AAA Gimmicks I`m Sick of Seeing
- Thread starter Emiscary
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The thing is that most people really don't "get it" here, and tend to overlook that it's not gender specific. Conan, Brak (John Jakes), Sojan The Swordsman, John Carter, Tarl Cabot, and tons of others are all macho sword swinging heroes who ran around naked, or next to it, through 99% of their careers due to barbarism, or the nature of their setting. People seem to forget about Conan wandering around in his furry bikini briefs, a pair of boots, and a sword belt and the artwork by guys like Frank Frazetta.Matthew94 said:
The odd thing is that if your making a female version of one of these classic characters, why would she be dressing sensibly? On some levels the arguement seems to be almost victorian that it just isn't ladylike so shouldn't be permitted or encouraged. At the same time that's also probably why most of the rage by nerds who think that this point somehow makes them more attractive to women is so hilarious, since the female writers and artists tend to be as bad, or worse than the guys when it comes to describing, rendering, and writing their characters.
Not to mention the simple fact that as many authors (many of them women) have pointed out, what works for guys as armor in a low tech setting, doesn't nessicarly work for women. A lot of those outfits are practical in the days before spandex or tights when you want to fight based on mobility, which is really the only option a female warrior is going to have. To be honest, a lot of the works like "Games Of Thrones" and others that try and portray warrior women with political correctness in a society wirh something approaching equality, wind up sort of undermining themselves by showing something even more unrealistic that would wind up with these ladies getting roflstomped.
The odd thing about a lot of these arguements is that guys like Frank Frazetta are the ones who started the conventions, and one of the things that made him such a famous artist was how much he was into athletics, understanding of the muscles, and his abillity to portray them. When he drew his warriors of either gender, the amusing thing is that they were actually portrayals of people who could do the things the characters in the books could do.
What's actually hilarious about some of this is that when you look at the artwork for Barsoom, both the men and ladies are actually overdressed for the setting.
Now granted, there ARE exceptions to this, and cases where it has gotten out of hand, but for the most part I haven't run into many cases where I've had an issue. 99% of the time it seems to be people complaining about sexy art, because it's sexy. Not to mention in many cases not getting the point, in considering where the characters are actually from or what they are doing. The Barbarian Swordswoman is barely clothed, OMG... that's Barbaric!
They're not. They're advertised as "Mature" and their definition of "mature" is not defined other than 17+.Emiscary said:
"Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language."
That's all that a mature game is. Getting mad that the official ESRB [http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp] meaning of mature doesn't match your perceived meaning of mature is just silly to put it lightly. Would you be as mad if I told you that MTV (aka Music Television) has shows that have nothing to do with music at all? If anything the mature label means that the player should be mature not that the game is, because that's what the other labels seem to reflect.
For games that are "*really* adult games", there is a rating for that. It's called "Adults Only". And even that doesn't define what being an adult means other than 18+.
"Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity."
A AAA game with an Adults Only rating would be a catastrophic failure sales wise. The amount of anger (which I'm assuming isn't genuine at this point) you're spewing over game devs following certain rules to be able to keep making games is ridiculous.
RazadaMk2 said:
Fallout 2 is a lot of people's "go to" example for killing kids, but your right about Warcraft III which was on the edge of gaming becoming quite this mainstream.
My basic attitude is that the contreversy about killing kids is less about the actual murder of children, as much as the fact that game developers and publishers have been caving to mainstream sentiment, instead of pushing the boundaries. Any creative work tends to suffer when the developers start to worry too much about public perception, rather than what works.
On top of this, a lot of the kids in video games are intentionally designed to be obnoxious. I never really thought about killing kids in say "Fallout 3" until I got to Little Lamplight and had kids pointing guns at me and calling me "Mungo", and making me jump through stupid hoops. I didn't see the situation as being any differant than say The Hitler Youth, or the kids being used as shock troops by african war bands.
You create something obnoxious and then don't let the player do anything about it, changing the existing game mechanics that had been in use up until that point, and that's a problem.
I'm not a believer that we need games all about killing children, but I figure in games like say "Fallout" or "Skyrim" or whatever, there should be children, and they should be killable if you for some reason find yourself wanting to.
Or you could just stop playing so many video games which will cause these things that piss you off to come fewer and farther between. I did, and I honestly have had little to no issues with almost everything on your list.
