
> natural to have feelings about it.
But they're not changing any of the story. And people aren't
complaining about the story. You've got little things like the amount
of hair on a Kilrathi or the shape of the guns on a Rapier that people
are complaining about.
> I felt betrayed and was really PO'ed when I saw how they butchered
> Starship Troopers, which was one of my favorite novels when I was
> young. I expect I will have some similar reactions to the WC movie.
> ie: "How could they do that to MY Wing Commander??"
Because things look a little different? Things look a little
different in every product. It's Chris Roberts making the movie, your
idea of what Wing Commander is is more important than what he thinks?
This isn't like Starship Troopers. They're not making a movie of Wing
Commander 1. It's a new story element they're adding to the whole.
> Don't get me wrong. I will see the film ASAP, and will probably enjoy
> it. I think, however, that I will have to play some psychological
> games with myself to divorce the movie from the game series. You see,
> I KNOW how the Kilrathi war started,
And that hasn't changed in any product.
> I KNOW what a Dralthi looks like
Yes.. it's a pancake with big wings in WC1.. a flat smooth disc in
Privateer.. an angular batlike creation in WC3 and a sharp dark
claw-like folded disc in the Movie.
> and I KNOW Blair and Maniac's history.
And nothing you know of their history changes in the movie. Now
you're just learning when they come aboard as officers.
> If the movie doesn't match up, then it must not REALLY be a WC movie,
> but rather a WC-like movie.
Match up to your preconceived notions? It *is* Wing Commander,
whether you consider it such or not, and of course, the movie matches up
with itself. Therefore the movie matches up with Wing Commander.
Thanksfully, it's even consistent with the games and other sources.
> I can then enjoy it in that context.
If you didn't enjoy it I'd feel bad for you. :)
Sean Tudor
>Chris, have you eversaid ANYTHING bad about wing commander? You are always
>making excuses or coming to defense of things that other wing commander fans (I
>guess we're not the TRUE ones like you) see faults and things that they would
>liked change in the wing commander games/movie.
Whilst I wouldn't be that hard on Chris - since he does run a very
good website - I do agree somewhat that he seems to do a lot of flag
waving and apologising for Origin and the Wing Commander franchise. I
guess if he came down hard on Origin/WC his source of information and
exclusives would dry up.
I also received some flack for criticising the complete lack of
gameplay in Secret Ops - but then that is another story for another
day. <g>
------------------------
Sean Tudor
Sydney, Australia
------------------------
This is my cannon, this is my gun
One is for bandits, and one is for fun
------------------------
vicious at magna dot com dot au
SX Glory
<snip>
>> I'd suggest waiting for the trailer, at least then you'll know what the
>> movie will 'really' look like, stills and 'news blurbs' don't do anything
>> justice.
>Speaking of trailer, anybody have any ideas when they're going to issue
one?
>I'd think the holiday film season is a good place to start if they're still
>coming out in February.
I'm surprised that they have't already released one if the movie does
finally hit theaters in February, the more they delay the less likely people
will be aware of it. I'm starting to doubt the possible February release
date.
Christopher Reid
>
> Whilst I wouldn't be that hard on Chris - since he does run a very
> good website - I do agree somewhat that he seems to do a lot of flag
> waving and apologising for Origin and the Wing Commander franchise. I
> guess if he came down hard on Origin/WC his source of information and
> exclusives would dry up.
Are you kidding? :) Go and look at the main CIC news page. Over the
pask week there are twenty-five News Updates. Not one is from Origin or
an Origin source.
Kris Vanhecke
>Kris Vanhecke wrote:
>>
>> Christopher Reid wrote:
>> > One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people
>> >to see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was
>> >no CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd
>> >go see it after it came out barely noticing these things you're
>> >making a big deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>>
>> I'd make just as big a deal about it.
>
> Of course you'd notice it, but you wouldn't be making a stink about
>it. If the CIC had been around and posted a picture of Melek from WC4
>in late 1995 I know there'd be all sorts of posts talking about how much
>WC4 would suck.
There's a huge difference here. The cats played a very small role in WC4,
and we probably won't see them that often in the movie either. So I can live
with that. But we'll see the ships (and specifically the Dralthi) a hell of
a lot more. And it bothers me that it looks so odd.
Christopher Reid
>
> Christopher Reid wrote:
> > Of course you'd notice it, but you wouldn't be making a stink
> > about it. If the CIC had been around and posted a picture of Melek
> > from WC4 in late 1995 I know there'd be all sorts of posts talking
> > about how much WC4 would suck.
>
> There's a huge difference here. The cats played a very small role in
> WC4, and we probably won't see them that often in the movie either. So
> I can live with that. But we'll see the ships (and specifically the
> Dralthi) a hell of a lot more. And it bothers me that it looks so odd.
How is the movie Dralthi any more odd than the WC3 Dralthi compared
to WC1's?
Kris Vanhecke
>In the Tome of Sivar, below "Killjoy was here," Christopher Reid
><CRei...@aol.com> scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
>alt.games.wing-commander:
>
>> >
>> > I'll still go see it ASAP, probably twice. First the cats, now the
>> > ships. I'll try to keep an open mind and enjoy the big picture, but it
>> > won't be easy, I can tell you that.
