Darji
-
Posts
465 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Darji
-
-
Oh look it is even the E3 build . Was that so hard dear Obsidian to show this to actual people who backed the game or waiting to get it released? I am pretty sure this will get now a lot of buzz and you have chosen the right people with Giant Bomb as well^^
As for the footage: It looks great, The dialogues system, the choices the writing was nice from the bits I have seen at least. The environments and over world look great as well. The character customization looks really in depth and with the background stuff I really hope the dialogue chances a lot as well. I am pretty excited about almost everything.
Except one thing. After playing Divinity I am so sad that this is not turn based combat. The overall feel of the combat looks really fast and even kind of speed up in the Demo but I really have to play it for myself to be sure of it. That is really the only bummer I have with the shown presentation
Stop bitching.
How do I bitch? It is called opinion and you obviously forgot the rest of the posts which talks about all the good stuff which is most of it. How about speak your own opinion and if you do not find something good or a but negative say it out loud instead of kissing everyone's butt?^^
The Ign video is also pretty good despite the bad video full screen player. Josh talks a lot more in the character creation alone^^
-
Oh look it is even the E3 build . Was that so hard dear Obsidian to show this to actual people who backed the game or waiting to get it released? I am pretty sure this will get now a lot of buzz and you have chosen the right people with Giant Bomb as well^^
As for the footage: It looks great, The dialogues system, the choices the writing was nice from the bits I have seen at least. The environments and over world look great as well. The character customization looks really in depth and with the background stuff I really hope the dialogue chances a lot as well. I am pretty excited about almost everything.
Except one thing. After playing Divinity I am so sad that this is not turn based combat. The overall feel of the combat looks really fast and even kind of speed up in the Demo but I really have to play it for myself to be sure of it. That is really the only bummer I have with the shown presentation
-
Video is 25 mins long.
Happy now Darji? (lol).
How do you even know the length? And yeah I am happy the question however still remains why now and not at E3. I doubt it is really different footage than the E3 stuff.
Given that they've been keen to keep the lid on even mild story spoilers I doubt it is E3 stuff. Remember how every other preview mentioned that they skipped quickly through most of the dialogue? What's the point of doing that if they're going to upload it as a pausable video just a few weeks later? I think it's more likely that this is a preview of the backer beta stuff.
They also said that a lot of footage was in some forest fighting stuff and doing a side quest. My guess this is what we will see.
And I say it again. If this is not a real quicklook they are not only screwing backers but more importantly they are screwing Giantbomb. IF its just talking about stuff with some footage between than it is normally a separate video which is called let us talk about ..... or so.
I trust Giantbomb that this will be a real quicklook^^
-
I doubt it will be really in-game gameplay footage, but maybe there could be some new tidbits
Every Quicklook so far was gameplay. And not only bits but rather a whole scene or scenario without any cuts. Quicklooks are not getting cut. They are showing "live" reactions recorded on video. If this is not a real quicklook I will be mad to be honest.
-
Video is 25 mins long.
Happy now Darji? (lol).
How do you even know the length? And yeah I am happy the question however still remains why now and not at E3. I doubt it is really different footage than the E3 stuff.
-
Really? You want to play this game? Wikipedia is great for common knowledge about famous stuff for research it is not. What do you want as proof? an video in which she says that she did the design for Bayonetta? Just google her and you can see for yourself. Seriously Hiro now you are just trolling....
But seriously this goes sooo far offtopic now....
LEts rather talk about how romance option actually can be a great atmosphere boost for your emotions and your investment in an RPG.
-
Best example: Bayonetta was designed by a Woman. God of war games have a ton of female designers as well.
It's always good when people don't provide any links or proof of their claims. Need to provide a link who designed the character and for the artist to admit they liked sexualising that character.
-
Then you obviously have never been at schools or offices with young employees.
Seriously, what teenage girls in schools wear is usually A LOT more revealing than the so called "sexualized NPCs".
It's nothing special to see 13 year old girls with cleavage down to the belly button and mini skirts. And office ladies with pigtails and skirts that aren't much more than a girdle. In summer, you also see a lot of women dressed sexy walking down the streets. You even see girls clearly showing off their underwear with see-through clothing.
Of course, this depends on where you live, but in europe and especially germany, people are a lot more open minded about sexy looks or sex in general. People and self-declared feminists imho should grow up and accept that a lot of women have a different oppinion about feminism.
I can understand people complaining about unrealistic or non-pragmatic armor in a game. But there is no reason to bash games with NPCs in sexy clothing because "clearly a man made that character model". Seriously, there are a LOT of female artists working at big game companies that design female characters in the same way men do. Because, surprise, even women sometimes enjoy seeing an attrative female character.
