Meshugger

Stop talking sense, that's a masculine trait. Shooo!

Let me extrapolate from your words. You are pretty much saying: "If an RPG includes romance stories than it lets the player indulge on hedonistic love fantasies (or, even worse, sex fantasies). This might be good to make horny teenagers buy the game, but since this is a Kickstarter fund project we want something more mature." Let me give you the news: pretty much every story driven game contain some sort of hedonistic gratification for the player. An example? Call of Duty is built around the purpose of making the player feel like a badass, the only one who can save the world. Ok, if we talk about the shooters genre that is pretty obvious, but I can assure you that you can apply the same kind of reasoning for each and every storydriven game, even the most mature. Every western RPG is centered around making the player identify himself with the main character of the story. It's done mostly with customization: you can choose your character's race, its appearence, what he is good at (his class and attributes) and so on. Then you take control of it, it does exactly what you tell him to do. This strengthens the identification even more. You become the character you're playing and that character in some way becomes you. So you end up projecting yourself in a character that is able to take control of his life, overcome the odds and, in the end, reach his goal, whatever it is. This is a great way to give the player gratification, to make him feel good with himself and to increase his self-respect. And the interesting thing is that the game doesn't need to be a power hungry fantasy to exert this effect on the player. Every goal can be good, even becoming a chef in a resturant or helping someone win his struggle agains alcohol. So: you think that romance stories in videogames are childish? Know that RPG games are childish as a whole. And they couldn't be different, because it's enbedded in the relationship between the player and the character he controls. Videogames are interactive experiences and the very core of story-driven interactive experiences is the identification between the player and the character he controls. Developers can try to make this relationship less intimate by forcing the player to control different characters during the course of the playthrough, or by forcing the player to control a party and not just one single character, but this doesn't prevent the ego-stroking gratification effect from happening. In those cases the identification process stops but then the player fstarts feeling like a deus-ex-machina, able to make things right by controlling the actions of a bunch of characters, just like a puppet-master would. Don't blame romances for being an way to give ego-stroking gratification to the player. Blame the RPG genre as a whole. ...eh, what? You are doing it wrong, i think. Women appriciate men who are slightly dominant, like taking the lead and showing them that you are really interested. Talking about jungian gratification of the ego might be an interesting ice-breaker but it wouldn't go anywhere on a base level. This thread is still about dating right? I am beginning to be slightly confused by the responses here.

So, have any of the forum members found each other and experienced true love? or the bad touch? This is what this thread is about, right? (Cyberdating)

I find this thread hilariously ironic with so many men debating the looks on women. Come on fighting the good fight, my dear white knights! (seriously, maybe one or two women are participating perhaps?)

Okay thanks, but 28% is still a huge difference for the same job. Is this something that is known about and accepted or is this behavior that is actually illegal? AFAIK that statistic hasn't been normalised for "same job", at least the one I see most commonly tossed around doesn't have that taken into account. Kind of reminds me of a statistic we had here. How only the children of the wealthiest men get into the university. They compared the father's income of law and medical students to the national average, noting how a large portion of them where in the highest earning brackets. Ignoring the fact that employed people in their 50s tend to be the highest earners, on average. Exactly, and for the rest of you: Are there any recent polls based on this debate out yet?

Since this thread has gone out of hand ages ago, i can tell that i find it quite humorously that Breivik thought that the song "Euphoria" by Loreen was the best candidate in the Eurovision song contest.

No it is not. We should only talk about the merits of Belgian decency. It is a quite more interesting.

Thanks!

Ultimately, this matters are defined by the laws of the host country. For example, i do not think that the UK would extradite anyone if there's a possibility for the accused to face the death penalty.

I heard on the news that Obama was better this time, but not as overpowering as Romney was in the previous debate. Also, this Libya issue seems to confuse a lot of people since i also heard that they (the moderator, Obama and Romney) were all wrong to a certain degree. What's the deal here really? Opinions from fellow americans perhaps?

The problem with corporations would immediately disappear the moment that you take away them legal right as a "person". Suddenly, people within the corporation would be personally accountable for the actions of the corporation as a whole. I know, i am dreamer, but hey....

It's an allegory for beard technology or alternatively for getting a cat as a pet.

Relevant to this thread:

Please, pleaaaaase keep the idea of objective-based XP. It was one of the best things about Vtm: Bloodlines. It would make so much sense in terms of approaching different objectives in different ways. Also, as a bonus for the best user name in the forum: Zap Rowsdower: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJd3g6LGSFc

Oh come on, you got have some standards? I fail to see the fun in winning without effort.

No. Nothing is. Of course it is. Playing a game requires a challenge to begin with. It's like saying that a sound democracy doesn't require a well informed public.

So much butthurt in the comments Try doing that on easy mode in Ninja Gaiden and you'll be dead within in 10 seconds. And i don't buy the "you're BATMAN"-argument either, that's just a moot point that sidesteps the issue itself. Are you talking about the youtube comments, or thread replies here? Because nobody here has argued that AA is a "hardcore" game or that it's comparable to Ninja Gaiden. The youtube comments. Ninja Gaiden is only hardcore on "Hard"-mode or higher, everything else standard. The "hardcore"-gameplay is only to keep the hype buzz flowing for the cretins.

I think that they are saving that footage for the BBC documentary, set for a release next month. Anywhoo, never has a heightmeter been as exciting as watching his ascent. 2,5 hours of pure thrill :D

What issue? Whoever defined quality in a game by it's difficulty? The "you are Batman" argument works perfectly well. Those fights are for you to do cool stuff with, not to challenge you. You know to PLAY with. There is nothing wrong with that idea. *sigh* Everything is wrong with that idea.

So much butthurt in the comments Try doing that on easy mode in Ninja Gaiden and you'll be dead within in 10 seconds. And i don't buy the "you're BATMAN"-argument either, that's just a moot point that sidesteps the issue itself.

SWEET JESUS That's all that i have to say,

That was a nice. You sure as hell can play the guitar much better than me On a related acoustic note, i found this nice cover: Reminds me of warm, endless summer nights.

Sweet Jesus, Ziets? The last time he and Avellone worked together resulted in the best expansion ever made. The only worry that i have now is the "Too much chefs in the kitchen"-syndrome...

Guevara was right that imperialism, neocolonialism and monopoly capitalism (=corporatism) is a bad idea for a healthy society. Too bad did he think that a substituted proletarian dictatorship through a bloody revolution with guerrilla tactics was a good idea for a healthy society. What's the saying again? "The path to Hell is pawed on good intentions"?

As unlikely as it would be (I agree it'd be a huge shift), I don't think it'd get rid of competition, or even judgment or acknowledgement. If people identified themselves as a "human being" first and foremost, it just means that a lot of the racial/cultural motivations for conflict are minimialized/eliminated. I play hard in a game of volleyball not because I wish to assert my dominant culture. I certainly don't try harder against different ethnicities. I like to win though (what's this get me... dopamine? Haha) and it's fun to compete and play at a competitive level, so I continue to do so. Alberta is considered more "redneck" and perhaps more homogeneous (especially in rural areas) but I still compete with others for employment and purchases (like my condo) in addition to leisure activities. I wouldn't consider the dissolution of culture/nationalism as something that would make people all communists or anything like that, working towards the collective. There's a slight difference there, you do not beat others in volleyball to assert your dominant culture, you beat them because you want your team to win. Their traits are just a secondary manifestation from the original reason: they are the other guys. If we start to think of everyone as one, then the reason for competition will then be pointless, which is why i think that the elimination of culture is a major shift in human social interaction. A step to monoculture is more likely, however bleak that would be.