>>
>> see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
>> CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
>> it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
>> deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>
>down and do all sorts of painful things to you, Chris. Likewise to
>the other CIC staffers.
>
>Ever heard of Vlad the Impaler?
When there's something weird, and it don't look good.... Who you gonna call?
Ghostbusters! :)
Delance
>Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
>try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
>access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
A better scan of an ugly thing might make it worse! ;)
>They *all* seem to have one normal gun and one big-ass-gun :)
>Personally,
>I don't mind... having the guns isn't going to hurt me... I *do* like
>the
>actual figures themselves, though... they're very detailed, and their
>faces look pretty good (and the Kilrathi general looks like a cat,
>that's
>a good thing;). You can see things like Blair's (and the Pilgrim)'s
>Pilgrim
>Crosses, which is neat...
The good news are: probably not all cats on the movie are space beans.
>Hmm? Roberts simply sold X-Toys the right to make WC action figures...
>How could he have any idea that they'd have big guns:)? And what's the
>problem with them having big guns:)?
Angel probably likes it.
>> Delance <<
fix adress for e-mail
SX Glory
>Death heeft geschreven in bericht <366dcc26...@news.mindspring.com>...
>>> One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
>>> see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
>>> CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
>>> it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
>>> deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>>If you use that as a justification to shut down CIC, we'll hunt you
>>down and do all sorts of painful things to you, Chris. Likewise to
>>the other CIC staffers.
>>Ever heard of Vlad the Impaler?
>When there's something weird, and it don't look good.... Who you gonna
call?
>Ghostbusters! :)
Umm... that would be Vlad Tepes, aka Vlad the impaler, aka Dracula... not
the Ghostbuster 2 villain.
Christopher Reid
>
> Ben Lesnick <bles...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> >Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
> >try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
> >access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
>
> A better scan of an ugly thing might make it worse! ;)
Except.. they're not ugly. The figures are detailed and look better
in the magazine..
Christopher Reid
>
> Christopher Reid wrote:
> > Wow, I find that amazing coming from you. :) I'm camping at the
> > theater the night before..
>
> to be all *that* hard to obtain. If the movie is a hit, it'll most
> likely be a 'sleeper.' (Starts slow and picks up sales due to
> word-of-mouth.)
I'd do it just to say I did it.. :)
> Best, Raptor (Still searching for False Colours in NZ)
I've got it on order at the local Borders and Barnes and Noble.
Christopher Reid
>
> I'm not trolling, I'm typing exactly what I'm thinking and that's
> the internet...
And trolling is part of the internet. All through this thread I'm
discussing peoples' views. I don't begin by attacking people
themselves. That's a key difference.
Christopher Reid
>
> Yeah its a difference, but does that make you and what does that make
> me? A good guy vs a jerk? Hey, if you think me telling you off is
> rude, I think its rude that you come in here
You think I leave? :)
> and try to explain logically why people's opinions are wrong.
Where have I done that? I do recall saying a few times why people
are more prone to complain however.
SX Glory
<19981206221020...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>> And trolling is part of the internet. All through this thread I'm
>>discussing peoples' views. I don't begin by attacking people
>>themselves. That's a key difference.
>Yeah its a difference, but does that make you and what does that make me?
A
>good guy vs a jerk?
If you say so.
>Hey, if you think me telling you off is rude, I think its
>rude that you come in here and try to explain logically why people's
opinions
>are wrong.
So you believe that the best thing to do is let people believe they're
right, when they're wrong? Or not to hear out a different opinion on a
matter? People are trying to make conversation with others, part of the
process in doing that is to say something and expect an opposite position,
then the articipants can trade comments as they build up their "social
chat". Given your statement you want people to post whatever they want, and
expect no feedback apart from "You are right" - *gee-whiz* that would make
for a fun newsgroup...
Christopher Reid
>
> On Sun, 06 Dec 1998 13:39:14 -0800, Christopher Reid
> <CRei...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Are you kidding? :) Go and look at the main CIC news page. Over
> > the pask week there are twenty-five News Updates. Not one is from
> > Origin or an Origin source.
>
> weeks.
No problem.. while we do get some nifty stuff from Origin (several of
this newsgroup's posters should have some WC collectibles from our
Ultimate Trivia game) and an interview here and there, the bulk of our
news we research and discover on our own, or learn about through helpful
visitors.
Christopher Reid
>
> >So you believe that the best thing to do is let people believe
> >they're right, when they're wrong? Or not to hear out a different
> >opinion on a matter? People are trying to make conversation with
> >others, part of the process in doing that is to say something and
> >expect an opposite position, then the articipants can trade comments
> >as they build up their "social chat". Given your statement you want
> >people to post whatever they want, and expect no feedback apart from
> >"You are right" - *gee-whiz* that would make for a fun newsgroup...
>
> harsh, but I appriciate when people say what they think. And no, I
> dont think that Chris should leave. Yeah Chris you pretty much
> politely tell people they are idiots all the time. They will say
> something bad (or as you some put it, "complain" about something they
> have no controll over) and you will reply with an explanation of how a
> person is wrong. Need examples? Just go through posts like
> "FMV-CGI", "No actors in Next WC?" and read your responses pretty much
> telling people that they are foolish in thinking that CGI will be bad
> (or not as good) as the previous FMV. And earlier in this thread
> telling people that the action figures aren't stupid looking (i.e.