Of course nobody is going to listen to that suggestion. I should just set myself up to be burned at the stake now for such a crazy suggestion.
And there have been revolutions in gaming in years, your problem is you're just looking in the wrong place. Persona 4 was an RPG that involved trying to catch a serial killer by exploring another world accessed by jumping into a TV. I haven't seen that in many games lately.
If you're looking to the AAA market to find new ideas, you're not going to find them. You're going to find pretty stuff that does what's already been proven to make money. (I am not saying that this means you'll find BAD things, so don't think I'm insulting the latest AAA releases)
Of course nobody is going to listen to that suggestion. I should just set myself up to be burned at the stake now for such a crazy suggestion.
And there have been revolutions in gaming in years, your problem is you're just looking in the wrong place. Persona 4 was an RPG that involved trying to catch a serial killer by exploring another world accessed by jumping into a TV. I haven't seen that in many games lately.
If you're looking to the AAA market to find new ideas, you're not going to find them. You're going to find pretty stuff that does what's already been proven to make money. (I am not saying that this means you'll find BAD things, so don't think I'm insulting the latest AAA releases)
In all seriousness, I did once have a moment when I had to snap myself out of it realizing I was actually gripped by the plot of a porn.Lumber Barber said:
OT: Most of what OP has said aren't gimmicks, they're cliches.
I do want child killing in games to be more common, though. Not because I'm a freaky psychopath, or anything. One reason would be that it would be immersion breaking. My main reason, however is that it shows up blatantly as something that's being tiptoed around. It's something that would cause a brief uproar, but after a while it would just get forgotten and everyone would be better off for it.
burningdragoon said:
Well the AO game would only be a spectacular failure because of the industry as a whole choosing to follow those rules. Understand that the ratings aren't a legal thing, we just had a supreme court battle about that and the goverment wanting to be able to sell and criminally enforce ratings.
If an AO game was produced, and it was sold through regular channels with that marking, it would do just fine. There is an audience for it, but right now the industry itself has chosen to not use regular channels, or to produce many games of that rating level.
Right now 99% of the AO games you see are nothing bad crappy sex games, released under the table. You don't see anything like regular games including SOME content that happens to put the rating at that level.
To be honest, I also think your somewhat wrong in your assumption. Not entirely, but partiaully. When the computer games ratings were conceived they promoted the entire thing where "E" was the equivilent of a MPAA "G" rating, a "T" was the equivilent of PG-13, and "M" was the equivilent of "R". The AO rating of course being the equivilent of "X" rated movies and beyond.
Now, you ARE correct that actually showing sexual penetration would put something in the adults only catagory, the equivilent of an "X" rating. It would not become porn however in a legal sense unless declared obscene and without redeeming value, which would also lead to it being banned (assuming someone brought forward a complaint about the specifics).
My personal issue is that "R" rated movies go far further than "M" rated games. There is a lot of room between "R" and "X". At worst most "M" games seem like they would carry a PG rating if they were movies. This has actually contributed to the problem of parents buying their kids "M" rated games, not expecting much intense content, so that when they find a game that actually deserves that rating it's kind of a shock.
Sit down and watch some hardcore horror movies, erotic thrillers, and other genres of movies and you can see scenes that would work quite well in video games. You can have a really intense (and even extremely kinky) sex scene without actually showing penetration (to the point where it really isn't nessicary), and well... let's just say I don't think many people on these forums are oblivious to what has happened in some of the more extreme horror movies, which has included the graphic torture and murder of children.
When I become critical of video games, I look at things like say the "Hellraiser" movies or "Saw" as pretty middle of the road examples, hardcore enough to be shocking, but not going as far as things like say the Guniea Pig collection, or the August Underground series which probably hit the high end of nastiness without an X rating. Why can't video games go as far as "Hellraiser" or "Saw" when it comes to content, when it happens to be appropriate? Not to everyone's tastes, but it does sort of show how the ratings are not being properly used, and how much room there actually is between what we see now, and needing to slap the AO rating on something (which isn't something that should be avoided anyway).
Wow, OP just said "Fuck you" to people that pay for games with DRM?
Also,
"8. Non Endings.
I know you guys aren't prepared to admit it to yourselves yet- but a game's story actually does matter. It's not like in porn where people are *SO* keen to witness the act itself that they don't care why it's happening. So stop skipping the last and most important part of the story so you can justify pumping out another installment."
