Is there such a thing as a good Super Man game?

The old Taito Superman arcade game was alright. It is a beat-em-up quarter muncher, though.

The old Taito Superman arcade game was alright. It is a beat-em-up quarter muncher, though.

RossRichard

That one is good. As is The Death and Return of Superman for SNES & Sega Genesis, which is also a Beat-Em Up based on the comic book story.

I remembered thinking Superman 64 could have had a bit of potential if not for the flying stages that have resulted in many a thrown controller.. Looking back, even that's being far too generous.  Your best bet is to pick up Lego Batman 2 and pretend Superman is the titular character :\

I remembered thinking Superman 64 could have had a bit of potential if not for the flying stages that have resulted in many a thrown controller.. Looking back, even that's being far too generous. Your best bet is to pick up Lego Batman 2 and pretend Superman is the titular character :\

BlendThree

Yeah, I was actually thinking the same thing. It's not "legacy", but the best game I know of in which Superman is a playable character is Lego Batman 2.

-Byshop

I did like the 1987 Superman coin op arcade game. Taito actually made a decent Superman game. But this was never ported to home consoles. Not even on Taito Legends 1 and 2. Sigh I have hope that Superman returns on Xbox 360 would have been a decent Superman game. But this game bombed. So nope not on home consoles Superman has not had a good videogame adaption. I even play Superman on the Sega Genesis. It was only 10% playable.. sigh.

I point you all to this game:

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

MonkeySpot

I did like the 1987 Superman coin op arcade game. Taito actually made a decent Superman game. But this was never ported to home consoles. Not even on Taito Legends 1 and 2. Sigh I have hope that Superman returns on Xbox 360 would have been a decent Superman game. But this game bombed. So nope not on home consoles Superman has not had a good videogame adaption. I even play Superman on the Sega Genesis. It was only 10% playable.. sigh.

Megavideogamer

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

MonkeySpot

[QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

Jag85

Why, because it's not 3D with cutting edge graphics? I played it recently, and it seems like the same game I played when I bought it in 1980 (14 then, 46 now). Still fun, you need to fly around the city, rebuild the bridge, nab Lex Luthor and his henchmen... The city layout (and how to navigate it in a fast way using the subways and other map short-cuts to try and lower your completion time) is still exactly the same...

:|

The concept of "Game Aging" is sort of a joke, to me. A good game (subjective opinion of the individual, of course), back then is a good game now... There is no difference in it, no "shelf life". Game Age is determined by the player, and if you're stuck on dual analog sticks for a first-person shooter, then "GoldenEye" on the N64, or the first "Medal of Honor" games are going to have "not aged well"... But if you talk to some of us who put in countless hours on "GoldenEye", or MoH games, they're the same thing they were back when they were issued. Now, I FAR prefer the dual analog stick for such games, no doubt about it... But i can fire up an N64 and still have a blast with "GoldenEye". Nothing has changed, for me, in appreciating those older games...

;)

They haven't changed, YOU, personally, have... This doesn't make you wrong for your taste shifting, PERSONALLY... But it does make you wrong for assuming other people have changed the same way YOU have changed. So I mean no insult or critique of you, PERSONALLY, but saying "Superman" for the 2600 "hasn't aged well" is solely your perception, and not a scientific, quantifiable fact.

So really, you didn't like "Superman" for the 2600 back then (or were too young back then to form real analysis or opinion), so you don't enjoy it now. I bought the game when it came out. And yes, I could tell a crap game from a good one back then. As most people on the Legacy forum who're old enough to remember those days will likely attest, there were phenominal games AND shovel-ware. We didn't have magazines or websites to give us an over-view, but word got around...

:)

There's NO crime in not liking it, for whatever reason you have... That's certainly not my point. But assuming that a 14yr old kid today couldn't possibly enjoy the game now as I did back in 1980, is appointing one's self the Arbiter of Good Taste, in a way.

I mean you NO disrespect, whatsoever.

[QUOTE="Jag85"][QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

MonkeySpot

Why, because it's not 3D with cutting edge graphics? I played it recently, and it seems like the same game I played when I bought it in 1980 (14 then, 46 now). Still fun, you need to fly around the city, rebuild the bridge, nab Lex Luthor and his henchmen... The city layout (and how to navigate it in a fast way using the subways and other map short-cuts to try and lower your completion time) is still exactly the same...