> blair's gun) because they are just like pictures from the novel...
> they are still stupid looking to that person regarless of how many
> times they have been drawn.
For a person who "appriciates when people say what they think" that's
a lot of criticism for my opinions..
> I myself think that the CGI is going to be a great thing for the
> next WC game, but if i see one saying "OH NOO NO FMW, WAHHH" I'm not
> going to tell them that the either one is going to be bad or worse
> without even seeing a demo.
Oh no.. you're just going to tell the people who have opinions on the
matter that they're being rude and acting stupid..
Christopher Reid
> at first.
Any reasons? I see lots of similarities.. more similarities to the
Dralthis we know than any other fighter. Central cockpit, flat batlike
wings that end in a sharp point, various version-specific materials
around the cockpit, etc.
Christopher Reid
>
> >Your criticism automatically shot down? You posted an opinion.
> >He replied. Then you called him an ass-kisser. This is flaming, and
> >flaming is trolling.
>
> Flaming is not trolling... they are similar but not the same,
> although most of you here probably think I'm a jackass we can agree on
> right? I admit I was flaming him but I wasnt trolling.
Then you're worse than what you claimed I was.
Christopher Reid
>
> Heh, well then.... sorry about all that. Bad day and all. Oh well,
> now you all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they
> have someone to dislike!
I really don't understand people who get off on garnering this sort
of attention..
Karl "CFF" Frank
> M$ is connected to DA, though. Hell, how do we know that M$ isn't
> looking to extend their empire into movies? ("Why hide it then?" you
> ask? Two words: Plausible Deniability. If it flops, they can slip
> away unharmed.)
Ah, Bill Gates spends more time in front of the DOJ than with his family
right now ;) , maybe he does not want another problem. You know
something like: "The WingCommander movie is an integral part of our new
WIN2000 OS... <BG>
--
"We are Micro$oft. Lower your expectations and surrender your
former software. We will add your technological advances to
our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.
Resistance is futile."
Rajan Ragupathy
> .
>
> Wow, I find that amazing coming from you. :) I'm camping at the
> theater the night before..
>
*Grin* Somehow, I don't think that tickets to the WC movie are going to
be all *that* hard to obtain. If the movie is a hit, it'll most likely
be a 'sleeper.' (Starts slow and picks up sales due to word-of-mouth.)
Best, Raptor (Still searching for False Colours in NZ)
--
Those who master others have force
Those who master themselves have strength.
-Confucius
Edward Pang
>>From: Christopher Reid <CRei...@aol.com>
>>Date: 12/6/98 12:34 PM Central Standard Time
>>Message-id: <366ACE...@aol.com>
>>
>>Death wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know toy makers take liberties with the characters they're
>>> portraying, and usually put in stuff to appeal to gun-nut kids, but
>>> still, how the hell would he even fire that thing short of having it
>>> mounted in a flipping turret? (I wouldn't imagine any tripod-type
>>> support having the rigidness, btw...) And then there's still the
>>> "marine" thing... I just hope that's a toymaker's 'creative license'
>>> and not representative of the movie Blair. (Again, the Ian Malcolm
>>> thing.)
>>
>> Isn't it like the gun he carries on the tentative book and novel
>>covers..?
>>
>>> The "big guns" isn't the only thing I was referring to by my "what was
>>> Roberts smoking" comment. Sorry I didn't make that clearer (it was
>>> kinda clunky, in retrospect). I meant the gawdawful designs
>>> themselves, both movie and toy.
>>
>> I really don't see how any movie design is any uglier than any WC1
>>design..
>>
>Chris, have you eversaid ANYTHING bad about wing commander? You are always
>making excuses or coming to defense of things that other wing commander fans (I
>guess we're not the TRUE ones like you) see faults and things that they would
>liked change in the wing commander games/movie.
SuperPoder, have you ever said anything CONSTRUCTIVE? =)
Look - this is Chris Roberts' baby, and if he's making the Kilrathi green with
yellow stripes, that's his right. Why? Because he made it, and he can
break any damned 'rule' you have in mind. It's his vision, and always has
been. You never owned it, even if you had the CDs, the books, the cartoon,
and even the little hat that came with the WCIII Limited Edition. Basically,
it's not your universe. You've played in his creation, and always have.
Besides that, don't storytellers always change the story a bit
every time they tell it, in order to customize it for their audiences? With
the movie, Chris Roberts has changed it to pay more tribute to things like
Das Boot, and by putting in actors like Lillard and Prinze Jr. and Saffron
Burrows, he's aiming to tell the story to the generation of movie goers who
were playing with kid's toys back in 1990 when the thing began. He's put
in the probable romance, and those new fighters as part of it.
Besides which, I'll bet the trailer makes the Dralthi
and Rapiers look better than you might imagine.. as long as you
keep an open mind. Remember.. WC is Roberts' baby, and not
yours. You don't get to decide what it looks like. However, you
can try to influence what the next game has, by posting here.
> I guess you're just praying that Origin still reads this newsgroup and they
>will see what a good ass-kisser you are and will get a job for origin and then
>you can OFFICALLY defend anything bad that someone says about your beloved
>company.
>
>SuperPoder
><Poder Omega>
>ICQ: 15072716
>So cold..... so very cold.....
