Pluvia said:
I don't really know how you managed to do this, but somehow you managed to miss me actually quoting the part where I immediately addressed it so you wouldn't miss it. Your rant here falls flat because you managed to miss me quoting myself so you wouldn't miss me showing you where I adressed it. The only thing I can do here is repeat myself, so maybe you should re-read my last post and reply to it so I don't have to repeat it.
As for literally all of those games, they've been addressed. If you want to then address the argument I put forward about them, you're avoiding it so far.
You quoted you're request of a larger list of triple A games that met you're criteria, that is not addressing in the slightest the fact that the game's you listed meet your "every once in a while" criteria, the only on avoid the point is you. Do those game not provide the "every once in a while" you asked for? Yes or now, it's as simple as that. I and John also DID give you a larger list like you asked, so I don't know how you came to conclusion I'm avoiding anything.
See above. And a request relating exactly to what I said is the complete opposite to an "unrelated request". Like, the complete opposite.
The above is claim based on you're lack of understanding of what the word acknowledge means. How exactly does asking for more triple a games after being told that 5 original ones you brought up related to your quote of "every once in a while"? Before you do anything else answer that question.
Minorities. My original statement hasn't been contradicted, nice try though but you're going to have to elaborate on things you say rather than just trying to pretend it has with no follow up information.
Oh the irony. Minorities is a vague term which can be applied to a lot of video game character's almost every regard. So a minority in what? profession? ideals? race ("whites" have the smallest population globally)ethnicity? Gender? (Males are the minority in that situation). So what do you mean by minority?
You're actually bouncing back and fourth here between things I've said and things you've said, yet you're equating them all to me. For example your "specific type of diversity" statement is something you've said, as I've repeatedly asked for all the diverse triple A games, and games that I apparently haven't bought. All. You "calling it" is just you calling something you made up.
Is English your first language? Because it seems like you have a foreign grasp of the language. I'm not bouncing back and forth between what you said and what I said. I'm illustrating the point that you changed what you originally asked for, and now you're asking for specific type of diversity, which I knew you would. I'm calling what I said you do and you did.
Big games only is yet another thing that you first put forward when you said "just games with hype" and "remove their hands from the side of their eyes and turn their head a few centimetres". That suggests you want me to ignore triple A games for literally no reason. No reason whatsoever. I even asked you what makes other games different, which takes us right back to you having to list the games I've apparently ignored.
What? I said people who complain about diversity have tunnel vision and only look at big games, which you are. I said if they'd looked at gaming as a whole they'd fine plenty of games with diversity. How in any was is that me putting forward the sentiment of "Big games only" Talk about making things up. It takes us back to the 3 lie you've made so far, I never said you ignored any game, besides Tomb raider, which you did. What I said was
The fact that people (like you) ignore/discount their diverse games.
The only thing you're really ignoring is 50% of that statement.
So again, the only thing you're calling is the thing you wanted me to ignore and didn't because hey, I'm going to need more than zero reasons to ignore something.
That's a lie, or ignorance. I stated that you can't judge the entire industry on a few games especially when you ignore smaller games, which you did, for no reason, so that statement that you won't ignore something for zero reasons is bunk.
Please, I "proved" your first point by ignoring your arbitrary and meaningless restrictions on what games I'm allowed to look at. Heavy emphasis on your. My goalposts are "Games they play", which shock horror includes triple A games, and "Every once in a while", which shock horror is any length of time I wish to define.
I gave you no restrictions, just suggested that you broaden your horizons when judging the entirety of the games industry, and you didn't. As for the games they play? It might include triple A for some, but considering you yourself didn't know much about a lot of the triple A game's brought up, I wouldn't hold my breath that a significant amount of those people play the games the complain about. D-Did you latterly just say "every once in a while" is predicated solely on what you define it as?
I actually never defined it, instead I repeatedly gave you the option of doing so by listing games, but you've repeatedly refused. So here I'll define it for you, "Every once in a while" means every 5 games. There we go, no longer vaguely defined.
Actually you did, the moment you gave me your list. Presented 5 games 2 of those 5 have diversity in them, every once in a while would be if 1 of those 5 had diversity in them. Even if you didn't define it, you would still have a 9/11 ratio.
Spoiler Alert What you're going to do here is try to say that the thing I said, every 5 games, doesn't count.
I'm not going to said that, as I never did, but you might misread it as such as you've done this entire time. [/quote]That somehow my statement of"Every once in a while" is subject to what you want it to be, and not what I, the person who said it, says it is.[/quote] "Every once in a while" means not often, not what you want it to mean. And as shown, diversity is put in games quite often.
Then I'll ask you to make a list like you've been too scared to do for the past few posts, then you'll refuse to do so (again). Also you're not going to address my argument for the dismissal of those other games because you can't.
But you have your list. You want me to list the 11 games again? the 5 games you brought up, the one I brought up and the 5 John brought up, there is your list, again. You mean your accusation that I said you ignored a bunch of triple A games? But you can quote me on saying you only ignored Tomb Raider. Or the fact that You actually dismissed Bloodborne Monster hunter, Dynasty Warriors, and Life is strange, plus the smaller games industry as a whole? Or are you going to continue to be delusional?
You don't want to tackle why the western gaming industry is different, you want to avoid and ignore it.
Its really not, especially considering you're only looking at the triple A games, and completely ignoring the double A market. Even then 9/11 games are pretty diverse.
