Eh, Family Guy has gone downhill in recent years, you're not missing much. Not like you were seeking it out in the first place.
South Park though continues to get better and better.
Ah! See that always seemed that way to me... early South Park seemed mostly unwatchable.
Even though I would be inclined to fulfill your wish, there isn't much to submit to I'm afraid... as I mostly see submissiveness, not dominance....
But there is potential here perhaps...
Beautiful, Smart, and Dominant are my defining characteristics.
Thanks for further proving my point that you are delusional and unable to decipher reality with your senses
Beautiful, Smart, and Dominant are my defining characteristics.
Thanks for further proving my point that you are delusional and unable to decipher reality with your senses
Generally speaking (not always), when someone makes extreme demands for a "submission" or as a "submissive" personality (whether male or female), or, whatever, they usually are stating they want a super over the top Alpha female (or male) who micromanages every aspect of their life and direct them everything and projecting the "submissive" part onto this theoretical partner.
The more modest the demands, the more likely that person wants more of that to themselves... generally.
But then again, it's also possible they deviate from that norm, in either direction, with so few categories and social structure to understand these things, it's no wonder people are often confused...
This seemed like it could be an interesting thread, but when I read the last few pages I could only find...
On topic, I really liked Petrovski. I found his monologue more interesting that most.
May I ask who Pretrovski is, so as to perhaps refacilitate my own re-entry to the more direct topic at hand Miss Artifice?
On topic, I really liked Petrovski. I found his monologue more interesting that most.
Indeed.
Interest in a character stems from having respect for or at least understanding of motivation, goals or vision. Or maybe even the character themselves.
As per usual I will now give a Gundam Antagonist overview in comparison to what I mean.
Indeed.
Interest in a character stems from having respect for or at least understanding of motivation, goals or vision. Or maybe even the character themselves.
As per usual I will now give a Gundam Antagonist overview in comparison to what I mean.
Anavel Gato, nicknamed the "Nightmare of Solomon", is one of the most fearsome soldiers in Zeon history. He fights to uphold Zeon's ideals, and is so unrelenting in his pursuits that his power of will alone makes opponents shake in their normal suits. He's also a peerless mobile suit pilot, and his abilities are no better demonstrated than when he wreaks havoc with the stolen Gundam Physalis or GP02. He wipes out an entire Federation fleet with the Gundam's atomic bazooka, and whips protagonist Kou Uraki around with just a beam saber and head vulcans. With or without a mobile weapon, he was a force to be reckoned with.His final moments were particularly memorable for me. The way he fought to the bitter end with that burning fearlessness in his eyes, and the way he chose to go out on his own terms made me develop a deep sense of respect for his character. There weren't many redeeming qualities to him, but they grant understanding, they reveal this is a character who stands by what he believes, speaks what he believes, kills for what he believes, and dies for what he believes ultimately. He is a implacable antagonist, he will either succeed or die.Bioware could do worse then going by the model of Gato who is: I will kill whoever gets in my way to accomplish my goal but at the same time I have ideals and belief and ultimately I do nothing for myself but those ideals. He is nothing but his mission, his obsession, anything human was purged by strife and war. He is not just martial skill but conviction and ultimately antagonists of his caliber are rare, he is no super villain bent on world domination or personal power and wealth, he is principled, in someways even noble.But at the end of the day he is someone you will either be killed by or kill.Spoiler
Haha! Gundam! How about that... well as a manga/anime fan there are plenty of characters could go on about there...
Don't think I've seen that one... I'm only familiar with one of those mid 90s Gundams of some kind or another...
I want them to write the villain as if it was being played by Alan Rickman.
Snape! Snape is a good one... how much less impactful would Harry Potter be without Snape...
He comes on at about 2:30.
Haha! Gundam! How about that... well as a manga/anime fan there are plenty of characters could go on about there...
Don't think I've seen that one... I'm only familiar with one of those mid 90s Gundams of some kind or another...
Ah well that is easily rectified the character comes from Gundam 0083: Stardust Memories
Toonami promo-that bit at the end? 'Zeon will rise again?' That'd be Gato.
As I said good antagonist, even though he was just the underlining under his superior he was the show's true antagonist as he was the Protagonist's chief rival. It goes to show that a Antagonist need not lead a army to be compelling, a valuable lesson I think, Gato is just a random officer in the fleet, abet a very skilled one.
He comes on at about 2:30.
Thank you kindly Miss Artifice! 