:|

The concept of "Game Aging" is sort of a joke, to me. A good game (subjective opinion of the individual, of course), back then is a good game now... There is no difference in it, no "shelf life". Game Age is determined by the player, and if you're stuck on dual analog sticks for a first-person shooter, then "GoldenEye" on the N64, or the first "Medal of Honor" games are going to have "not aged well"... But if you talk to some of us who put in countless hours on "GoldenEye", or MoH games, they're the same thing they were back when they were issued. Now, I FAR prefer the dual analog stick for such games, no doubt about it... But i can fire up an N64 and still have a blast with "GoldenEye". Nothing has changed, for me, in appreciating those older games...

;)

They haven't changed, YOU, personally, have... This doesn't make you wrong for your taste shifting, PERSONALLY... But it does make you wrong for assuming other people have changed the same way YOU have changed. So I mean no insult or critique of you, PERSONALLY, but saying "Superman" for the 2600 "hasn't aged well" is solely your perception, and not a scientific, quantifiable fact.

So really, you didn't like "Superman" for the 2600 back then (or were too young back then to form real analysis or opinion), so you don't enjoy it now. I bought the game when it came out. And yes, I could tell a crap game from a good one back then. As most people on the Legacy forum who're old enough to remember those days will likely attest, there were phenominal games AND shovel-ware. We didn't have magazines or websites to give us an over-view, but word got around...

:)

There's NO crime in not liking it, for whatever reason you have... That's certainly not my point. But assuming that a 14yr old kid today couldn't possibly enjoy the game now as I did back in 1980, is appointing one's self the Arbiter of Good Taste, in a way.

I mean you NO disrespect, whatsoever.

Since I was born-and-bred in the so-called "8-bit era" (i.e. the NES and SMS generation), Atari 2600 games just seem a bit too old for my tastes... although, funnily enough, I have no problems enjoying golden-age arcade games of that same era. The 2600 games that interest me are often just downgraded ports of golden-age arcade games, while the original (and often less action-oriented) 2600 titles don't really interest me as much.

For that matter, a lot of the NES classics haven't aged that well for me either... but once again, funnily enough, I still enjoy playing Sega Master System classics... though that might be because I grew up playing more SMS games (since the SMS was more dominant than the NES in Europe).

But sure, I can understand why you might have been annoyed by my (somewhat dismissive) comment towards Atari 2600 games... If gamers today said the same thing about the games I grew up playing, I might react in the same way.

The Atari 2600 was great for finally bringing arcade hits home. But it really did look bad, even back then. The graphics couldn't come close to emulating most arcade games. A lot of games took a little imagination to identify what objects were. And the sound, oh my, the sound. Most games sounded as annoying as nails on a chalkboard.

From what I read, it was originally intended to play many different variations of Pong, but then developers discovered it could be programmed to do other things. So it was never intended to do all the things programmers really wanted to do with it. That's why Atari made their computers not too long after the Atari 2600.

[QUOTE="Jag85"][QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

I like the Atari 2600 game, actually.

MonkeySpot

Why, because it's not 3D with cutting edge graphics? I played it recently, and it seems like the same game I played when I bought it in 1980 (14 then, 46 now). Still fun, you need to fly around the city, rebuild the bridge, nab Lex Luthor and his henchmen... The city layout (and how to navigate it in a fast way using the subways and other map short-cuts to try and lower your completion time) is still exactly the same...

:|

The concept of "Game Aging" is sort of a joke, to me. A good game (subjective opinion of the individual, of course), back then is a good game now... There is no difference in it, no "shelf life". Game Age is determined by the player, and if you're stuck on dual analog sticks for a first-person shooter, then "GoldenEye" on the N64, or the first "Medal of Honor" games are going to have "not aged well"... But if you talk to some of us who put in countless hours on "GoldenEye", or MoH games, they're the same thing they were back when they were issued. Now, I FAR prefer the dual analog stick for such games, no doubt about it... But i can fire up an N64 and still have a blast with "GoldenEye". Nothing has changed, for me, in appreciating those older games...