Hey, he's an optimist - give him credit for that. He looks for the
bright side in most anything. You, on the other hand.. you're the type
who got WCP's script cut in half, because y'all complained so loudly
about how WC4 had 'too much FMV' and then WCP had 'too little
story'.
---
"Clippy?? CLIPPY??"
"You mean I've been afraid of getting my ass chewed out
by a freak who liked being called Clippy?"
- Lt. Max 'Maestro' Garett, Wing Commander: Secret Ops
Edward Pang
>Edward Pang wrote:
>>
>> Heh. Will a 300 MHz one do? ;) I can do scans if
>> I can get photos...
>
>Hehe, anything above 66 would do, my flatbed scanner is attached
>to my old 486 and it takes *FOREVER* to scan anything... I'll have
>access to nicer computers and scanners tommorow, though:)
>
Heh. Send anything else over, and I can email you the
scanned pictures ASAP. That reminds me, I sent an email about
something... =)
SuperPoder
>Look - this is Chris Roberts' baby, and if he's making the Kilrathi green
>with
>yellow stripes, that's his right. Why? Because he made it, and he can
>break any damned 'rule' you have in mind. It's his vision, and always has
>been. You never owned it, even if you had the CDs, the books, the cartoon,
>and even the little hat that came with the WCIII Limited Edition. Basically,
>it's not your universe. You've played in his creation, and always have.
I SAID nothing about the wing commander movie. That was someone else!!! I was
addressing that SOMEONE else was saying how THEY didnt like the way the stuff
looks and how Chris came in all defensive (as always). SO, I'm not saying
anything bad about the movie, in fact, I like the way the drathi looks (not the
rapier though.) So please address that back to the person that was complaining
about the movie. MY problem is that any critizism that is given here is
automatic shot down by Chris, he has much right as I do to tell me off.
I'm not trolling, I'm typing exactly what I'm thinking and that's the
internet...
SuperPoder
SuperPoder
>discussing peoples' views. I don't begin by attacking people
>themselves. That's a key difference.
Yeah its a difference, but does that make you and what does that make me? A
good guy vs a jerk? Hey, if you think me telling you off is rude, I think its
rude that you come in here and try to explain logically why people's opinions
are wrong.
SuperPoder
SuperPoder
>right, when they're wrong? Or not to hear out a different opinion on a
>matter? People are trying to make conversation with others, part of the
>process in doing that is to say something and expect an opposite position,
>then the articipants can trade comments as they build up their "social
>chat". Given your statement you want people to post whatever they want, and
>expect no feedback apart from "You are right" - *gee-whiz* that would make
>for a fun newsgroup...
Well, why wouldnt it make a fun newsgroup? Okay, maybe I am too harsh, but I
appriciate when people say what they think. And no, I dont think that Chris
should leave. Yeah Chris you pretty much politely tell people they are idiots
all the time. They will say something bad (or as you some put it, "complain"
about something they have no controll over) and you will reply with an
explanation of how a person is wrong. Need examples? Just go through posts
like "FMV-CGI", "No actors in Next WC?" and read your responses pretty much
telling people that they are foolish in thinking that CGI will be bad (or not
as good) as the previous FMV. And earlier in this thread telling people that
the action figures aren't stupid looking (i.e. blair's gun) because they are
just like pictures from the novel... they are still stupid looking to that
person regarless of how many times they have been drawn.
I myself think that the CGI is going to be a great thing for the next WC
game, but if i see one saying "OH NOO NO FMW, WAHHH" I'm not going to tell them
that the either one is going to be bad or worse without even seeing a demo.
SuperPoder
Sean Tudor
<CRei...@aol.com> wrote:
> Are you kidding? :) Go and look at the main CIC news page. Over the
>pask week there are twenty-five News Updates. Not one is from Origin or
>an Origin source.
My apologies - I haven't checked your website in the last couple of
weeks.
------------------------
SX Glory
<19981207001245...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>So you believe that the best thing to do is let people believe they're
>>right, when they're wrong? Or not to hear out a different opinion on a
>>matter? People are trying to make conversation with others, part of the
>>process in doing that is to say something and expect an opposite position,
>>then the articipants can trade comments as they build up their "social
>>chat". Given your statement you want people to post whatever they want,
and
>>expect no feedback apart from "You are right" - *gee-whiz* that would make
>>for a fun newsgroup...
>Well, why wouldnt it make a fun newsgroup? Okay, maybe I am too harsh, but
I
>appriciate when people say what they think. And no, I dont think that
Chris
>should leave.
OK...
>Yeah Chris you pretty much politely tell people they are idiots
>all the time. They will say something bad (or as you some put it,
"complain"
>about something they have no controll over) and you will reply with an
>explanation of how a person is wrong.
Sometimes people are wronf about something, adn people tell them where they
are wrong. Guess what, I've been wrong about things, people told me what was
right, and I gained a bit more knowledge from that. The only time someone
hates being told that they may be wrong, or are offered an opinion that
differes from their own is when they believe they are always right, and
there's is nothing more wrong than that.
>Need examples? Just go through posts
>like "FMV-CGI", "No actors in Next WC?" and read your responses pretty much
>telling people that they are foolish in thinking that CGI will be bad (or
not
>as good) as the previous FMV.
