pmp10

In Far Cry 3 the whole girlfriend/seductress plot would require complete rework. Otherwise it wouldn't be inclusive of heterosexual women. I'd say it's not that easy. I'm all for cutting down on the male power-fantasy aspect of gaming but you are not providing much of a alternative.

So we obviously have a disagreement of what inclusivity means, appealing to the fanbase is about inclusivity where you can play as a male or female. So we may be debating the same point? Also female characters in a game mustn't be objectified. This does not mean now the games will become "watered down gray tasteless mass" But if a large AAA gaming studio like Ubisoft doesn't offer fans the chance to play as a female then this is a problem that they need to address. This objective is relevant in most cases and of course there are exceptions If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. Now, our new Planescape Torment could keep the content for males and make a barebone senseless Ravel for females, not give Annah any reason for hanging around you, but it'd mean extra work that a decent portion of the playerbase (men play chicks too) will never see, and anyone playing a female char would complain that the game massively lacks flavor. You gotta either remove all gender references from the game, build new just as good gender references for females, or just scrap the idea of a nameless one with boobs. Some games are built with multiple potential genders in mind, some with multiple possible protagonists in mind, some aren't, and it is good that some aren't, because those games are capable of adding much more gender specific flavor. I'm naturally biased here as I'm a guy, like most protagonists, and as I have extremely little internal gender association, if I woke up a woman, besides being very freaked out I wouldn't really care one way or another, but despite such bias I still feel it is a very valid argument that the more you try to push for everyone being able to fullfill their deepest desires in one game, the more bland that game becomes, or the more work has to go into that game for the same content per gameplay. You make some good points As I mentioned there are exceptions, for example I don't expect Lara Croft to have a male protagonist. Planescape is another example where you can't really change the main character and I don't expect that change My point about inclusivity is more for a new RPG like the latest Dragon Age, in this case there is no issue around inclusivity as Bioware has addressed this. But Ubisoft and there new Unity sequel in the AC saga. This needs to change because its not like its not technically possible to have a female character Have you played any Assassin's Creed games? The nature of the Animus prevents a choice in character options because you're replaying a figure's memories within a single bloodline. The only way they could have a male and female playable character would be if they were in different time periods. Unity you're reliving Arno's memories, offering another character option means writing an entirely separate game. Sure I hear you. And I played all the AC games except for Black Flag. My issue is more with Unity and the four optional characters, all men. No women Why were you ok with watch dogs then? Or for that matter why are any ubisoft/open-world games acceptable? The drop-in multiplayer is a recent gimmick and it will force you to play the protagonist of single-player. Seems to me you have issues with design of many open-world games. I just can't tell why you attack only specific titles for natural outcome of this approach.

I'm a bit out of the loop here. Why was there a hate thread for The Cynical Brit? What did Mr. Biscuit do to raise people's ire? He criticized journalists for being anti-consumer. On the whole he would take a pro-gamersgate stance if he dared.

I'm pretty sure that they care very little for the average consumer. Both sides have been driven by extremists for a while now.

Why would I even want to free roam with all that horrible level scaling and bad gameplay/combat anyway ? (post Morrowind ES games, that is) To have replayability. Every game of Original Sin is meant to follow the same path. With the nonsensical hit-chance/damage scaling it's stupidly hard to combat any mob two levels higher.

I don't see why the social-justice/anti-gg side would be concerned. The whole 'gamersgate' movement accomplished little and has no idea where to go next.

Thoughts after releasing Divinity:Original Sin and what comes next. Turns out that the game sold over half a million.

I have literally never met anyone who primarily cared about the campaign for any RTS; except for Total War. Every RTS player I know cares about multiplayer 10x more than the single player campaign. Some time ago Blizzard admitted that about half of Starcraft 2 players never tried to play the game online. You can imagine what the numbers would look for a less multiplayer-oriented title.

Quite a few got adapted for consoles and still didn't do well. The genre is dying simply because the production values no longer make sense for a PC exclusive and singleplayer focused game. MOBAs sidestepped the problem by being made for multiplayer and microtransactions from the get-go. Halo Wars did well. Almost all RTS games are made with multiplayer in mind. With a strapped-on multiplayer? Sure. But majority of the player-base just wants the campaign. That's why trying to move classic RTS model into F2P territory simply didn't work.

Quite a few got adapted for consoles and still didn't do well. The genre is dying simply because the production values no longer make sense for a PC exclusive and singleplayer focused game. MOBAs sidestepped the problem by being made for multiplayer and microtransactions from the get-go.

There is essentially no reporting at all. Plenty of opinion pieces and conversations taken out of context. You can almost believe the charges on the state of journalism.

Wait so now we get a 4chan conspiracy to combat the game-journalists one? Isn't there anyone actually checking-up on all those accusations?

If sanctions were really intended to force deescalation then they have already failed. And the self-embargo shows clearly how effective it would be to strike at common Russians. Honestly I doubt anyone in the west thinks Ukraine can be saved anymore. Now discussion should be about containing Putin before he makes his next move.

this doesn't feel right. Ukrainian troops, mostly consisting of volunteers, stall Russian forces, the same ones that crushed NATO trained Georgia just a few years ago? I know that Russian special forces and private contractors are working in Ukraine, supporting the rebel cause, but why would anyone send regular troops... this is not a very smart move, Putin can't be that desperate, can he? That's just a dozen poorly placed paratroopers. By most accounts since the Russian intervention it's the Ukrainian troops who are surrendering.

That assumes that we don't start inventing jobs to keep those people employed. Technological unemployment will be a real problem in the future but for now we can just develop new needs that will spawn businesses and industries.

By now it's safe to say that nobody knows. Maybe in a month we will get a decent investigation and write-up. Right now there is a new conspiracy theory every day.

Zoe Quinn, developer of the indie game Depression Quest had sex with a games journalist, according to a butthurt ex-boyfriend. This led to accusations of nepotism and unprofessional behavior (also ****-shaming). That's about the whole story, really. If only. The whole thing started as some kind of holy war over women victimization and misogyny. By now it seems to be about defending the holy right of the internet of tearing down whoever we don't like. There was also the hacking thing with Phil Fish where his data went public supposedly for white-knighting.

I hope I misunderstood you there. You are aware of the things gaming communities are capable of?

Funnily enough this new patch broke quite a few things with a 80% resist hard-cap. Steam users can get easily screwed by auto-update.

The game most likely doesn't regenerate random seed at reload. You could load a 1000 times and that shot would always be a miss.

It less a problem with the game and more with the sad trend Obsidian projects are taking. You'd think that after South Park they would find some high profile work. Instead we can almost see the bottom of the barrel.

That's a interesting theory but it begs one question. How can you reconcile majority getting poorer (relatively or not) with democracy? Surely if those people are in the majority they can change wealth distribution by voting.

That's not strictly true as more developed countries often control future technological trends. If US/Europe can move some industry standards towards less greenhouse gas emission there is a chance that even poorer countries will adapt them.

Honestly without spells or a bow your thief won't be of very much use in combat. The whole combat system weights far too heavily on magic and elemental damage.

That's pretty much the whole appeal of the game. Unrestricted looting in Cyseal and figuring out crafting recipes with adventure game logic. Don't rush those things as there really isn't much to the game afterwards.