;)

They haven't changed, YOU, personally, have... This doesn't make you wrong for your taste shifting, PERSONALLY... But it does make you wrong for assuming other people have changed the same way YOU have changed. So I mean no insult or critique of you, PERSONALLY, but saying "Superman" for the 2600 "hasn't aged well" is solely your perception, and not a scientific, quantifiable fact.

So really, you didn't like "Superman" for the 2600 back then (or were too young back then to form real analysis or opinion), so you don't enjoy it now. I bought the game when it came out. And yes, I could tell a crap game from a good one back then. As most people on the Legacy forum who're old enough to remember those days will likely attest, there were phenominal games AND shovel-ware. We didn't have magazines or websites to give us an over-view, but word got around...

:)

There's NO crime in not liking it, for whatever reason you have... That's certainly not my point. But assuming that a 14yr old kid today couldn't possibly enjoy the game now as I did back in 1980, is appointing one's self the Arbiter of Good Taste, in a way.

I mean you NO disrespect, whatsoever.

Nice read, but aging also determines if a person today (that hasn't played the game before) could pick it up and play the game and enjoy it. Not saying it can't happen with the Atari Superman or N64 Goldeneye, but it would be a little bit of a harder sell than saying...maybe Super Mario Bros or Asteroids or Gravitar.

Here is a personal example using one of the games you listed. (Goldeneye)...I have never played Goldeneye64 in all my life until about a week ago when a friend wanted to dust some nostalgia off and boot it up in his N64. So I got to play it along with him, and can I say that is was absolute hell. The controls were awful. Not because of the one joystick, but because it was also airplane controls. I picked oddjob and I couldn't get one kill on my friend...WITH ODDJOB. 

I would never recommend Goldeneye to anyone that hasn't played it. At least Medal of Honor Underground...(I haven't played the first one yet) lets you use a normal scheme where up means up and down means down. Heck some of those controller schemes it offered didn't even let you strafe and you had no idea which ones would do that.

Yes I know that was the norm to have the airplane type controller scheme back then, but it is so damn backwards for me now that it is entirely unplayable for me.

I'm a strong believer if that you have to put a significant amount of time in to learn the game controls it has AGED terribly.

Also back on OPs point...How can you make a game based on an invincible character? Or just plain god-like? I don't think there will ever be a good superman game because superman is impossible to defeat.

[QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

[QUOTE="Jag85"] While it was considered a good game for its time, it has aged pretty badly... Though the same could be said for a lot of other Atari 2600 classics.Jag85

Since I was born-and-bred in the so-called "8-bit era" (i.e. the NES and SMS generation), Atari 2600 games just seem a bit too old for my tastes... although, funnily enough, I have no problems enjoying golden-age arcade games of that same era. The 2600 games that interest me are often just downgraded ports of golden-age arcade games, while the original (and often less action-oriented) 2600 titles don't really interest me as much.

For that matter, a lot of the NES classics haven't aged that well for me either... but once again, funnily enough, I still enjoy playing Sega Master System classics... though that might be because I grew up playing more SMS games (since the SMS was more dominant than the NES in Europe).

But sure, I can understand why you might have been annoyed by my (somewhat dismissive) comment towards Atari 2600 games... If gamers today said the same thing about the games I grew up playing, I might react in the same way.

And then Monkey got me to reply...And now it is way off tangent of where OP wanted this discussion...way to start this argument Jag85! :P

[QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

[QUOTE="Jag85"] While it was considered a good game for its time, it has aged pretty badly... Though the same could be said for a lot of other Atari 2600 classics.NodakJo2010

Why, because it's not 3D with cutting edge graphics? I played it recently, and it seems like the same game I played when I bought it in 1980 (14 then, 46 now). Still fun, you need to fly around the city, rebuild the bridge, nab Lex Luthor and his henchmen... The city layout (and how to navigate it in a fast way using the subways and other map short-cuts to try and lower your completion time) is still exactly the same...

:|

The concept of "Game Aging" is sort of a joke, to me. A good game (subjective opinion of the individual, of course), back then is a good game now... There is no difference in it, no "shelf life". Game Age is determined by the player, and if you're stuck on dual analog sticks for a first-person shooter, then "GoldenEye" on the N64, or the first "Medal of Honor" games are going to have "not aged well"... But if you talk to some of us who put in countless hours on "GoldenEye", or MoH games, they're the same thing they were back when they were issued. Now, I FAR prefer the dual analog stick for such games, no doubt about it... But i can fire up an N64 and still have a blast with "GoldenEye". Nothing has changed, for me, in appreciating those older games...

