joe_collector

Tomb Raider was fun, but I really want to see how Borderlands 2 translates to the Vita. I am also hoping that with the PS4 and Xbox One effectively being PCs, that developers will port over some older PC games. I would love to have access to some PC classics on PSN as well as some PS3 games that also have PC counterparts, like the original Borderlands. At least we should get some bonuses for buying paywall'ed mini-PCs for the living room. And yes, I know all about their stupid streaming subscription service, but I'm not that enthused with server-based gaming, other than low-resolution web-, and I am definitely taking a wait-n-see attitude with this.

Yeah, 20 actual retail games, 10 PS3/PS2 "classics" and 70 psn minis and indies. If Sony & co. actually releases 100 *brand new* retail disc games for the PS4 in 2014 (not counting PS2/PS3 retreads), then I'll buy 2 PS4's.

But retroactive continuity is not just a comics term, and was in use prior to that in other forms of media, like serials and novels. I can remember the idea being brought up in terms of the Narnia series, which was retcon city in some parts.

No problem, and I still have an unopened copy of Prototype 2 sitting in the backlog. I wonder if it'll be better or worse?

No idea, but it's been around for a long time, back to when novelists used to change their character's backstory in subsequent books.

MVS stamps are nothing compared to the old character stamps in the GA books - I wonder how many of those were clipped out of ultra-expensive books?

But that was just a retcon and when Jean was supposed to be Phoenix, it was still noted as "1st Appearance of Phoenix" in OS.

Since you so vehemently disagree, please do *not* invite me over to one of your weekend parties.

But that was a pretty weak retcon, right up there with the coke-fueled "Norman Osborne digging himself out of the ground and hiding in France for decades" stupidity.

When I read this kind of comment, it makes me want to puke. You people are all so enthralled with the "market value" (like that means anything) it really makes me sick that some people actually equate value with importance, *especially* when we're talking about books from totally different eras. I think I'm about done in this thread, so you can go back to fondling your slabs and talking about ROI and all that important comic stuff.

I don't think THAT book would ever be expensive. That's the rare "Profanity Variant" I like to post sometimes.

Sorry, but that doesn't agree with the known rules of time and space, and I have never seen those issues noted like that. It's always "First Appearance of Him" with notation of "(Becomes Warlock)" or similar notation in brackets. The Warlock character design, name, costume, powers, and Soul Gem did not exist until 1972, so it's impossible for Warlock to appear earlier.

So what's up with this book being so expensive? Is it rumors of the movie Bucky/Winter Soldier being a version of the 50's Bucky Jack Monroe or just more Nomad stuff?

And the other poll is equally insipid, as Warlock did not exist until MP 1, and there is no mention of him in any of the FF or Thor magazines. FF 66/67 and Thor 165 are the first appearances of Him, not Warlock, and the point being debated is whether MP 1 deserves a "First Appearance of Warlock" notation rather than the totally-illogical "Origin of Warlock". That's it, Get it?

OMG, that's got to be the dumbest poll I've ever seen, and whoever created that should be beaten to a pulp. No one ever disputed whether Roy Thomas took the Speedo-wearing, caveman Him and used that template to develop the new superhero Warlock, just as Greer Nelson is both The Cat and Tigra, only that the transformation is so severe, that Him does not resemble Warlock is any tangible way. They just took Him as the clay for Warlock because of copyright issues, and wanted to transform a character they already owned. Warlock was its own unique concept.

If he a) got new powers, b) got new power accessory (Soul Gem) c) got a new personality, d) got a new costume, e) got a new world to play around with and most importantly of all, f) stuck with that same basic character design for decades, then yes, I would agree. Him - Warlock is exactly the same as The Cat - Tigra, and I guess no one will dispute that first appearance until a Tigra movie gets announced and everyone holding Cat #1 NM issues will start in.

Then please don't go back and try and put words in my mouth - if you remember my comments, then you know my hatred for Modern hacks has nothing to do with Marvel or its history. It's kind of like giving comics to your younger sibling and he rips them all to shreds - Marvel Modern hacks.

I see I have an angry SA troll following me around - time to go outside and get some air. Like it or not, as more people actually start to understand what is INSIDE the books, Marvel Premiere 1 will continue to gather more heat and I can almost guarantee an official "First Appearance of Warlock" notation at some point in the future. People aren't stupid and there is virtually no correlation between a Speedo-wearing caveman and the superhero Warlock, other than they both came from the same cocoon.

Oh man, sometimes it doesn't pay to check old auction wins. I remember finding a nice seller on eBay who was offering up newsstand-fresh comics and after buying a few ASM runs, I locked in on his auctions. I bought quite a few Avengers books, including 162-171 (for 164-166 - beautiful copies), but skipped the 170's for 182-191.

I don't know why you wasted time posting that, as no one is disputing that Him transformed into the new Warlock, gained new powers, a new world, new personality, new costume and a new Soul Gem, effectively becoming a superhero for the first time. Just as we don't dispute that The Cat and Tigra both used to be Greer Nelson,yet they are two different characters with two separate and noted first appearances. From Marvel.com: First Appearance: (As Him) Fantastic Four #66 (1967) (as Warlock) Marvel Premiere #1 (1972) Marvel Wiki: First appearance (as Him) Fantastic Four #66-67 (Sept.–Oct. 1967) (as Adam Warlock) Marvel Premiere #1 (April 1972) Created by: (Him) Stan Lee Jack Kirby (Adam Warlock) Roy Thomas Gil Kane

Nope, that was Him, a Speedo-wearing caveman that Marvel later revived and transformed into the superhero Warlock. Like The Cat to Tigra. Same character. just built upon no matter how you try to spin it. Yeah sorry I actually READ the comics, not look at plastic tombs. And Marvel.com agrees with me, stating MP 1 is the FIRST APPEARANCE OF WARLOCK - look it up. Disagreeing with the company who publishes the books = Major Fail. I have a total of 8 slabs in my collection. I too actually read my books (thumbs u Then you need to read them again. I have them all, and the Speedo-wearing caveman has absolutely nothing to do with the Soul Gem-wearing, red costume, new powers, Warlock of MP 1-on. As someone else aptly stated, it's like the transformation of The Cat to Tigra - same person, but two different characters, powers, costumes and names.

Probably 8, my "clipping career" was right at the start and it only lasted for that first month for me. I started buying superhero comics at around 6 or so, which is probably why the PF books are so attractive to me - I see some PF covers and it's like I can remember them on the spinner rack (looking through a dusty window), especially some romance books (I used to *really* wonder WTF was up with those ).

Nope, that was Him, a Speedo-wearing caveman that Marvel later revived and transformed into the superhero Warlock. Like The Cat to Tigra. Same character. just built upon no matter how you try to spin it. Yeah sorry I actually READ the comics, not look at plastic tombs. And Marvel.com agrees with me, stating MP 1 is the FIRST APPEARANCE OF WARLOCK - look it up. Disagreeing with the company who publishes the books = Major Fail.

Nope, that was Him, a Speedo-wearing caveman that Marvel later revived and transformed into the superhero Warlock. Like The Cat to Tigra.

Too bad I was so concerned about the QP, as I passed on a few HG copies with white borders, etc.