They can balance for both at once (which means you use guardian health as your baseline for weapon damage balance, and adjust pve health and stats accordingly - the weapons do the same damage in both modes, and if a gun is too effective in pvp, it will similarly be too effective in pve, and vice versa).

Yes, because the Last Word would be soooo effective in PvE… PvP and PvE are fundamentally different, even if you normalize the health.

Scoff if you must, but I greatly enjoyed TLW in PvE

Now that I've seen milkman vex with a shirt, all I can see is that he isn't wearing pants.

Is there a name for a worse version of that term?

The surprisingly-not-terrible Trolls movie strongly implies that Trolls have genitals (one gets disrobed within the first ten minutes, and careful camera angles obscure what viewers see). Partway through the film, we meet a male character who is established to be completely naked, but is missing some crucial elements:

That was a real headscratcher that kept me awake for a while. Glad to finally get that one off my chest...

They can balance for both at once (which means you use guardian health as your baseline for weapon damage balance, and adjust pve health and stats accordingly - the weapons do the same damage in both modes, and if a gun is too effective in pvp, it will similarly be too effective in pve, and vice versa).

Yes, because the Last Word would be soooo effective in PvE… PvP and PvE are fundamentally different, even if you normalize the health.

You're an editor. Think about that time you got network notes asking you to add a scene back in, but that scene had a bunch of stuff in it that wasn't explained there, but was explained in another scene, so you have to add that one back in, and then there's a new character who seems important but just disappears, so you add another scene to explain what's up with that guy...

I understand what you mean, but I have not had that happen. For one… I don't deal with networks working in film. Directors and Producers are generally smart people who would understand the undertaking of what you say.

Except when it comes to Comic Book Movies.

Oh man. The show I'm on right now (for which my original contract has been extended 8 times) has had soooo many revisions just to change the style of the graphics. We're dealing with notes from:

- IP holder
- Parent company of IP holder
- Network
- Our EPs
- Parent company of our company

And most of the notes contradict one another. The final cuts of some episodes are virtually shot for shot identical to cuts five note sessions ago. And this is for a game show. TV is just a series of people who want to make a mundane note to "put their stamp on it" without actually risking the enterprise along the way. God forbid you ever work on a Bravo show; their producers have quotas for the number of notes they have to give. You know, because more is better, right? Creative decisions shouldn't be made by non-creative people, imo, but apparently if you were the CEO of any other company, and then got made CEO of a TV studio, that means you know what makes for good TV.

I have a google doc to track the notes because 30+ pages per 38 minutes of show was the norm.

I shouldn't complain - their bad decisions keep me employed since my primary function is as a fixer of messes.

Of course you can always code a solution to the problem you've just manufactured, but now you're falling into "design bloat." At some point you need to choose to streamline the systems and make things easier for your players instead of more complex. Complex interaction in gameplay? YES. Complex controls? Probably not. Complex menu system and UI? Hell no. You do not want your players to spend more time in their menus than in the actual game.

There is a huge problem as it is. PvP balance changes impact PvE. This is bad. The solution is to let you have PvP and PvE loadouts, with the flick of a tab. You wouldn't actually spend any more time in your menu than you already do now. Especially if the tab was auto selected depending on your current activity and lobby. Explain to me why you'd spend more time in your menu. In fact you would spend LESS time, since you wouldn't have to swap weapons when you enter PvP as you do now.

Now:
1. Exit PvE
2. Switch your gear. Equip the guns you want to use in crucible.
3. Enter PvP

My idea:
1. Exit PvE
2. There is no step 2 since all your PvP guns are already equipped in your PvP load out from last time.
3. Enter PvP

I see. Automatically use your assigned gear for each mode when you switch (saves time in menus) but now you have two pages of equipped gear. Does each page get its own 9 slots of backup items? Or 4.5 slots per page? Shared 9 slots which would let you equip Pve weapons on your pvp tab, etc.? Again, design bloat. All of this takes time away from deciding how to make the actual game good, and spends time coding and designing the UI. It's not a bad system, and many games (Diablo, Dragon age) use weapon tabbing to allow for alternate loadouts, so there are examples to draw from (which makes designing easier). This is better than simply having the same existing UI and two sets of gear, which is what you seemed to be initially proposing.