;)

They haven't changed, YOU, personally, have... This doesn't make you wrong for your taste shifting, PERSONALLY... But it does make you wrong for assuming other people have changed the same way YOU have changed. So I mean no insult or critique of you, PERSONALLY, but saying "Superman" for the 2600 "hasn't aged well" is solely your perception, and not a scientific, quantifiable fact.

So really, you didn't like "Superman" for the 2600 back then (or were too young back then to form real analysis or opinion), so you don't enjoy it now. I bought the game when it came out. And yes, I could tell a crap game from a good one back then. As most people on the Legacy forum who're old enough to remember those days will likely attest, there were phenominal games AND shovel-ware. We didn't have magazines or websites to give us an over-view, but word got around...

:)

There's NO crime in not liking it, for whatever reason you have... That's certainly not my point. But assuming that a 14yr old kid today couldn't possibly enjoy the game now as I did back in 1980, is appointing one's self the Arbiter of Good Taste, in a way.

I mean you NO disrespect, whatsoever.

Nice read, but aging also determines if a person today (that hasn't played the game before) could pick it up and play the game and enjoy it. Not saying it can't happen with the Atari Superman or N64 Goldeneye, but it would be a little bit of a harder sell than saying...maybe Super Mario Bros or Asteroids or Gravitar.

Here is a personal example using one of the games you listed. (Goldeneye)...I have never played Goldeneye64 in all my life until about a week ago when a friend wanted to dust some nostalgia off and boot it up in his N64. So I got to play it along with him, and can I say that is was absolute hell. The controls were awful. Not because of the one joystick, but because it was also airplane controls. I picked oddjob and I couldn't get one kill on my friend...WITH ODDJOB. 

I would never recommend Goldeneye to anyone that hasn't played it. At least Medal of Honor Underground...(I haven't played the first one yet) lets you use a normal scheme where up means up and down means down. Heck some of those controller schemes it offered didn't even let you strafe and you had no idea which ones would do that.

Yes I know that was the norm to have the airplane type controller scheme back then, but it is so damn backwards for me now that it is entirely unplayable for me.

I'm a strong believer if that you have to put a significant amount of time in to learn the game controls it has AGED terribly.

Also back on OPs point...How can you make a game based on an invincible character? Or just plain god-like? I don't think there will ever be a good superman game because superman is impossible to defeat.

[QUOTE="NodakJo2010"]

[QUOTE="MonkeySpot"]

Why, because it's not 3D with cutting edge graphics? I played it recently, and it seems like the same game I played when I bought it in 1980 (14 then, 46 now). Still fun, you need to fly around the city, rebuild the bridge, nab Lex Luthor and his henchmen... The city layout (and how to navigate it in a fast way using the subways and other map short-cuts to try and lower your completion time) is still exactly the same...

:|

The concept of "Game Aging" is sort of a joke, to me. A good game (subjective opinion of the individual, of course), back then is a good game now... There is no difference in it, no "shelf life". Game Age is determined by the player, and if you're stuck on dual analog sticks for a first-person shooter, then "GoldenEye" on the N64, or the first "Medal of Honor" games are going to have "not aged well"... But if you talk to some of us who put in countless hours on "GoldenEye", or MoH games, they're the same thing they were back when they were issued. Now, I FAR prefer the dual analog stick for such games, no doubt about it... But i can fire up an N64 and still have a blast with "GoldenEye". Nothing has changed, for me, in appreciating those older games...

;)

They haven't changed, YOU, personally, have... This doesn't make you wrong for your taste shifting, PERSONALLY... But it does make you wrong for assuming other people have changed the same way YOU have changed. So I mean no insult or critique of you, PERSONALLY, but saying "Superman" for the 2600 "hasn't aged well" is solely your perception, and not a scientific, quantifiable fact.

So really, you didn't like "Superman" for the 2600 back then (or were too young back then to form real analysis or opinion), so you don't enjoy it now. I bought the game when it came out. And yes, I could tell a crap game from a good one back then. As most people on the Legacy forum who're old enough to remember those days will likely attest, there were phenominal games AND shovel-ware. We didn't have magazines or websites to give us an over-view, but word got around...