He never says anyone is foolish about believing that CGI FMV may be worse
than live-action FMV, he only points out the benefits from switching to CGI
from live-action. By pointing out some things that someone may not have
considered originally the other person can evaluate the new info and update
his/her position given the new information.
>And earlier in this thread telling people that
>the action figures aren't stupid looking (i.e. blair's gun) because they
are
>just like pictures from the novel... they are still stupid looking to that
>person regarless of how many times they have been drawn.
I wouldn't call saying that he likes the action figures is calling someone
stupid for disliking them. You are a bit 'extreme' in your views of what he
actually says, one might think you have personal feelings that are affecting
your choice of comments.
> I myself think that the CGI is going to be a great thing for the next WC
>game, but if i see one saying "OH NOO NO FMW, WAHHH" I'm not going to tell
them
>that the either one is going to be bad or worse without even seeing a demo.
Why not, how will you start a conversation if you don't post your opinion?
Personally I like FMV a lot, but I won't deny that there are merits to CGI,
and actually more benefits for the player. If nobody posts that opposite
opinion though, no conversation will take place, and any potential gain for
all readers of the newsgroup is lost.
Edward Pang
Your criticism automatically shot down? You posted an opinion.
He replied. Then you called him an ass-kisser. This is flaming, and flaming
is trolling.
---
Edward Pang
>> And trolling is part of the internet. All through this thread I'm
>>discussing peoples' views. I don't begin by attacking people
>>themselves. That's a key difference.
>
>Yeah its a difference, but does that make you and what does that make me? A
>good guy vs a jerk? Hey, if you think me telling you off is rude, I think its
>rude that you come in here and try to explain logically why people's opinions
>are wrong.
>
He stated that he disagreed with you. Then you called him
an ass-kisser. Now you're accusing him of telling people what to think,
when he presented what you did - an opinion. Please.. get a FAQ.
Kris Vanhecke
>Kris Vanhecke wrote in message <74eu3p$dd8$1...@xenon.inbe.net>...
>>Death heeft geschreven in bericht
<366dcc26...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>>>> One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people to
>>>> see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was no
>>>> CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd go see
>>>> it after it came out barely noticing these things you're making a big
>>>> deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>
>>>If you use that as a justification to shut down CIC, we'll hunt you
>>>down and do all sorts of painful things to you, Chris. Likewise to
>>>the other CIC staffers.
>
>>>Ever heard of Vlad the Impaler?
>
>>When there's something weird, and it don't look good.... Who you gonna
>call?
>>Ghostbusters! :)
>
>Umm... that would be Vlad Tepes, aka Vlad the impaler, aka Dracula... not
>the Ghostbuster 2 villain.
No, he too was Vlad the Impaler. Vigo was just his nickname.
Kris Vanhecke
>Kris Vanhecke wrote:
>> There's a huge difference here. The cats played a very small role in
>> WC4, and we probably won't see them that often in the movie either. So
>> I can live with that. But we'll see the ships (and specifically the
>> Dralthi) a hell of a lot more. And it bothers me that it looks so odd.
>
> How is the movie Dralthi any more odd than the WC3 Dralthi compared
>to WC1's?
I feel there's a large difference. I didn't even know it was a dralthi at
first.
Kris Vanhecke
SuperPoder
>an ass-kisser. Now you're accusing him of telling people what to think,
>when he presented what you did - an opinion. Please.. get a FAQ.
Heh, he's an ass-kisser because he always backs up origin, but sure, that's his
opinion. But that is my opinion. Get a FAQ?
>ELD (Edward Pang)
>Date: 12/6/98 11:31 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <366b6896.18605789@news>
>Your criticism automatically shot down? You posted an opinion.
>He replied. Then you called him an ass-kisser. This is flaming, and flaming
>is trolling.
Flaming is not trolling... they are similar but not the same, although most
of you here probably think I'm a jackass we can agree on right? I admit I was
flaming him but I wasnt trolling.
SuperPoder
SX Glory
Kris Vanhecke wrote in message <74fpdr$4v7$1...@xenon.inbe.net>...
>SX Glory heeft geschreven in bericht <74f0v1$4gb$1...@delphi.dsuper.net>...
<snip>
>>>>Ever heard of Vlad the Impaler?
>>>When there's something weird, and it don't look good.... Who you gonna
>>call?
>>>Ghostbusters! :)
>>Umm... that would be Vlad Tepes, aka Vlad the impaler, aka Dracula... not
>>the Ghostbuster 2 villain.
>No, he too was Vlad the Impaler. Vigo was just his nickname.
The GB2 villain was a character based on Vlad... that's about as close as
you can relate him to Vlad.
SuperPoder
>
>Chris Reid
Heh, well then.... sorry about all that. Bad day and all. Oh well, now you
all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they have someone to
dislike!
SuperPoder
SX Glory
>SuperPoder wrote:
>> Heh, well then.... sorry about all that. Bad day and all. Oh well,
>> now you all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they
>> have someone to dislike!
> I really don't understand people who get off on garnering this sort
>of attention..
Wouldn't you be worried if you did understand? I know I would...
SX Glory
<19981207011502...@ng-bw1.aol.com>...
>> Then you're worse than what you claimed I was.
>>
>>Chris Reid
>
you
>all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they have someone to
>dislike!
