Making Sense of Amazing Spider-Man's After Credits End Scene

SCROLL TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE FOR AN UPDATE TO THIS STORY.

SPOILERS FOLLOW FOR THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN.

DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE SPOILED ON THE FILM.

The Amazing Spider-Man, Sony's reboot of the wallcrawler, just hit theaters today, but some fans are already buzzing about the planned sequel to the film. Amazing Spider-Man 2 is already being written by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci (Transformers, Star Trek), so it would seem logical that the studio would want to tease that follow-up in some way to the many, many fans who are seeing the film this summer.

The Amazing Spider-Man Movie Review

Additionally, Chronicle director Josh Trank has been rumored to be up for a Venom solo movie. So clearly Sony wants to mine the Spider-Man universe. And let's assume they've at least taken notice -- as has the rest of the world -- of the very successful Marvel Studios movies, and in particular the resounding success of The Avengers. An Easter egg or after-credits scene of course makes sense for Amazing Spider-Man -- and we in fact do get one in the middle of the end credits of the new film. But what does it mean exactly?

Does whatever a spider can

The brief scene features Dr. Curt Connors, the once and future Lizard, who has now been imprisoned. As he sits in his cell, a shadowy figure appears from out of nowhere -- did he teleport into the cell? -- and a brief exchange takes place between the two regarding Peter Parker's father. The mysterious character asks Connors if he told Peter about his father, and then shortly thereafter he seemingly disappears once again. Actually, you can catch a glimpse of this scene in the third Spider-Man trailer:

Scrub to 1.24 to see Dr. Connors' mysterious pal.

Who is this guy? Is he Connors' boss, lurking in the dark corners of the film, but actually the real villain of the piece? We know that Connors works for Oscorp, and we know who runs Oscorp, don't we? Norman Osborn, of course! A.k.a the Green Goblin -- or at least, the guy who will become the Green Goblin one day -- Osborn is one of the big bads of the Marvel universe. He's Spidey's arch foe much as the Joker is Batman's, and let's not forget that Chris Nolan decided to save the Joker for his second Batman movie. And of course, Osborn is named-dropped throughout Amazing Spider-Man... though doesn't it seem a bit too obvious for it to actually be him?

Dr. Connors, a.k.a. the Lizard

Another possibility, though perhaps more of a long shot than Osborn, is -- wait for it -- Peter Parker's dad himself, Richard Parker! Played by Campbell Scott in flashback (along with Embeth Davidtz as Pete's mom Mary), Richard is said to be dead during this film, having been killed when Peter was still a boy -- in the grand Spider-Man tradition. But it also is clear that Richard Parker's dealings with Dr. Connors and Oscorp, of which he was also an employee before his death, tie directly into Peter's origin as Spider-Man in this film. And reportedly, the plan is to continue to flesh out this story arc in future movies. Loyal Marvel zombies will also recall that Spidey's folks did return from the dead in the comics at one point -- kinda sorta. Actually, they turned out to be Life Model Decoys. Ask Tony Stark what that is if you don't know.

One other suggestion -- and this is total fanboyism at work -- is this is a Venom tie-in. The character -- sometimes a villain, sometimes an antihero, and sometimes a hero -- remains very popular. His current incarnation in the comics is as Flash Thompson, Peter Parker's longtime frenemy, and Flash is in fact in the new movie (played by Chris Zylka). And again, Sony is still pushing for a Venom movie… So, yeah. Not sure how that shadowy guy could tie-in to Venom, but that's what retconning is for!

Fans have suggested the Easter egg character might be Electro (flash of light!) or Mysterio (magic tricks!) or any number of other Spidey villains, while others are whispering that it's Inglourious Basterds' Christoph Waltz playing the role. And the bottom line is, unlike The Avengers Thanos Easter egg, the Spidey ending is vague enough that it really could wind up being any of the above when Amazing Spider-Man 2 hits a couple of years from now.

Who do you think the shadowy figure at the end of Amazing Spider-Man is? Discuss below!

Update #1: This story has been updated since it first ran in May, with specific details from the film added.

Update #2: Ain't It Cool spoke to Rhys Ifans, who plays Dr. Connors in the film, and he said that the mystery character is not Norman Osborn. "A representative from OsCorp appears miraculously in the room," he tells the site. "How he gets in there and how he leaves, we don’t know. Maybe we will find out. But it’s not Norman Osborn. ... But it is someone who is in the employ of Norman Osborn without question."

The site followed up by asking, "[It's] someone we're familiar with, who we don’t know is employed by Osborn?" And Ifans replied, "Yeah."

So if it's not Osborn, then who the heck could it be?

Talk to Movies Editor Scott Collura on Twitter at @ScottIGN, on IGN, and on Facebook.

Source : ign[dot]com

Blizzard Explains Diablo III's Restricted Access

Update: Blizzard has issued a statement explaining why players who purchase Diablo III digitally from this point forward will need to wait up to 72 hours for full game access.

"For security reasons and to help ensure the integrity of the game and auction house service, players who purchase the digital version of Diablo III may have to wait until payment verification is complete before they can access certain game features."

"Similar to World of Warcraft, these restrictions were put in place to deter credit card fraud, which in turn helps reduce gold spam and other harmful activities that can have a negative impact on the game experience for everyone."

The level 13 cap and progress limit at the Skeleton King boss fight in Act I, as reported below, were not actually intentionally implemented, according to Blizzard. "An unintended consequence of these security measures, players who purchase the game digitally after patch 1.0.3 are temporarily being capped at level 13 and not able to proceed beyond Act I. We are working to correct this as soon as possible and will provide another update when we have more details to share."

Here's the full list of restrictions, aside from the mistake with the level and progress cap.

• No public game access for unverified digital purchasers


• No auction house access (real-money or gold) for unverified digital purchasers


• Unverified digital purchasers cannot trade items or drop items for other players to receive


• Unverified digital purchasers are not able to chat in any public or game channels


• Unverified digital purchasers cannot attach a custom message to friend requests, but they can send/accept friend requests, and play with their friends

• Global Play is not available for unverified digital purchasers

Blizzard claims that in most cases restrictions are lifted within 24 hours. Have you purchased Diablo III digitally within the last few days? What has your experience been like?

Original Story: Most of the staff at IGN has been enjoying Diablo III. In fact, many of us talk about it so much that we've convinced friends and other co-workers to buy it. While plenty of people are willing to go out to a store or purchase a boxed copy online, many more turn to Battle.net and quickly pick up a digital copy. As of the new 1.0.3, though, new customers can apparently only unlock the full game three days after purchase.

In a post on Blizzard's support forums, the details are made clear (though not explained at all):

As of patch 1.0.3, when purchasing a digital version of Diablo III through the online store or your Battle.net Account, players are restricted to the Starter Edition for the first 72 hours (sometimes less). Players on Starter Editions have the following restrictions:

• Act I up to the Skeleton King is available


• Level 13 cap


• Matchmaking available only with other Starter Edition players


• No Auction House access (Real Money or Gold)


• Global Play is not available. Players attempting to connect to Diablo III Starter Edition in a region other than their Battle.net Account's home region will receive Error 12. See the Global Play support article for more information.

Basically, people who go out and purchase the game in-full are restricted to the content from the Beta. We've reached out to Blizzard for clarification, since at the moment we're just left wondering why this step would be taken. Perhaps it has something to do with restricting access in order to help server loads? Or maybe keep would-be farmers from buying a bunch of copies to put a ton of auctions up and get around the 10-item per account limit? Let's all speculate together.

Source : ign[dot]com