:)

There's NO crime in not liking it, for whatever reason you have... That's certainly not my point. But assuming that a 14yr old kid today couldn't possibly enjoy the game now as I did back in 1980, is appointing one's self the Arbiter of Good Taste, in a way.

I mean you NO disrespect, whatsoever.

Stefan91x

Nice read, but aging also determines if a person today (that hasn't played the game before) could pick it up and play the game and enjoy it. Not saying it can't happen with the Atari Superman or N64 Goldeneye, but it would be a little bit of a harder sell than saying...maybe Super Mario Bros or Asteroids or Gravitar.

Here is a personal example using one of the games you listed. (Goldeneye)...I have never played Goldeneye64 in all my life until about a week ago when a friend wanted to dust some nostalgia off and boot it up in his N64. So I got to play it along with him, and can I say that is was absolute hell. The controls were awful. Not because of the one joystick, but because it was also airplane controls. I picked oddjob and I couldn't get one kill on my friend...WITH ODDJOB. 

I would never recommend Goldeneye to anyone that hasn't played it. At least Medal of Honor Underground...(I haven't played the first one yet) lets you use a normal scheme where up means up and down means down. Heck some of those controller schemes it offered didn't even let you strafe and you had no idea which ones would do that.

Yes I know that was the norm to have the airplane type controller scheme back then, but it is so damn backwards for me now that it is entirely unplayable for me.

I'm a strong believer if that you have to put a significant amount of time in to learn the game controls it has AGED terribly.

Also back on OPs point...How can you make a game based on an invincible character? Or just plain god-like? I don't think there will ever be a good superman game because superman is impossible to defeat.

I know a lot of musicians, and some are really good at one instrument, while others seem to be able to pick up anything and play it, no matter the scale, family, or sometimes the handed-ness (seen a righty pick up a lefty guitar and make it sing, which blew my mind)... I think gaming is a lot the same, either you have the ability to adapt or you don't. I have no problem switching back and forth when it comes to controller schemes. Certainly, I have my preferences, but switching from a modern CoD game to "GoldenEye" presents no problem to me whatsoever... Perhaps, Jag, you are not a multi-instrumentalist. This makes you no less of a musician.

PS - You can't offend me. as I see it we're engaged in a discussion, I see no reason to get uppity and i didn't mean to convey any negativity in explaining my viewpoint... We are all different people who enjoy the same hobby, which shows kindred spirit while allowing diversity... Which is to be celebrated, in my opinion. The one thing I don't encourage, is condemning a game based on it's age like a loaf of bread. Games don't have a shelf life, time doesn't effect them. Time effects the user, that's all. So posting disparaging commentary about a game because it's not like this or that, or older and has less in the way of features or graphic "oomph"

Which was my only point.

In terms of making a game about a god-like character, the same issues are facing writers for the character, and they seem to get it done... ""DC vs. MK" hapndled it, and the Atari game did as well (floating hunter-killer Kryptonite, etc)... Superman has some Achilles' Heel "flaws", and games just need to write around the issue of god-like attributes, same as the books have done for decades...

What? You can change the controls to normal scheme in the options. Also you can strafe without any problems, use the c buttons. Have you really played this game? Sounds strange to me....

Stefan91x

Yes I have played...no I wasn't first player :P...Everything had to be done on the fly. So I had those 8 choices...there was even a couple of them that wouldn't let you move. I was really confused and lost in a hornets nest.

I know a lot of musicians, and some are really good at one instrument, while others seem to be able to pick up anything and play it, no matter the scale, family, or sometimes the handed-ness (seen a righty pick up a lefty guitar and make it sing, which blew my mind)... I think gaming is a lot the same, either you have the ability to adapt or you don't. I have no problem switching back and forth when it comes to controller schemes. Certainly, I have my preferences, but switching from a modern CoD game to "GoldenEye" presents no problem to me whatsoever... Perhaps, Jag, you are not a multi-instrumentalist. This makes you no less of a musician.

