-
Posts
629 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by random n00b
-
-
You conceded the point? Wow, then what was that comment on Basic Instinct about?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.
No Tomb Raider games that I know of feature plots in which Lara's assets are of any consequence. This does not imply that a game cannot be made in which sex is an important part, much in the vein of the movie examples already provided to you.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.But the plot of Basic Instinct would make no sense if instead of sex, they were having a passionate game of chess.
-
Don't forget the mind control.
-
Marx once thought as you do...
-
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.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.
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.And if a person enjoys some h-game, then where exactly is the contest to my point?
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.I'm talking about sex being "meaningful." Not simply entertaining. Unless you want to qualify entertainment as meaning. That I'll gladly concede. -
Again, only in times and places where ignorance is prevalent. In the West, we didn't eradicate religion. We eradicated (or greatly reduced, at least) ignorance. Starting to see a pattern yet?Religion in of itself is a problem, but the Abrahamic religions are probably the worse of the bunch in the modern world. More evil and destruction has been done in the name of religious beliefs than any amount of good.
This is fallacious on so many levels, that I'm not even going to bother.Oh yeah, Einstein. One of the so-called greatest minds that gave us the atomic nightmare. -
Yes. Because you can cut sex scenes out of a movie in which sex is pivotal, just like you can cut battle scenes out of Letters from Iwo Jima.Sex being fundamental to the plot doesn't mean sex scenes are critical to it.Eh, if you say so.
Yes, the plot would have been served the same if instead of going to the movies, you just read the screenplay, too.The plot would have been served the same with fade to dark.
But it does, since that's the whole point of watching movies. Unless you do that to achieve some measure of higher enlightenment or something, in which case I'd recommend a different medium.Your enjoyment of the uncut version does not contest my point, either. -
What nonsense is this?Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and ignorance go hand and hand, n00b.Many intellectuals through History have been deeply religious, Einstein among them.
Ignorance only goes hand on hand with ignorance.
-
Yeah, so? Cut scenes or not, sex is fundamental to the plot there. And the uncut version is better overall.Basic Instinct seemed to do fine in the US theatrical cut.Indecent Proposal?
What, want to discuss every example case-by-case?
-
Religion is just the scapegoat. Ignorance is the true problem.Its the Islamic religion that is the problem.
Wrong, actually. "Socialist" totalitarian regimes are worse - by far.There is a reason why theocracies are the worst form of government when it comes to civil rights and liberties. -
Yes. Because stuff like Basic Instinct and Disclosure can do without the sex just the same.I haven't seen sex inserted meaningfully into any narrative. Book, movie, or game, it's generally only there to be titilating.You mean an actual sex scene or sexuality?
The distinction goes both ways.
edited for accuracy
-
Yes it's not that bad actually... or so I'm told.
-
Fallout? I assume you mean the first game only...
-
Is that for real?random: It's because in America many shops e.g whole Walmart refuse to sell AO rated games. This means lots of lost salesOr that's how I remember it anyhow
Wow, that explains it, then. If they don't sell porn flicks, they don't sell AO games, either. Makes sense, I guess.
lol puritanism
Yes, well. I'm sure everyone is familiar with the quality and consistency of the narrative of the majority of works in which (explicit) sex is featured... ahem.I haven't seen sex inserted meaningfully into any narrative. Book, movie, or game, it's generally only there to be titilating.Sexuality, however, is a central part of human behavior. And as such, it stands to reason that it belongs with the rest of social conducts commonly presented in narrative. There's more to sexuality than just the act itself.
-
I was going to say exactly what Pidesco wrote, so I won't repeat it.
What I don't understand is the seemingly irrational fear of the AO rating. If we're dealing with a story with adult motives and adult themes, then chances are that a mature, sensible portrayal of sex isn't out of place. It's not the kind of game a dev would buy for his children to begin with, sex or no sex. So why, then, the fear of getting an AO rating?
It's a matter of time, I guess. When today's gamers are making laws tomorrow, something else will be The Book.
-
Oh, no. Hilde's going at it again...
-
What do you mean, more "respectable"? Given the situation of isolation in ToD, a (rather numerous) cult is a perfectly credible threat. As for interesting, well. I can't think of other group that's been used more to represent iconic evil as a whole, but that doesn't make nazis "interesting" by itself. More like the opposite, in fact.
I see what you mean about the lack of traveling in ToD, but the way I see it, it's just another plot device that can be used to spice up a story, not a must-have.
-
I just came back from the movies, watched Indy4. It was kinda... meh. It's perfectly possible that the movie just didn't live up to the unrealistic expectations I unconsciously created due to Indiana Jones being my favorite childhood hero, however. But it seemed... uninspired. Some scenes (chief among them the one with the nuke) seem forced and out of place. And I think they got the character management wrong as well, at the end it's just too many "good guys" that detract from the lead, and don't really add anything. Also, it seems that all that made
Marion
a cool character is gone. Finally, the fake russkies seem... too fake. I'm hoping my impression on that will change when I get to see a non-dubbed version. I can't seem to get enough of Cate Blanchett, though.
All in all, this is the weakest Indy flick to me.
Congratulations, my friend. You just won the Internets.Temple of Doom is much better than The Last Crusade.
Haaahaha! Ouch.Finally, and I'm going out on a limb here, the reason why most people you know like The Last Crusade better than Temple of Doom is because it was the first Indy film most people your age saw in theaters. Feel free to lambast me if I'm completely wrong.But seriously, yeah. ToD is the perfect mix of silliness, adventure, and horror. Club Obiwan is probably the best opening of all four as well. Arguing that it lacks nazis and map overlay scenes is just nitpicking, really.
-
If fanning the flames of sectarian violence in Iraq makes a foreign nation a bad guy then the US and the UK get top honors for evil!Aside from that - I think some facts would be good to back up assertions.
?
Doublethink?
?
Those are the premises for the upcoming Red Alert 3, right?Yeah well here's my take on them:9/11 was an inside job.
The war on terror is bogus.
Its all manufactured terrorism.
The banksters are artificially propping up the economy, to give a bit more time to attack Iran after another round of inside jobs and false flag ops.
The schedule for the NWO has gone awry for Zionists and there neocon stooges. Its a lot harder for them to start WW3 Christians against Muslims while in the midst of a recession/depression.
Cool beans.
-
In times of Universal deceit, telling the truth, is a Revolutionary Act.
-George Orwell-
Everybody has an agenda. Except me.
-Michael Crichton-
Also, "neocolonists"?
-
Congrats, doc.
-
I want my two minutes back, please.
-
You mean the cringe-worthy choreography doesn't bother you?
They are hot however, so all is forgiven. I guess the Czech have a rep to keep up.
-
The article says it was only captured in x-rays. If they make any pics public, they'll be the artificially colored kind. Also, it says the sat was "blinded" at first, which may limit the amount of material available.Edit: Also, I'm with Morgoth. I presume NASA will be making the pictures public. Will they be doing it on their site?It'd be cool to have some pics, tho.
-
You could do that yourself, as it's a matter of copy-paste in the appearance.2da file.
Or just stick to regular clothes. It's not like you'd *need* anything heavier...
Sex and video games
in Computer and Console
Posted
I tried, and this is what I got:
Michael Douglas would be the one in the left.