He is perhaps a tad prone to assumption regarding people as a whole... as to opposed to those in his kind of world.. but I had to laugh at the "It seems he really did upgrade the ship's defenses!" It's definitely in line with a number of Bioware characters, the kind of chortling taunting type but who can actually back up the talk, which is refreshing.... it's not as compelling or gets people as invested otherwise.... ![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
Ah well that is easily rectified the character comes from Gundam 0083: Stardust Memories
Spoiler
Oh! Well maybe I'll watch it someday,...
As for Aribeth as I was going on about at 4:00 you can sort of see more of her story and ideas/interests etc...
It seems to me she viewed herself as a failure and unfit to judge or fight, after having failed to meet some extreme standard of perfection, which was likely somewhat artificial anyway, that you can only be just or make those decisions if you have been perfect in the face of adversity... which is....... false..... it merely constrains you are fit to judge, maybe an adjustment.. not that you cannot or even should not... ever.. in any capacity.
In retrospect, the portion about "never having loved Fenthick" or wanting that kind of life seemed like harbinger about Bioware generally... that they did not always view romantic desires from a strictly conventional perspective.
This seemed like it could be an interesting thread, but when I read the last few pages I could only find...
I know. I don't know that I've ever seen so many words to say so little.
I want them to write the villain as if it was being played by Alan Rickman.
I've been sad lately that so many people think of Snape and not Hans Gruber.
This seemed like it could be an interesting thread, but when I read the last few pages I could only find...
don't value your opinion as much as you think you do.
Oh make no mistake, I am honored by the interest you have shown, Miss Rose.
(Think you meant to say "we" in that second you though... 
)
I'm sorry to say 
we really know pretty much nothing about ME: Andromeda and it's been that way for a really surprisingly long time... I have no idea what direction they are going in... my sense is with a new galaxy it will be pretty removed from reapers and so on... all we know is the Ship is super big, and the Mako is back...
..whichever direction they go though, I hope they sincerely invest in the person they are fighting against because it definitely makes for a more interesting experience.
On topic, I really liked Petrovsky. I found his monologue more interesting that most.
he was much better in Invasion
he was much better in Invasion
I haven't read that yet, actually. I liked him pretty well in the DLC itself though, so I probably should pick it up.
. I got tired of not!Rommel pretty quickly in the DLC, his comic counterpart was a much better rendition you should check it outI haven't read that yet, actually. I liked him pretty well in the DLC itself though, so I probably should pick it up.
I'd love a villain cut from a similar cloth as Bill 'the Butcher' Cutting, but it would have to be a completely different story from the one Andromeda will probably tell. That sort of villain would work better in a story where the protagonist and the antagonist are opposed for personal reasons, rather than a 'save the galaxy' tale.
What makes or breaks a good Villain seems to be character depth.
KL in ME3, seemed shallow, immature and insecure trying to bang his chest at Shepard. He had very little depth beyond the chestbanging and immaturity.
By comparison, Saren from ME1, while not super Deep, still had opinions, beliefs and goals. All KL seemed to be after was acceptance and respect, like a Child that wasn't getting enough love.
KL seemed more like an irrelevant ****** that I would gun down in a driveby shooting as a collateral on my way to what's actually important.
If they had managed to add some more depth and character to KL then people might have accepted him more even with all that immature chestbanging. He just might have seemed more relevant.
As it came out he was Little more than another irrelevant goon to gun down or cassualy throw asside when he decides to keep bothering you.
So, really, what people dislikes the most about KL is probably the lack of relevance. Someone that insignificant got all that screen time.
What makes or breaks a good Villain seems to be character depth.
KL in ME3, seemed shallow, immature and insecure trying to bang his chest at Shepard. He had very little depth beyond the chestbanging and immaturity.
By comparison, Saren from ME1, while not super Deep, still had opinions, beliefs and goals. All KL seemed to be after was acceptance and respect, like a Child that wasn't getting enough love.
KL seemed more like an irrelevant ****** that I would gun down in a driveby shooting as a collateral on my way to what's actually important.
If they had managed to add some more depth and character to KL then people might have accepted him more even with all that immature chestbanging. He just might have seemed more relevant.
As it came out he was Little more than another irrelevant goon to gun down or cassualy throw asside when he decides to keep bothering you.
So, really, what people dislikes the most about KL is probably the lack of relevance. Someone that insignificant got all that screen time.
That's because Kai Leng was rewritten in haste.
I don't know about his depth being different, but he was a helluva lot more clever in the original script. And he didn't beat his chest. He played his cards close to his chest.
Retour en haut