Yes I have been to schools and offices with young employees.
Also, if you're going to make claims about a LOT of female artists working at big game companies who enjoy sexualising female NPCs, then please provide some links.
Best example: Bayonetta was designed by a Woman. God of war games have a ton of female designers as well.
-
Yeah it should adjust to your timezone. At least it does for me.
-
Now you are making your argument sound a little desperate, gaming is just another medium for entertainment. The exact same principles should apply around the definition of sexualisation and objectification of people?
No Bruce I'm not making my argument sound desperate. Why should this thread be taken off topic and we now talk about movies? We already have a movie thread in the Off Topic Forum. What it sounds like is you're making your argument desperate by trying to take this off topic and talk about movies in a video game thread. So keep it on topic and about video games and not movies, or tv shows or comic books or whatever.
So the question if not relevant. But nice desperate attempt to take this off topic and talk about movies.
The problem is that you are trying to differentiate one media games with other medias movies, comics etc. and this makes no sense at all. I always laugh about things that are totally ok in movies, books, comics etc but not in video games.
-
Haha, you're linking to a Thunderf00t video to support your argument? ROFL
Yes why not. His videos about this issue are pretty good except for the always pandering of how much money she got for her kickstarter. Prove me that what he is saying in this video is wrong.
-
There's actually an interesting tangent here, and also some terminological confusion. What Sarkeesian and other sensible people are objecting to is objectification: portraying women as objects you want to possess rather than subjects you want to be. The term "sexualization" is usually used about children: characters you would not usually—and, most people agree, should not—consider in sexual terms.
I.e. "sexualization of [adult] women" is kind of nonsensical. Objectification OTOH is an issue, and in fact one reason I dislike romance-as-minigame is that it is intrinsically objectifying, since it turns your "LI" into a prize to be won.
("What about teh menz?!?" I hear you ask. Objectification of men is not as toxic as objectification of women simply because it's far less pervasive. Popular culture objectifies women constantly, everywhere, all the time, whereas it objectifies men only rarely. I'd even argue that objectification wouldn't be a problem at all if it wasn't the default way of portraying one particular gender. If pop culture was a more or less even mix of subjects and objects irrespective of gender, it would not make life difficult for one particular group of people the way it does now.)
SJW out.
You also should watch this video. It shows exactly how Anita is wrong and just tries to push her sex negative agenda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Ju-1I1DTU&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A#t=676
-
No I am not. And yeah if I search I can find a lot of feminists who do not agree with someone like Anita or her views for example.
Also I believe this is becoming way off topic. Maybe we should rather argue in a different thread than this one^^
Please do show us those feminists who are all for sexualised NPCs in video games. You said there's a lot, so it shouldn't be too hard.
First of all you need to understand that there are different levels of this word. There is sexualizing and there is over sexualizing for example. There is nothing wrong with a sexual attractive female or male character show knows that she/he is hot and uses this even to her/his advantage. It becomes wrong if it does not fit the setting or the character itself.
As I said before easy example: Triss in the Witcher is sexualized but it fits her personality and the rough world the game is set in. A bikini model in COD just for the sake of it is oversexualizing because it does not make any sense for the generic character with no personality nor the world the game is set in. Also I want to say that I will not make any effort to search for stuff you probably would not even take serious to begin with. Right now I do not even know anymore if you are trolling or not...
-
1
-
-
No Hiro that is not how Feminist think. This is how sex negative Feminist think. As I said before there are a lot of different types of Feminists out there. There is no generally example of the "perfect" feminist. There is a lot of arguing in between as well. On what is sexist and what not etc. You really need to understand this. I am not even really fond of feminists in general because I think it is an outdated believe full of stigmata but even I know that much^^
So are you a feminist? Also can you show me a link where a feminist is okay with the sexualisation of females in video games?
No I am not. And yeah if I search I can find a lot of feminists who do not agree with someone like Anita or her views for example.
Also I believe this is becoming way off topic. Maybe we should rather argue in a different thread than this one^^
-
In Summer in Germany even at my university i see more revealing outfits. Were do you life? Dubai? Iran? Also we met her at a TAVERN. A bar a club in todays language. We do not meet her on the fields or at some marketplace selling groceries... Also I love how you try to judge people by what they are wearing. Who here is the sexist?... If its her personality who are you to tell that this is wrong?
As for the Name. I always think of her as a Spanish name and then it should be Isabella since I never saw the name Isabela in spanish XD
LMAO.
Here's a clue if you didn't realise already and I'm pretty sure it's gone way over your head. I'm not a feminist and I said I wasn't taking a feminist stand. I already said I was pointing out the feminist stand to Bruce who admits he is a feminist.
Get it now?
