Tale

It took me a while to even remember what I was arguing in this thread. So you're not alone. For a while I got more caught up in arguing than discussing. The discussion gets disrupted and easy to lose when people take to mocking others or using sarcasm instead of clearly illustrating their stance. Something I'm oft guilty of. Excellent. Wanna make out?

Yes. And movies are made by people, using tools. But let's stick to the topic. This is the topic. But I do! It's the wonderful game of "let's rewrite a perfectly good plot so that it doesn't need to include certain parts so my argument holds water!". This is not the topic. Feel free to argue against a side opinion because you feel that's more interesting than the actual topic. But don't expect me to join in further. Just, y'know, to note. This is a position I am not at all in disagreement with. I never said titilation had no place. Nor have I ever intended to imply that its presence is forbidden by a lack of meaningful context that can only be achieved by masterful writing. The point is largely the opposite. That the existence of sex, violence, insert outrage of the month in games does not require some elitist definition of meaning to fit within a game. Just like it doesn't need it within movies. Movies regularly and consistently fail that same test. But to much less ado.

My comment about Basic Instinct is that it's still 'meaningful' and it's still Basic Instinct if you edit much of the titilation out and merely allow them as suggestion. I conceded the point that they do enhance the film as entertaining. And that entertainment is the purpose and the true meaning of most films. It maybe could, if written properly enough and with appropriate changes to characters! But this in not a point I have any interest in making or arguing.

I was not speaking about video games specifically, as I was just addressing your blanket statement earlier, and your nitpicking of Basic Instinct's box office performance and DVD uncut versions, between which, incidentally, you cannot establish a correlation. In a h-game, sex is not an important part of the plot, it is THE plot, gameplay object, and selling point. H-games are pornography, which is out of the scope of the discussion. Again, you could just read some movie's script and be done with it. But movies are eminently visual (wow!), and what is shown on screen is what counts. You can leave some parts to the imagination, but some, you just can't. Once more, it depends on how and to what extent the details are rooted into the plot. In other words, you can't argue against my point anymore, so you're going to make multiple comments that have nothing to do with the point itself. Basic Instinct's performance between versions, an H-games status as pornography, and a point about movies I already gave a concession towards that you're still arguing for. Nothing about this addresses the point that this supposed 'meaning' is just as trivial or true in videogames as movies. That was the meaning of the blanket statement. The importance of watching the sex acts in Basic Instinct is not more meaningfully important than staring at Lara's breasts.

The Jack Ryan movies were successful. I thought Fugitive was really good.

Her nipple missles are set only to stun and hypnotize.

This goes both ways. The same can be said of video games. Lara's breasts are pivotal to tomb raider. You're not arguing against my point. And if a person enjoys some h-game, then where exactly is the contest to my point? I'm talking about sex being "meaningful." Not simply entertaining. Unless you want to qualify entertainment as meaning. That I'll gladly concede. But I was under the impression from Pidesco's use of meaning that we're talking about some elitist definition that requires it to be used only to enlighten or teach.

Yeah, so? Cut scenes or not, sex is fundamental to the plot there. And the uncut version is better overall. Sex being fundamental to the plot doesn't mean sex scenes are critical to it. Which I do believe is the implication of what I said. Sexuality is fine, even in games. When it becomes sex scenes it's usually unecessary and meant largely to titilate. The plot would have been served the same with fade to dark. Your enjoyment of the uncut version does not contest my point, either.

Perhaps my comment attempted to be too 'definitive." My argument isn't that it's impossible. It's that it's nothing to do with games or game writing. People just use sex 19/20 times just to titilate. I would have thought the word "generally" might have given it away. Movie is just a far more populous medium to have more exceptions. Movies have existed for over a century, games merely 3 1/2 decades, half that time period with visuals that could only be called abstract. If movies didn't outnumber games in just about every regard, there'd be something to worry about. Basic Instinct seemed to do fine in the US theatrical cut.

I bet you had to click that to see this. I took you off ignore a month ago. I'd forgotten why you were even on there.

You mean an actual sex scene or sexuality? The distinction goes both ways. There's no argument about "sexuality" in games. Until it expands into sex scenes or similarly overt sexual themes.

I haven't seen sex inserted meaningfully into any narrative. Book, movie, or game, it's generally only there to be titilating.

Because you get an option to view messages of people you've ignored on a case by case basis.

Give me your Wii and Metroid Prime 3 or the bunny gets it.

The credibility of the threat is not an issue. It's not simply about danger to Indy, any idiot with a gun or knife can pose that. The cult in ToD tried way too hard to seem evil. All the heart ripping out, slavery, mind control, and oppressive caves with heat. But they had to. There's no way easy way to convey the evil of that group. They're wholly unfamiliar. But it meant they had to spend a lot of time on it and it left them no room for subtlety or the audience letting down their guard and respecting the villains as characters of complex motivation. Nazis, on the other hand... show a swastika and we know they have to be stopped. Then you can have debonair businessmen and intellectual talks about history all you want. It's something I also liked about the Russians in the new one. Despite Blanchett's constant attempt at impersonating Natasha from Rocky and Bulwinkle.

Or actually very far from. Nazis are a more respectable and interesting group of villains than a cult. And his globetrotting was far more than overlays. Globetrotting to various locales such as Egypt and Europe has become a mainstay and popular feature of Adventure as a genre and often pervades the same named genre in video games. When the scope of travel is great, it can deliver a more powerful sense of adventure to the audience.

I agree with Kaftan so heartily that I've removed him from ignore. Congrats, Kaftan!

True enough, I suppose. I personally only like Last Crusade marginally better than Temple of Doom, mostly because it goes out of its way and attempts to recreate some of the magic from the first, mostly by playing it too safe. I thought Last Crusade was considered the greatest departure for the series. It had a more humorous tone with the interactions of Indy and his father. Of course, you're right in that it does attempt to recreate some magic from the first, but they definitely don't seem to play it too safe.

Liking Temple of Doom less because it did not feature Nazis, familiar mythos, and globe trotting adventure isn't about liking Temple of Doom less because it was different. It's about liking Temple of Doom less because it doesn't feature many of the features that caused people to particularly like the other two movies. These aren't "complaints." They're features of the other two films that helped give them a character people liked. A character ToD lacked. Trilogy implies nothing of the sort. Trilogy only means that there were three related works. Trilogy quite literally means "any series of three related works." At the time, maybe. In the context of now, Temple of Doom is looked upon as the worst of the original trilogy.

Holy crap. There are people (emphasis on it being plural) that thought Temple of Doom was not the worst of the OT? Holy zombie Jesus on a cracker, this place truly is hell. Yeah, it totally couldn't have anything to do with Temple of Doom's lack of Nazis, familiar Judeo-Christian mythos, or globe trotting adventure.

*foams at mouth* *bites at people*