Actually, story only matters in some games. For instance, in a game where the game is driven by story. That is, if the continuation of the story is your reward for playing the game, or the reason you're playing the game, then it matters.
I really don't think a pre-scripted story really matters in a game where the main focus is on gameplay or a game with heavy character customization.
See I like to view games as "stories in progress". That is, it's not like you're watching frodo and sam take the ring to mordor, it's "you ARE taking the ring to mordor". But if it's really you doing it, then you obviously must have a choice to do otherwise, no?
From my perspective, games like Minecraft have the best "stories" (the best experiences)
Also,
"8. Non Endings.
I know you guys aren't prepared to admit it to yourselves yet- but a game's story actually does matter. It's not like in porn where people are *SO* keen to witness the act itself that they don't care why it's happening. So stop skipping the last and most important part of the story so you can justify pumping out another installment."
Actually, story only matters in some games. For instance, in a game where the game is driven by story. That is, if the continuation of the story is your reward for playing the game, or the reason you're playing the game, then it matters.
I really don't think a pre-scripted story really matters in a game where the main focus is on gameplay or a game with heavy character customization.
See I like to view games as "stories in progress". That is, it's not like you're watching frodo and sam take the ring to mordor, it's "you ARE taking the ring to mordor". But if it's really you doing it, then you obviously must have a choice to do otherwise, no?
From my perspective, games like Minecraft have the best "stories" (the best experiences)
RE: Barbarians and the character design thereof, here's a helpful infographic from Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor explaining exactly this issue.Therumancer said:
I know it's not a legal thing and I know it's a very imperfect system. Yeah the main reason a AAA AO game would fail is because the industry has decided to steer away from it, but at the same time stores like Walmart aren't going to stock AO games, and that's not something the devs can change so easily and not being able to stock their game at Walmart and the like would hurt sales.Therumancer said:
It's just silly that OP is so angry because devs are working within those systems instead of pushing cultural boundaries at a rate that he finds acceptable. Also silly that he seems to take issue in part because of the name of the label not fitting with his perception of that name.
As for why R rating movies are more graphic than M games, I will attribute that to a couple things. One being the relative age of the mediums. The other would be technical limitations. Some games pack in the gore or graphic violence, sure, but some engines just aren't equipped to handle the primary goals of the game as well as things like good blood and damage effects.
I kinda covered that in my first post, but for (not especially great) example, in Dragon Age: Origins, there's some pretty silly persistent gore/tomato soup and some very goofy sex scenes. I would much rather BioWare worked on the important parts of the game (story, characters, choices) than waste their very finite resources on even slightly more graphic sex scenes.
QTE's and always online DRM. Nothing else really, while some DLC does annoy me (Asuras wrath being the worse, why the hell did no one mention that little shit tree? a quarter, the quarter with the damn ending in it none the less, of the game was behind a pay wall, never mind a single mission/Team mate, AW makes mass effect 3 look like the God damn make a wish foundation in comparison) but for the most part, its either the people that make the games or the fans/Raging angry types that that get too more tbh.
Mind, I'm sure that's not a Gimmick, but aw well.
Mind, I'm sure that's not a Gimmick, but aw well.
Kahunaburger said:RE: Barbarians and the character design thereof, here's a helpful infographic from Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor explaining exactly this issue.Therumancer said:
Actually I'd consider Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor to be inherantly biased starting with the name. Their picture of the sexualized woman isn't technically wearing anything wrong for fighting depending on the time period, and setting. It's basically briefs, boots, and breast covering, assuming spandex doesn't exist that's reasonable given the female form. Fabio's costume is arguably worse, but mostly because it supposed to be a Viking and that really doesn't work given the setting. Conan and John Carter wore similar outfits in more temporate climates.
As far as "Gor" goes, the first thing I'd ask is if you've actually READ Gor, especially the first few books?
John Lange (John Norman) did a huge amount of research for his books. People tend to look entirely at his sociological/erotic writing about the true nature of women and how to handle them, but not into the rest of the details of his writing. He did lengthy research into weapons and armor, engineering, and similar things and for all the sex and fighting, it also focuses on everything from combat techniques and weapons (even if the choreography is... lacking) to how coins are minted, to the construction and function of ships. While not historically accurate, it's interesting because it shows what could be done with a combination of modern knowlege and primitive tools and materials, given how a number of the people in Gor are from 20th century earth, but in a world intentionally kept stagnant and at a fairly low level of technology by it's true masters that control the actual super science used to travel between worlds and similar things (it's pretty complicated and in depth).