No Hiro that is not how Feminists think. This is how a sex negative Feminist thinks. As I said before there are a lot of different types of Feminists out there. There is no generally example of the "perfect" feminist. There is a lot of arguing in between as well. You really need to understand this. I am not even really fond of feminists in general because I think it is an outdated believe full of stigmata but even I know that much^^
-
Really?... Ok let us say you are out on the street and you see a woman or man you are interested in. The first thing that makes you take notice of is her looks and appearance. If that would not interest her you would not even talk to her. Or do you talk to every man or woman in the hope of having an interesting character on the outside? This is getting kind of stupid....
Darji, word of advice. Hitting on women you see in the street (a) doesn't work and (b) is rude, and many if not most women consider it harassment. Don't do it. If you have any kind of social life, you'll get the chance to talk to lots of women in all kinds of contexts. You'll find out pretty quickly if you hit it off.
And, as I said earlier, IME appearance is only a fairly small component of that chemistry. Fixating on it, however, is a great way to close yourself off to people.
First of all I am not hitting on anyone on the streets. Secondly going to someone and try to start a conversation is not rude. It would be rude if you would say: "Hey Babe you look awesome lets have sex" If you just go and say hello and start a conversation it is not rude at all. Third people are getting attracted to each other the first moment you see them. This is a scientific fact. If you are not interested in a person or can sympathize with her you will most likely not talk to her/him at all.
-
This is Isabella
On many parties or clubs this is nothing compared to what women are wearing.
So you're taking the parties and clubs with skimpy dressed females as the standard of how women dress in all settings of real life and how they should be portrayed in all settings of video games? You ignore every other possible occasion where you meet females who aren't dressed with skimpy clothes but are still very attractive? Okay.
In Summer in Germany even at my university i see more revealing outfits. Were do you life? Dubai? Iran? Also we met her at a TAVERN. A bar a club in todays language. We do not meet her on the fields or at some marketplace selling groceries... Also I love how you try to judge people by what they are wearing. Who here is the sexist?... If its her personality who are you to tell that this is wrong? This is how the character was written. If it were a shy and socially awkward character and then wears something like that. Than yeah you can totally argue that it is wrong. But with a personality liker her? Not really. A video game character does not represent the whole women in the whole world. It represents one character.
As for the Name. I always think of her as a Spanish name and then it should be Isabella since I never saw the name Isabela in spanish XD
-
1
-
-
Really?... Ok let us say you are out on the street and you see a woman or man you are interested in. The first thing that makes you take notice of is her looks and appearance. If that would not interest her you would not even talk to her. Or do you talk to every man or woman in the hope of having an interesting character on the outside? This is getting kind of stupid....
Pretty much all women I meet don't wear skimpy outfits and have their cleavage sticking out at me. Are you suggesting that's what happens in real life?
This is Isabella
On many parties or clubs this is nothing compared to what women are wearing.
-
3
-
-
I agree, for me there was also much more to Isabella than just her looks. She had an interesting history and personality
And looks is always the first thing you need as you've stated before.
Really?... Ok let us say you are out on the street and you see a woman or man you are interested in. The first thing that makes you take notice of is her looks and appearance. If that would not interest her you would not even talk to her. Or do you talk to every man or woman in the hope of having an interesting character on the outside? This is getting kind of stupid....
-
1
-
-
There are many types of feminists out there. For example pro sex and anti sex Feminists. There is nothing wrong with choosing a person because of their appearance. That is the first thing you see in the real world as well. The first thing you see is their appearance. This is how we humans work and you can nothing do about it.
So the first thing you see in the real world is women in bikinis walking around the city? Where is that city because I want to get on the next plane and fly there.
When you first see Isabella she is not wearing a Bikini. She is wearing a totally normal but sexy revealing outfit. Nothing else. Yes she shows her cleavage but again there is nothing wrong with that. She is a rogue like character and she knows how she can use her body to her advantage. She is using this outfit to get mans attention and then steals from them. Basically she is using men as objects to get money out of them.
Also since this is an RPG you know exactly what kind of character or class Isabella is as well.
-
1
-
-
Hiro I wanted to respond to this because you asked a good question earlier
Firstly you are 100 % correct that I am a feminist and as you know I take issues of SJ very seriously, in fact I take them more seriously than Romance. But there is no contradiction here.