I have to ask though, is this where you want the team to spend their time? They've already got a single loadout system in place where the weapons work in both game modes with minor tweaks.

I know, I know, you don't think "minor tweaks" cuts it because changing the weapon for PvP (necessary to foster competition) nerfs the gun for PvE, effectively breaking it. Understood. That being said... I've long held that D1 was balanced incorrectly as a result of being designed as PvE first with PvP added later (saw that in an interview I believe, no Raga, I don't have a link). D2 benefits from the first generation here: They can balance for both at once (which means you use guardian health as your baseline for weapon damage balance, and adjust pve health and stats accordingly - the weapons do the same damage in both modes, and if a gun is too effective in pvp, it will similarly be too effective in pve, and vice versa).

And... I'd rather have the team working on unified balance rather than additional UI elements. Personal preference. I think your system as you've described it here, works as well.

You still haven't told me how you found Charlotte as the closest near me.

https://www.imax.com/news/experience-dunkirk-imax-70mm-film-and-imax-laser

Scroll down to IMAX 70mm locations. Only one is listed in NC. Cross reference on Fandango and it confirms.

Finally. Thanks!

Now we can get back to talking about Bungie and the 4K train!

My take is simple: In the next year I may buy a TV big enough and sit close enough to it to make a difference. Otherwise, I'm maninly interested in HDR.

Will Weird Al be singing about Kermit's 2000 inch TV?

Now that I've seen milkman vex with a shirt, all I can see is that he isn't wearing pants.

I'll be driving through Atlanta on August 30th or September 1st. I'm only going to be in Florida for a month; then I have to go back home to Michigan. We should hook up somehow. Make a day trip down here! I'll see what I can scrounge together for dough and we can do a DBO Disney field trip.

And Vortech said film IMAX theaters weren't replacing film with digital.

FWIW, I said I didn't think any theater had done that. I hadn't heard of it happening, and it's a costly downgrade. If I mislead you, I apologize.

Okay, please share sources. I know you're in the business so you probably know stuff just because, but surely there are websites that make it easy to find out things like how different films should be viewed ideally.

In general you don't have to worry too much about it. The only one that's not in the 35mm aspect ratios that the vast majority of theaters support is the 15/70mm movies and those are pretty darn rare. IMAX.com is a decent way to find out what movies that are coming up that were filmed with those cameras. For the rest of it, you can just decide based on theater technology preference. Cody put his list, and I mostly agree (I'm assuming his list was specifically for the movie Dunkirk), but I'll make a general list of my preferences that incorporates the branding and such that you are more likely to see advertised:

1. IMAX Laser
2. Dolby Cinema / AMC Prime with Dolby Cinema /
3. IMAX Digital / IMAX 2D or 3D / The IMAX Experience / (annoyingly, the theater chains don't make a good effort to specify so you will see things like) IMAX at AMC or IMAX at Regal even though it's not using 15/70
4. AMC Prime (but not Dolby cinema) or RPX (these are the upgraded theater brands for theater chains, and the only mean whatever the theaters feel like they should mean at any given time)
5. If you can find a "THX Certified" theater anymore that's a good thing, but very rare, and at thins point might actually suggest that the tech is fairly old. Since almost lighting is distributed on film I'm putting this last.
6. ok, I guess last is actually everything else. Make decisions based on non-movie attributes like location, concessions, seating plan and such.

You're an editor. Think about that time you got network notes asking you to add a scene back in, but that scene had a bunch of stuff in it that wasn't explained there, but was explained in another scene, so you have to add that one back in, and then there's a new character who seems important but just disappears, so you add another scene to explain what's up with that guy...