PS - You can't offend me. as I see it we're engaged in a discussion, I see no reason to get uppity and i didn't mean to convey any negativity in explaining my viewpoint... We are all different people who enjoy the same hobby, which shows kindred spirit while allowing diversity... Which is to be celebrated, in my opinion. The one thing I don't encourage, is condemning a game based on it's age like a loaf of bread. Games don't have a shelf life, time doesn't effect them. Time effects the user, that's all. So posting disparaging commentary about a game because it's not like this or that, or older and has less in the way of features or graphic "oomph"

Which was my only point.

In terms of making a game about a god-like character, the same issues are facing writers for the character, and they seem to get it done... ""DC vs. MK" hapndled it, and the Atari game did as well (floating hunter-killer Kryptonite, etc)... Superman has some Achilles' Heel "flaws", and games just need to write around the issue of god-like attributes, same as the books have done for decades...

MonkeySpot

I like your little analogy, but here is another that could just as easily relate. Music in general. We can always go back and have fun and listen to the hits of the 80s and 90s, but there is always those couple of songs. Not sure why but you have always liked them. It could be the Macarena for example. Yes it could be fun to listen to it once a while for nostalgic purposes (sorry born in 1991 so you have to deal with the Macarena lol) it isn't one of those songs that you really could listen to over and over. (Except for the few) While say All-Star...people are still enjoying this song today.

Movies are also the same. Casablanca will always be a classic that people time and again will go back to watch, but Jurassic Park 2 while scoring big back in the day today people claim it to be horrible. Which it was and wasn't...too many inconsistencies lol.

[QUOTE="Stefan91x"]

[QUOTE="NodakJo2010"]

Nice read, but aging also determines if a person today (that hasn't played the game before) could pick it up and play the game and enjoy it. Not saying it can't happen with the Atari Superman or N64 Goldeneye, but it would be a little bit of a harder sell than saying...maybe Super Mario Bros or Asteroids or Gravitar.

Here is a personal example using one of the games you listed. (Goldeneye)...I have never played Goldeneye64 in all my life until about a week ago when a friend wanted to dust some nostalgia off and boot it up in his N64. So I got to play it along with him, and can I say that is was absolute hell. The controls were awful. Not because of the one joystick, but because it was also airplane controls. I picked oddjob and I couldn't get one kill on my friend...WITH ODDJOB. 

I would never recommend Goldeneye to anyone that hasn't played it. At least Medal of Honor Underground...(I haven't played the first one yet) lets you use a normal scheme where up means up and down means down. Heck some of those controller schemes it offered didn't even let you strafe and you had no idea which ones would do that.

Yes I know that was the norm to have the airplane type controller scheme back then, but it is so damn backwards for me now that it is entirely unplayable for me.

I'm a strong believer if that you have to put a significant amount of time in to learn the game controls it has AGED terribly.

 

Also back on OPs point...How can you make a game based on an invincible character? Or just plain god-like? I don't think there will ever be a good superman game because superman is impossible to defeat.

MonkeySpot

I know a lot of musicians, and some are really good at one instrument, while others seem to be able to pick up anything and play it, no matter the scale, family, or sometimes the handed-ness (seen a righty pick up a lefty guitar and make it sing, which blew my mind)... I think gaming is a lot the same, either you have the ability to adapt or you don't. I have no problem switching back and forth when it comes to controller schemes. Certainly, I have my preferences, but switching from a modern CoD game to "GoldenEye" presents no problem to me whatsoever... Perhaps, Jag, you are not a multi-instrumentalist. This makes you no less of a musician.

PS - You can't offend me. as I see it we're engaged in a discussion, I see no reason to get uppity and i didn't mean to convey any negativity in explaining my viewpoint... We are all different people who enjoy the same hobby, which shows kindred spirit while allowing diversity... Which is to be celebrated, in my opinion. The one thing I don't encourage, is condemning a game based on it's age like a loaf of bread. Games don't have a shelf life, time doesn't effect them. Time effects the user, that's all. So posting disparaging commentary about a game because it's not like this or that, or older and has less in the way of features or graphic "oomph"

Which was my only point.

In terms of making a game about a god-like character, the same issues are facing writers for the character, and they seem to get it done... ""DC vs. MK" hapndled it, and the Atari game did as well (floating hunter-killer Kryptonite, etc)... Superman has some Achilles' Heel "flaws", and games just need to write around the issue of god-like attributes, same as the books have done for decades...