Not really, disliking someone doesn't make anyone happier. And either way
'twas your comments under attack.
SX Glory
<19981207010057...@ng-bw1.aol.com>...
>> He stated that he disagreed with you. Then you called him
>>an ass-kisser. Now you're accusing him of telling people what to think,
>>when he presented what you did - an opinion. Please.. get a FAQ.
>
>Heh, he's an ass-kisser because he always backs up origin, but sure, that's
his
>opinion. But that is my opinion. Get a FAQ?
One can argue that the only reason you're calling him an ass-kisser is to
gain attention to yourself, a sign of insecurity; Of course another may
argue that you may simply be jealous because he receives more respect here
from people that he's never met than you have ever received, with the
apparent attitude problem that you portray it's obvious why. Or there may be
some other reason, in any case by portraying yourself as you do, the image
that comes acroos is that of a petty person. Make a note that all I've
written is based on the image you are promoting of yourself with your
particular comments.
SuperPoder
>of attention..
>
Heh, I didnt say all that because of a bad day, I'm ending it because of it.
If was still feeling good I'd still be throwing back and forth at ya....
another day though, perhaps.
PoderOmega
>>> now you all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they
>>> have someone to dislike!
>
>>of attention..
>
>
>SX Glory
How about you guys come to alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo? You guys are
aren't bigshots there like you are here. Make fun of me for there for a bit,
and see what happens. It will help you understand if you want to perform a
science experiment.
PoderOmega
<SuperPoder>
Wouldn't you like to be a Poder too?
http://members.aol.com/poderomega
Death
(PoderOmega) scrawled the following, in the chapter titled
alt.games.wing-commander:
> >Wouldn't you be worried if you did understand? I know I would...
> >
> >SX Glory
>
> How about you guys come to alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo? You guys are
> aren't bigshots there like you are here. Make fun of me for there for a bit,
> and see what happens. It will help you understand if you want to perform a
> science experiment.
Setting aside for a second the cheesy killfile evasion technique of an
alternate screenname, when someone is being an ass, like you are, the
newsgroup in question is irrelevant.
Now if you were talking about using an emulator to play the SNES
version of WC on one's home computer, then the newsgroup might matter.
Guess what, though?
We're talking about you being an asshole, not NES/SNES emulators.
^K to the rescue (of my time)...
SubCrid Death
ICQ UIN: 3908950 <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
LOAF's Merry Guild: <http://www.loaf.pi.se/loaf/guild.html>
SX Glory
<74fsm6$5er$4...@esel.cosy.sbg.ac.at>...
>Death wrote:
>> M$ is connected to DA, though. Hell, how do we know that M$ isn't
>> looking to extend their empire into movies? ("Why hide it then?" you
>> ask? Two words: Plausible Deniability. If it flops, they can slip
>> away unharmed.)
>Ah, Bill Gates spends more time in front of the DOJ than with his family
>right now ;) , maybe he does not want another problem. You know
>something like: "The WingCommander movie is an integral part of our new
>WIN2000 OS... <BG>
At least he's giving something back (that very large donation he made).
Could simply be a pr move, or is using it for tax purposes, but either way
he's doing something few people with his money are (I'd like to see any
number of the carbon clubbers make any similar type of donation).
SX Glory
<19981207042918...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>Christopher Reid wrote in message <366B72...@aol.com>...
>>>SuperPoder wrote:
>>>> Heh, well then.... sorry about all that. Bad day and all. Oh well,
>>>> now you all have someone to dislike, and everyone's happy when they
>>>> have someone to dislike!
>>> I really don't understand people who get off on garnering this sort
>>>of attention..
>>Wouldn't you be worried if you did understand? I know I would...
>How about you guys come to alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo?
Unless there's a WC or Privateer chat it would be a waste of our times.
>You guys are aren't bigshots there like you are here.
Ahh, so it is jealousy that's driving you to make the comments you are.
>Make fun of me for there for a bit, and see what happens.
Who's making fun of you, we are simply making obserations based on your
comments. If you didn't act like a jerk (that lyric from that song pops in
my mind ~why don't jerks know their jerks~) maybe you wouldn't find us
commenting on your actions which are jerk-like.
>It will help you understand if you want to perform a
>science experiment.
Help us understand what, that you are or aren't acting like a jerk there?
Grow up boy, a man would stand his ground and face the music...
SX Glory
<19981207020959...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>> I really don't understand people who get off on garnering this sort
>>of attention..
>Heh, I didnt say all that because of a bad day, I'm ending it because of
it.
So you are admitting that you are a 'petty' boy?
>If was still feeling good I'd still be throwing back and forth at ya....
>another day though, perhaps.
Back where I come from we have a name for that... what was it... oh yes a
LOSER. Because you obviously don't know when to quit, and don't realize how
stupid you end up looking because of it.
Edward Pang
>
> > He stated that he disagreed with you. Then you called him
> >an ass-kisser. Now you're accusing him of telling people what to think,
> >when he presented what you did - an opinion. Please.. get a FAQ.
>
> Heh, he's an ass-kisser because he always backs up origin, but sure, that's his
> opinion. But that is my opinion. Get a FAQ?