The sexualisation of a person in game is not necessarily a bad thing. My definition of that means that there is sexual dimension to there character. This could be there appearance or how they conduct themselves. Isabella is a good example of this type of personality and she also happened to be my Romance choice, ahhhh....those Pirate boots
But a person who is sexualised also needs to have other attributes that make them relevant or important. They need to be defined around something else apart from there sexuality. And that's important, so Isabella wasn't just a hottie. She was a important contributor in combat and had an interesting personality
But the objectification of a person is where that person has no other purpose but to be an object and this is normally around there looks, so for example if Isabella only looked like she did and had no other valuable combat skills or had no interesting dialogue choices. This is a negative
So you can see the difference, the sexualisation of something is not always a bad thing but the objectification of something is
However, you have said you need the 'looks' and sexualisation of female NPCs to even start a romance. You could choose any other NPC to fill your party but you choose Isabela because of her looks as well. Even if there was another NPC that could fill the role combat wise and/or have an interesting personality, it was the looks that you chose first and seems anything else was secondary and a bonus in your eyes. The main thing for you was her looks, then personality, then combat prowess. It was the sexualisation of the female NPC that you choose and then you worked your party around her? eg. Well I don't need this NPC because Isabela can do this already and she's in my party.
And there's more to objectification than just 'looks'. As a feminist you would know this so it's disingenuous to say objectification is only about one thing.
It's very weird you're taking this stance as a feminist with your justification of sexualisation of female NPCs because you want to romance the 'hottie' in a video game when it seems to go against everything about what I've read on feminists views on this topic. Perhaps some links would help because I have many links where it seems to back me up on this.
There are many types of feminists out there. For example pro sex and anti sex Feminists. There is nothing wrong with choosing a person because of their appearance. That is the first thing you see in the real world as well. The first thing you see is their appearance. This is how we humans work and you can nothing do about it.
-
1
-
-
Sexual objectification of course. Stripper for example do this but this is nothing bad in general. Sex sells and is something very natural. It only becomes a bad thing if it does not fit. Like for example Bikini models in Call of Duty or if its against their will of course. Again in Japan almost everything is sexualized and objectified but they do not really differentiate between male and female and this is a good way of doing it. If its only on one side it becomes rather pandering. If this is the right word for it.
Objectification is NOT only bad when it doesn't fit the setting! Objectification involves the disregard of a human being's dignity. That is always bad. Probably why I hate so many Animes.
You should take a look at this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Ju-1I1DTU&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A#t=676
Everything is objectification. It is just a matter of interpretation.
-
1
-
-
@Darji:
Fairy Tail is an excellent example! They're sort of parodying fanservice with the way they do theirs. 'Tis amusing, ^_^
I do not think they are parodying fanservice in Fairytail. The later stuff has really hentai moments combined with torture in the Manga. And I am pretty curious how they will handle this in the Anime. Sexualisation of these characters just fits perfectly into the world Mashima has created. Also it is a show for teens and sex always sells with teens no matter the gender^^
But I personally like most of the fanservice in Fairytail. Most of it is of course amusing ^^
-
Wait. There is nothing wrong with sexualizing characters or objectification in general. It becomes only bad if it used in a dumb way. For example. In a highly sexualized World like Metal Gear Solid, a Quiet in a skimpy outfit is totally fine and there is nothing wrong with it since she fits perfectly into the world Kojima created. Using skimpy Bikini models in a game like COD for MP or SP would make absolutely no sense and is a bad example how you should not do it.
You really can not generalizing sexualizing and objectification. Another example would be Anime. Let us take Fairy tail for example which has tons of fan service for male and female characters. But the women and men have so much diversity in their personality that it actually feels really great. And Fairy tail despite a lot of sexualisation and objectification of their characters is one of the most favorable series for men and women in Japan. It is always in their Top5 list of Animes.
Stop making the error Anita Sakeesian does because she things sexualisation and any form of objectification = bad and misogynistic. She even called Witcher 2 out for that a few days ago which by the way is just ridiculous.
When you say objectification Darji; what form of it are you referring to? I've just checked the definition of objectification, and it seems to mean treating a person as a thing; without regard for their dignity. How is disregard for people's dignity not bad?
Sexual objectification of course. Stripper for example do this but this is nothing bad in general. Sex sells and is something very natural. It only becomes a bad thing if it does not fit. Like for example Bikini models in Call of Duty or if its against their will of course. Again in Japan almost everything is sexualized and objectified but they do not really differentiate between male and female and this is a good way of doing it. If its only on one side it becomes rather pandering. If this is the right word for it.
The Official Romance Thread
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted · Edited by Darji
In the IGN Video which was released today the host actually asked about romances and Josh answered that there is no romance in the game because romance take a lot of effort and are very time consuming and that with the whole number of 8 companions they felt that it was not possible to implement it while getting it to their quality standards. He even admitted that the forums and backers are very invested in romance options on the forums XD
Too bad because I really liked Calisca. Also I really imagine that romance option are a very good way to actually make women interested in these games. Since this was also a question which came from a woman^^