I understand what you mean, but I have not had that happen. For one… I don't deal with networks working in film. Directors and Producers are generally smart people who would understand the undertaking of what you say.

Except when it comes to Comic Book Movies.

Of course you can always code a solution to the problem you've just manufactured, but now you're falling into "design bloat." At some point you need to choose to streamline the systems and make things easier for your players instead of more complex. Complex interaction in gameplay? YES. Complex controls? Probably not. Complex menu system and UI? Hell no. You do not want your players to spend more time in their menus than in the actual game.

There is a huge problem as it is. PvP balance changes impact PvE. This is bad. The solution is to let you have PvP and PvE loadouts, with the flick of a tab. You wouldn't actually spend any more time in your menu than you already do now. Especially if the tab was auto selected depending on your current activity and lobby. Explain to me why you'd spend more time in your menu. In fact you would spend LESS time, since you wouldn't have to swap weapons when you enter PvP as you do now.

Now:
1. Exit PvE
2. Switch your gear. Equip the guns you want to use in crucible.
3. Enter PvP

My idea:
1. Exit PvE
2. There is no step 2 since all your PvP guns are already equipped in your PvP load out from last time.
3. Enter PvP

Part of being a Disney Parks Nerd is that I go to WDW 4-5 times a year, though, so meeting up is still fairly possible if you're willing to go somewhere the Disney buses would take me. Sometime in October is most likely my next trip.

It would be a nightmare.

Then segregate guns. PvP only and PvE only. Maybe you can use PvE guns in Mayhem or something.

You... WHAT? Again - you'd need twice as much vault space since you'd have twice as many guns and armor sets, and you'd have to change gear every time you switched game modes. Did you not read my posts above at all?

No… there are many solutions to that. You assume that the PvP guns would be as numerous as PvE. It could be as simple as the crucible quartermaster's / Iron Lord / Osiris weapons being PvP only. Those are in your vault now.

Okay, let's say there's only ONE gun for PvE and ONE for PvP, which is absurd, but let's assume it. Same for armor. You still need to full change out your equipped weapons and armor every time you switch modes, and that's poor design imo.

Again there are solutions… like saving your guardian's gear for PvP and PvE separately… when you enter PvP it can switch, and when you enter PvE switch back automatically…

In Diablo 2 this switching was done manually either with clicking a tab, or hitting 'w'. You can now change your second set of gear. So hard.

if you are in a lobby or activity, it could display the appropriate set automatically. If you're in orbit with nothing selected, then you can manually switch between both.

Of course you can always code a solution to the problem you've just manufactured, but now you're falling into "design bloat." You're an editor. Think about that time you got network notes asking you to add a scene back in, but that scene had a bunch of stuff in it that wasn't explained there, but was explained in another scene, so you have to add that one back in, and then there's a new character who seems important but just disappears, so you add another scene to explain what's up with that guy... At some point you need to choose to streamline the systems and make things easier for your players instead of more complex. Complex interaction in gameplay? YES. Complex controls? Probably not. Complex menu system and UI? Hell no. You do not want your players to spend more time in their menus than in the actual game.

That is seriously the least funny, but supposed-to-be funny things I've ever heard. I don't know who thought that was clever, but they were very wrong.

[Source]

So that's why my kid has a huge fan-like head and only one eye… !

That is seriously the least funny, but supposed-to-be funny things I've ever heard. I don't know who thought that was clever, but they were very wrong.

[Source]

Go back to a limited set of predefined weapons with on-map pick-ups. I understand what they're shooting for with making everything carry over between modes, but I honestly hate it. I can't keep up with the sheer variety of guns and perks for one mode, let alone two, so I end up just ignoring PvP.

Simpler is better.

I have real hopes that the removal of "rolls" on guns will alleviate much of the complexity confusion (at least I expect it will for me). A Devil You Know will simply be a Devil You Know, not A Devil You Know with Sureshot, Rangefinder, Rifled Barrel & Hidden Hand.