Sure. Check out Yahoo under 'Netiquette'. They've got
stuff about how to post and how not to insult people on that
thing. Calling someone an ass-kisser for disagreeing with you
all the time counts as an insult. He has a different opinion than
you do. Live with it.
> >ELD (Edward Pang)
> >Date: 12/6/98 11:31 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: <366b6896.18605789@news>
>
> >Your criticism automatically shot down? You posted an opinion.
> >He replied. Then you called him an ass-kisser. This is flaming, and flaming
> >is trolling.
> Flaming is not trolling... they are similar but not the same, although most
> of you here probably think I'm a jackass we can agree on right? I admit I was
> flaming him but I wasnt trolling.
>
So making flames isn't making yourself a troll? Hmm...
go get that Netiquette FAQ. =)
SuperPoder
>alternate screenname, when someone is being an ass, like you are, the
>newsgroup in question is irrelevant.
>
>Now if you were talking about using an emulator to play the SNES
>version of WC on one's home computer, then the newsgroup might matter.
>Guess what, though?
>
>We're talking about you being an asshole, not NES/SNES emulators.
>
>^K to the rescue (of my time)...
>
>SubCrid Death
>ICQ UIN: 3908950 <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
>LOAF's Merry Guild: <http://www.loaf.pi.se/loaf/guild.html>
LOL! Heh, I totally didnt change to PoderOmega to get around the kill filters,
I didnt think that anyone would be doing that yet anyway. Oh boy, that was
funnny. I know we aren't talking about emulators, SX Glory justed was asking
what it was like to be me so I refered him somewhere. I'm sure he was kidding
and I the same, so geez, dont kill me.
SX Glory
<19981207144932...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>Setting aside for a second the cheesy killfile evasion technique of an
>>alternate screenname, when someone is being an ass, like you are, the
>>newsgroup in question is irrelevant.
>>Now if you were talking about using an emulator to play the SNES
>>version of WC on one's home computer, then the newsgroup might matter.
>>Guess what, though?
>>We're talking about you being an asshole, not NES/SNES emulators.
>LOL! Heh, I totally didnt change to PoderOmega to get around the kill
filters,
>I didnt think that anyone would be doing that yet anyway.
Why would anyone else want to change their nicks?
>Oh boy, that was
>funnny. I know we aren't talking about emulators, SX Glory justed was
asking
>what it was like to be me so I refered him somewhere.
Obviously you have a low comprehension of the english language. Chris said
"I really don't understand people who get off on garnering this sort of
attention.." referring to you who was enjoying insulting people and then
getting "spanked" by others in the group. I said "Wouldn't you be worried if
you did understand? I know I would..." which means that if someone
understood your motives, they should be worried because they might be like
you; I have no doubt that nobody interpreted it as "I want to know more
about you", all I need to know about you has been presented in here by you.
It speaks low of you if you behave appropriately elsewhere and
inapproprately here.
>I'm sure he was kidding
>and I the same, so geez, dont kill me.
Stop confusing yourself, the way you act nobody likes you, and deluding
yourself into thinking people are interested enough to learn more about you
isn't helping you at all...
Delance
>> >Yeah... warning, though, the scans sorta suck ass:) I'm going to
>> >try and scan 'em at a higher resolution tommorow, when I'll have
>> >access to a computer that's a wee bit faster...:)
>>
>> A better scan of an ugly thing might make it worse! ;)
>
> Except.. they're not ugly. The figures are detailed and look better
>in the magazine..
Well, my point hold, if they are ugly, they will look worse with
detail. If they are not.. Well.. Let's wait and see..
>> Delance <<
fix adress for e-mail
Martin Kuek
games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
strike me as being scary.
Christopher Reid
>
> How about you guys come to alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo? You guys
> are aren't bigshots there like you are here. Make fun of me for there
> for a bit, and see what happens. It will help you understand if you
You don't seem to understand. :) We're not here to make fun of
people. We don't go from newsgroup to newsgroup attacking people.
We're Wing Commander fans, so that's why we're here.
Chris Reid Wing Commander CIC
Chri...@wcnews.com http://www.wcnews.com
Christopher Reid
>
> Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in
> previous WC games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they
> didn't really strike me as being scary.
They were probably least scary in WC4 than any other product. One,
because they're newly defeated and asking for our help, and two, they
didn't really spend the money to make a good model for Melek.
SX Glory
>Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in previous WC
>games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
>strike me as being scary.
They looked a lot better in WC3.
SX Glory
>> Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in
>> previous WC games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they
>> didn't really strike me as being scary.
> They were probably least scary in WC4 than any other product. One,
>because they're newly defeated and asking for our help, and two, they
>didn't really spend the money to make a good model for Melek.
Out of curiosity, anyone have a clue as to what happened to the old 'model'
of Melek (WC3)?
Christopher Reid
>
> Christopher Reid wrote:
> > They were probably least scary in WC4 than any other product.
> >One, because they're newly defeated and asking for our help, and two,
> >they didn't really spend the money to make a good model for Melek.
>
> Out of curiosity, anyone have a clue as to what happened to the old
> 'model' of Melek (WC3)?
I don't know about Melek.. but Thrakhath is sitting in a box in the
hills of Austin.
Christopher Reid
>
> >You don't seem to understand. :) We're not here to make fun of
> >people. We don't go from newsgroup to newsgroup attacking people.