John studied at Princeton where he got his PHD in philosophy, and held a couple of differant professorships, and a lot of the stuff in his books came from various professors and students he knew and who helped him with research.
While I'm not going to take any paticular social queues from John, in terms of say women being happiest when brutally enslaved, oppressed, and then sold to another master when they become content with thier situation, when it comes to things like armoring, weapons, and similar things, he's not a terrible source. What's more people tend to forget that he did write a number of "table turning" chapters in the Gor series, like early Jason Marshal, or some of the bits involving Amazons like the Panther women, that I remember getting into practicality and what styles of fighting work for them. Yeah, granted this is usually the prelude to a bunch of guys about to be hotly dominated by gorgeous babes, but that doesn't really change a lot of the surrounding material.
Now granted, he is NOT perfect, and there are probably guys who are better at this than him, Robert Adams (Horseclans) impressed me a few times, but I used him because he's been around long enough to be considered a classic writer and contributor to fantasy. Artwork based on his stories has a lot more reality behind it than you might give it credit for, and that comes through in some of the artwork.
Your "sexy" lady picture there seems to be being portrayed as at least visiting a temporate climate, going by the leopard skin. Given what a lot of the high tech ladies wear throughout say Africa, India, and other places (and we've all seen National geographic), and how the warriors generally ran around without much clothing themselves, it's not totally out of line.
In Fabio's case, I'd imagine any real viking would freeze to death, but at the same time having not read the book I don't know where he's supposed to be. If he's a viking that just arrived in a temporate climate, yeah he might go running around in his shorts. Especially seeing as he's unlikely to have packed a huge wardrobe into his longship (well then again, being the Fabio version he might have... he's probably got a fan on there somewhere to blow through his hair constantly).
burningdragoon said:
Well, stores like Wal*Mart are increasingly irrelevent to video gaming, they aren't stocking that many games anymore, especially for the PC. Stores like Gamestop/Electronics Boutique used to stock adult computer titles behind their counters, but mostly stopped because the stuff was garbage and not many people wanted to walk in and buy some lame porn game for top dollar that everyone in the store would see them ask for by name.
The idea here is to produce games that aren't pure, non-stop sex and graphic violence, but have those aspects to them, so they would look much like any other game of a given genere, except for the AO warning on them. The idea being to put them on the shelf like anything else, sell them through Amazon, or whatever else.
Yes, there would be opposition on some levels, but nothing that couldn't be overcome if the industry decided to fight.
As far as games like Dragon Age goes, I think the romances and such in the game were a good start, but in of themselves weren't anything wonderful. I disagree with this being neglected because I think that's the seed of what's going to move the industry forward, and turning gaming into a more mature pastime. Right now if all they produce is material acceptable to kids and teens, that's what gaming is going to remain aimed at, and those who criticize it as being for kids will be right.
I don't think the issue is so much the industry not pushing cultural boundaries hard enough, but that it's not pushing at all. Heck, it's actually backpedaling when you get down to it. As people have pointed out, there have been games where you could kill children, with it generally fitting in with the nature of the game and it's tone. Right now it's something the industry generally won't do at all, for fear of offending, even when it would fit within the game. Sometimes in a paticularly grim game, not having any children (or the remnants thereof) or making them untouchable actually ruins what they set out to do.
It's sort of like the whole "zombies loose on a school bus" bit from a zombie movie, which has showed up a few times. Complete with blood splattering on the windows, and kids being pulled back and bitten, leaving bloody handprints, etc... (which in of itself frequently pulls punches compared to other kills in a zombie movie, but that's another point). You generally won't see anything even going that far in a video game, especially not if your say commanding the zombies as the bad guy (or whatever).... "I'm a soul sucking necromancer, who summons legions of undead minions and slaugherers villages for more mana... yet I am powerless before little Timmy and his friends...".
The point is that the taboo was already broken, it's just that gaming is moving away from it instead of moving forward at all.
Besides I'll say flat out that dead kids can be unusually touching if done right. In games where your playing a bad guy... which I won't analyze all the reasons for, or why it doesn't make someone a real world psycho, going after the kids helps reinforces the whole "I'm evil" thing for similar reasons... and if that's what your going for, that's why it should be there. Personally, I usually can't get into playing truely evil for long in games, but I suppose I can understand it as a horror movie fan. Anyone who has a problem here probably should grow up, because it should have ceased to be shocking when Freddie Kruegar (the child murderer to end all child murderers, with numerous movies about him killing kids/teens, with the ghosts of little girls he molested and murdered dancing outside the spiritual manifestation of his house in the nightmare realm....) became a pop culture icon.
