Amentep

Thats a 16 Bit system, the game only work on 32 bits or 64 Bit systems. So it'll totally work if he hooks up 3-4 Sega Genesises (Genesi?) together, right?

I restart RPG games all the time anyhow, so for me its no more of a time commitment to restart because I played a wizard and decided to be a fighter than if I start as elf and decide halfway through the game I really would rather play a dwarf. But I admit that's a personal quirk. And personally I don't see any specific harm in a respec option; to me its going to depend rather heavily on the game. I just don't really see a large negative to restarting to create a new character and having no respec.

Until such time that creating wombs and transplanting fetuses to men or artificial wombs are viable, safe and reliable at least.

I was more thinking about what if the woman wants the abortion but the man doesn't. So putting a sense of aside the choice of having sex in the first place as a mutual choice, baring being able to remove the fetus and implant it (either into the man or an artificial external womb), wouldn't the 9 month physical commitment necessitate that the woman's position holds more weight than the man's at this time? (Admittedly, IMO, a lot of the problems with abortion aren't really related to abortion as much as no one likes the currently available alternatives).

If you didn't want your DNA used, why did you contribute it in the first place? * If she didn't want to use his genetic material, why did she accept the donation? * Seriously, y'all talk like that around May of every year you have to step over people ****ing in the streets to get to work because all the young women have went into heat and all the young men have lost their senses... *Obviously, this is for voluntary transactions only.

Wouldn't, logically, this argument be applied to all of video gaming? Its frivolous so why debate it? And sports? And TV? And Movies? Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but I see a game like Bayonetta as satire. Attacking Bayonetta for sexualization is like attacking Saint's Row for glorifying gang violence. It's a flawed premise. I dunno, depends on the context to me. If something starts as a satire of a thing, but the satire fails its just the thing. Therefore its open to criticism for being the thing (arguably you could criticize a satire of a thing for still pushing the thing even though its a satire). I don't necessarily agree with it (not having played Bayonetta I'm loathe to criticize or praise it, but Saints Row does a good job of satirizing the GTA style game in its sequels. I wouldn't say its immune to criticism either, though, just that I probably wouldn't agree with much of it). I thought your only trigger was Dwarves. Go Dwarves, Go!

Guys I don't know if I should pledge towards this game but I'm starting to feel guilty that I haven't..what should I do? Only pledge towards it if you'd like it to be made. Otherwise don't.

And people respec in real life all the time. Otherwise I wouldn't see the flood of 40-50 year olds leaving their careers to become nurses...

There is nothing inherently sexist about a person of any sex creating a character of any sex because the creation isn't what defines perception. If you'd rather use an alternate term like positive or negative gender representation or something similar more power to you; personally, I don't care to get in an argument on semantics.

Looks like it meets the minimum requirements on STEAM (as much as I can figure that stuff out). Seems to me (if true) its just as legit to review a game using the minimum specs (albeit, I suppose if possible it'd be best to review the game on recommended specs and then have a sidebar about minimum spec performance).

To be fair, just because a woman designed something doesn't equate to that something automatically not being sexist (anymore than a man designing it means something is sexist). Scale can be seen as a contributing factor. A highly sexualized character who is but 1 of 1000 characters of that gender is different from 1 of 2. That doesn't make it *bad* in and of itself though surely, and ultimately, execution is what matters? Edit: Typos - when will I get a message without typos out today?

It's own little version of the blood wars down here on the boards. Fight XP / no Fight XP = Law / Chaos axis ?

Wouldn't, logically, this argument be applied to all of video gaming? Its frivolous so why debate it? And sports? And TV? And Movies?

I've seen some women support it and some women not support it. I'm not sure "support" really matters since everyone views things subjectively anyhow. I would like to highlight how ridiculous this is. "I've seen some women support it and some women not support it." So you mean, just like men? Yes, I do. I think we need to be clear that race and gender (and even philosophical belief) does not make us monolithic group entities devoid of personal thought or taste. I find the idea that you have to agree to A or else you're not B to be a scary notion and unfortunately one that is being pushed all to often within these online debates*. *I'd argue that its also the chief reason people have an "us vs them" mentality with respect to these events and in particular (and worrying, IMO) are perfectly willing to not listen to anything the other side says. EDIT: Typos

I'm loathe to comment on the animation without any context to understand it. Its very easy to take a snip of something without context and then mentally create the context for it. Edit: Typo

I'm not sure it was a good concept. Which is (IMO) one of the problem with most games' approach to pick pocketing. The item really should be relatively small and in a pocket. You shouldn't be able to pickpocket a cloak, a sword, a shoe, etc. nor should you be able to plant items the size of, say, dynamite into a pocket. Problem is you'd have to actually have a way to design what is actually in the pockets and where the pockets are (IMO) for it to work right, and I don't see it worth it, really (unless you're creating a pickpocketing simulation game)

I've seen some women support it and some women not support it. I'm not sure "support" really matters since everyone views things subjectively anyhow.

In some ways, I think large scale adoption of self-driving cars are inevitable (whether they're good or not is almost beside the point). Too many people will see the benefit and believe the risk is acceptable.

Your secret is safe with me. I won't tell anyone. Unless I forget and tell someone. Nobody is perfect. Hmmm, would have sworn your name was Veecee Bruce, Mr. Bruce.

Its all well and good to debate abortion, but the real controversy here is that Cantousent isn't his real name. I admit, I died a little inside when I found out.* *Definitely true for specific versions of the truth.

If horses are in-game, than the answer to "werehorses?" is "in the game" Thank you, thank you...I'll be here all week. Be sure to tip your waitress.

Back in the day, there was a whole fansite dedicated to answering that question... ...which I guess retrospectively they failed to answer since the question still plagues us to this day. Glad to see another answer though to the eternal question...

Hmmm, well I played D&D, Gamma World and Star Frontiers in the early 1980s. In 1985 I played SSI's Phantasie which I loved (the idea of being able to recruit random monster classes was a hoot). Played some other mid-80s RPGs on the C64. Didn't have the money for a good computer, and ended up moving over to consoles for awhile where I played things like Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Final Fantasy. I decided to break down and buy a computer around the time Baldur's Gate was coming out and reviews for it led me to buy it. That then led to Icewind Dale and Fallout and Fallout 2 when I finished BG.

Not a big fan of respecing (I usually just restart the game if not happy with my choices and create a new character from scratch). That said, I could see some lore related reasons (say a Diety granting a respec into a priest class after a quest) for it being in a game. And I'm not sure a lore related reason is absolutely necessary; really depends on the game and whether it fits that game.

True, but child murder(I'm counting Jason Todd as a child because he was a teenager) is also a fairly abhorrent crime by most moral and legal standards. Furthermore, Batgirl being sexually assaulted by the Joker is at best implied(IIRC Alan Moore said somewhere it wasn't his intention to do that in TKJ and most people I talk to about comics didn't really take it that way) while Jason Todd being brutally beaten and murdered was explicitly stated and shown. Yeah, but IIRC Moore has said he can see why people read it that way and Brian Bolland has said he read the script that way and drew it that way. Yes, but variant covers don't always match the contents of the comic. By this logic, wouldn't the Skoottie Young baby variants or the selfie variants DC did a while back also draw criticism for not matching the tone of the book? Sure, they don't. They're also kind of irrelevant, so getting upset over one seems meaningless. This cover didn't fit the book. It wasn't approved by editorial on the book but by marketing. It was a meaningless variant cover that ultimately had no bearing on the book itself.. If we were talking about the real cover and changing the content of the book, then its a different scenario. This though? Its a tempest in a teapot, IMO.