> >We're Wing Commander fans, so that's why we're here.
>
> is attacking me in other posts that have nothing to do with this
> thread. Does someone even agree with me on that?
I do! And I'm fully behind SX's posts in support of fans like myself
and Dundradal who are attacked for no reason in other threads by a
certain somebody..
SuperPoder
>people. We don't go from newsgroup to newsgroup attacking people.
>We're Wing Commander fans, so that's why we're here.
>
Heh, I'm a Wing Commander fan too. I'm just sorry now that SX Glory is
attacking me in other posts that have nothing to do with this thread. Does
someone even agree with me on that?
SuperPoder
Martin Kuek
In article <74hqnj$out$1...@delphi.dsuper.net>, "SX Glory" <sxg...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>Martin Kuek wrote in message <366bc...@rpi.au>...
>>Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in previous WC
>>games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
>>strike me as being scary.
>
>They looked a lot better in WC3.
>
SX Glory
>>>Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in previous
WC
>>>games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
>>>strike me as being scary.
>>They looked a lot better in WC3.
>They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
Who knows, maybe they'll release plush Kilrathi dolls, or squeezie Melek,
Hobees and Thrakath toys...
Edward Pang
>Martin Kuek wrote in message <366cb...@rpi.au>...
>>>>Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in previous
>WC
>>>>games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
>>>>strike me as being scary.
>
>>>They looked a lot better in WC3.
>
>>They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
>
>Who knows, maybe they'll release plush Kilrathi dolls, or squeezie Melek,
>Hobees and Thrakath toys...
>
Tickle-Me-Thrakath? =) "Tickle me and die, human coward!"
---
"Clippy?? CLIPPY??"
"You mean I've been afraid of getting my ass chewed out
by a freak who liked being called Clippy?"
- Lt. Max 'Maestro' Garett, Wing Commander: Secret Ops
Rajan Ragupathy
>
> They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
Takes all kinds, I suppose. Personally, I'd much rather have cuddled
Panther, but that's just me. ;-)
Best, Raptor
--
Those who master others have force
Those who master themselves have strength.
-Confucius
Martin Kuek
Delance
>> Out of curiosity, anyone have a clue as to what happened to the old
>> 'model' of Melek (WC3)?
>
> I don't know about Melek.. but Thrakhath is sitting in a box in the
>hills of Austin.
"Thrakhath sitting in a box in the hills of Austin". Sounds like a
good name for a music.
Delance
>Martin Kuek wrote:
>>
>> They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
>
>Takes all kinds, I suppose. Personally, I'd much rather have cuddled
>Panther, but that's just me. ;-)
An actual size panther doll like the ones that bud bundy had? That's
just kinky.
Delance
> Tickle-Me-Thrakath? =) "Tickle me and die, human coward!"
LOL
Delance
>>Just a smal point here. Were the Kilrathi really that scary in previous WC
>>games? The only time I've seen Kilrathi is in WC4 and they didn't really
>>strike me as being scary.
>
>They looked a lot better in WC3.
Kilrathi on WC4 are peaceful Kilrathi. Not meant to be scary.
Delance
>They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
On WC4 he's a peaceful cat. You would not do that on WC3!
Delance
>>They look cute in WC4. I wated to cuddle Melek :-).
>
>Who knows, maybe they'll release plush Kilrathi dolls, or squeezie Melek,
>Hobees and Thrakath toys...
Kilrathi toys? What it will do, squeezie it and it will rip apart the
confed soldier toy? No, no, it will say "Death to all humans", "No
humans will survive", "We shall destroy Terra" and worse. What a nice
gift.
SX Glory
>"SX Glory" <sxg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
They're simply Losers... and from what we've seen in prophecy they're not
that peaceful...
david uttley
movie thinking it will suck you tend to like it all the better. If the
movie's good anyway.
Christopher Reid <CRei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:366ACE...@aol.com...
>Kris Vanhecke wrote:
>>
>> Christopher Reid wrote:
>> > One of the biggest drawbacks of the CIC is that it allows people
>> >to see this stuff early and worry and lament about it. If there was
>> >no CIC, and you had no pre-conceived notions about the movie, you'd
>> >go see it after it came out barely noticing these things you're
>> >making a big deal of today and think it was a great movie..
>>
>> Like I wouldn't notice the hairless cats or the weird ships...
>> I'd make just as big a deal about it.
>
> Of course you'd notice it, but you wouldn't be making a stink about
>it. If the CIC had been around and posted a picture of Melek from WC4
>in late 1995 I know there'd be all sorts of posts talking about how much
>WC4 would suck.
SX Glory
>At least they"ll get it out of there system now. I find that if you go to a
>movie thinking it will suck you tend to like it all the better. If the
>movie's good anyway.
Why would someone want to go see a movie if they thought it was gonna suck?
Edward Pang
Give me some time and I'll try putting together a song
about Blair leaving Thrakath sitting in a box in the hills of Austin. ;)
Delance
>>Kilrathi on WC4 are peaceful Kilrathi. Not meant to be scary.
>
>They're simply Losers... and from what we've seen in prophecy they're not
>that peaceful...
Or maybe the Kilrathi we see on WCP are not the same we see on WCIV.
That were peaceful Kilrathi going to Pascal system. We see fanatical
Sivar warriors on WCP.