So, as far as I can tell, the actual content of your post is:Therumancer said:Kahunaburger said:RE: Barbarians and the character design thereof, here's a helpful infographic from Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor explaining exactly this issue.Therumancer said:
Actually I'd consider Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor to be inherantly biased starting with the name. Their picture of the sexualized woman isn't technically wearing anything wrong for fighting depending on the time period, and setting. It's basically briefs, boots, and breast covering, assuming spandex doesn't exist that's reasonable given the female form. Fabio's costume is arguably worse, but mostly because it supposed to be a Viking and that really doesn't work given the setting. Conan and John Carter wore similar outfits in more temporate climates.
As far as "Gor" goes, the first thing I'd ask is if you've actually READ Gor, especially the first few books?
John Lange (John Norman) did a huge amount of research for his books. People tend to look entirely at his sociological/erotic writing about the true nature of women and how to handle them, but not into the rest of the details of his writing. He did lengthy research into weapons and armor, engineering, and similar things and for all the sex and fighting, it also focuses on everything from combat techniques and weapons (even if the choreography is... lacking) to how coins are minted, to the construction and function of ships. While not historically accurate, it's interesting because it shows what could be done with a combination of modern knowlege and primitive tools and materials, given how a number of the people in Gor are from 20th century earth, but in a world intentionally kept stagnant and at a fairly low level of technology by it's true masters that control the actual super science used to travel between worlds and similar things (it's pretty complicated and in depth).
John studied at Princeton where he got his PHD in philosophy, and held a couple of differant professorships, and a lot of the stuff in his books came from various professors and students he knew and who helped him with research.
While I'm not going to take any paticular social queues from John, in terms of say women being happiest when brutally enslaved, oppressed, and then sold to another master when they become content with thier situation, when it comes to things like armoring, weapons, and similar things, he's not a terrible source. What's more people tend to forget that he did write a number of "table turning" chapters in the Gor series, like early Jason Marshal, or some of the bits involving Amazons like the Panther women, that I remember getting into practicality and what styles of fighting work for them. Yeah, granted this is usually the prelude to a bunch of guys about to be hotly dominated by gorgeous babes, but that doesn't really change a lot of the surrounding material.
Now granted, he is NOT perfect, and there are probably guys who are better at this than him, Robert Adams (Horseclans) impressed me a few times, but I used him because he's been around long enough to be considered a classic writer and contributor to fantasy. Artwork based on his stories has a lot more reality behind it than you might give it credit for, and that comes through in some of the artwork.
Your "sexy" lady picture there seems to be being portrayed as at least visiting a temporate climate, going by the leopard skin. Given what a lot of the high tech ladies wear throughout say Africa, India, and other places (and we've all seen National geographic), and how the warriors generally ran around without much clothing themselves, it's not totally out of line.
In Fabio's case, I'd imagine any real viking would freeze to death, but at the same time having not read the book I don't know where he's supposed to be. If he's a viking that just arrived in a temporate climate, yeah he might go running around in his shorts. Especially seeing as he's unlikely to have packed a huge wardrobe into his longship (well then again, being the Fabio version he might have... he's probably got a fan on there somewhere to blow through his hair constantly).
A) You think that it isn't unreasonable for someone to go into battle in their anachronistic swimwear, and are either philosophically or morally opposed to backing this assertion with actual evidence.
B) You think the plot spackle John Norman uses to hold his rambling misogynist discourses and rape porn together is pretty well-written. Ooookaaay, then.
The problem is that we keep seeing the same zombies. They almost always tend to be created by some out of control disease/virus, and drop with a shot to the head.s69-5 said:
I think Zombies wouldn't be such an overdone thing, if people mixed it up more. Argento's "Demons" series (or Evil Dead for that matter) were good in part because they redefined the entire trope. This is to say nothing of other supernatural versions of zombies.
I've long suspected that we've gotten into the current rut because today's politically correct morality prevents the use of things like Voodoo, Satanism, and similar things the way it used to be used, for fear of offending someone. Some totally made up corperae entity being responsible doesn't risk offending anyone, but also tends to be absolutly bland, leading to bland zombies.
That said, I'd really wish we got away from the liberalism and could just make games without worrying about who they might offend. We see the zombies
Kahunaburger said:So, as far as I can tell, the actual content of your post is:Therumancer said:Kahunaburger said:RE: Barbarians and the character design thereof, here's a helpful infographic from Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor explaining exactly this issue.Therumancer said:
Actually I'd consider Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor to be inherantly biased starting with the name. Their picture of the sexualized woman isn't technically wearing anything wrong for fighting depending on the time period, and setting. It's basically briefs, boots, and breast covering, assuming spandex doesn't exist that's reasonable given the female form. Fabio's costume is arguably worse, but mostly because it supposed to be a Viking and that really doesn't work given the setting. Conan and John Carter wore similar outfits in more temporate climates.
As far as "Gor" goes, the first thing I'd ask is if you've actually READ Gor, especially the first few books?
John Lange (John Norman) did a huge amount of research for his books. People tend to look entirely at his sociological/erotic writing about the true nature of women and how to handle them, but not into the rest of the details of his writing. He did lengthy research into weapons and armor, engineering, and similar things and for all the sex and fighting, it also focuses on everything from combat techniques and weapons (even if the choreography is... lacking) to how coins are minted, to the construction and function of ships. While not historically accurate, it's interesting because it shows what could be done with a combination of modern knowlege and primitive tools and materials, given how a number of the people in Gor are from 20th century earth, but in a world intentionally kept stagnant and at a fairly low level of technology by it's true masters that control the actual super science used to travel between worlds and similar things (it's pretty complicated and in depth).
John studied at Princeton where he got his PHD in philosophy, and held a couple of differant professorships, and a lot of the stuff in his books came from various professors and students he knew and who helped him with research.
While I'm not going to take any paticular social queues from John, in terms of say women being happiest when brutally enslaved, oppressed, and then sold to another master when they become content with thier situation, when it comes to things like armoring, weapons, and similar things, he's not a terrible source. What's more people tend to forget that he did write a number of "table turning" chapters in the Gor series, like early Jason Marshal, or some of the bits involving Amazons like the Panther women, that I remember getting into practicality and what styles of fighting work for them. Yeah, granted this is usually the prelude to a bunch of guys about to be hotly dominated by gorgeous babes, but that doesn't really change a lot of the surrounding material.
Now granted, he is NOT perfect, and there are probably guys who are better at this than him, Robert Adams (Horseclans) impressed me a few times, but I used him because he's been around long enough to be considered a classic writer and contributor to fantasy. Artwork based on his stories has a lot more reality behind it than you might give it credit for, and that comes through in some of the artwork.
Your "sexy" lady picture there seems to be being portrayed as at least visiting a temporate climate, going by the leopard skin. Given what a lot of the high tech ladies wear throughout say Africa, India, and other places (and we've all seen National geographic), and how the warriors generally ran around without much clothing themselves, it's not totally out of line.
In Fabio's case, I'd imagine any real viking would freeze to death, but at the same time having not read the book I don't know where he's supposed to be. If he's a viking that just arrived in a temporate climate, yeah he might go running around in his shorts. Especially seeing as he's unlikely to have packed a huge wardrobe into his longship (well then again, being the Fabio version he might have... he's probably got a fan on there somewhere to blow through his hair constantly).
A) You think that it isn't unreasonable for someone to go into battle in their anachronistic swimwear, and are either philosophically or morally opposed to backing this assertion with actual evidence.
B) You think the plot spackle John Norman uses to hold his rambling misogynist discourses and rape porn together is pretty well-written. Ooookaaay, then.
None of those are gimmicks.Emiscary said:
Also, it's nothing about being too intense. It's about not getting the industry killed. Additionally, those things would rank AO, and you couldn't buy them. Except the first one, which is just legal ass-covering.
Finally, I have no idea why people desperately need to murder children in video games.
I don't know what game you're talking about specifically, but the games I play advertise customisation as just that.
Aslo, really not a gimmick anymore.
Not a gimmick.
Agreed, but it's still not a gimmick.
The problem is, as long as people have more money than sense, it's here to stay.
Not a gimmick, not new, not relevant to anything.
Yeah, how dare people have optional additional material!
That's..that's kinda sexist, bro.
Agreed, but not a gimmick.
Okay, so you've played four games.