m76

Expect for skyrim right after release, bethesda games were relatively trouble free for me. There might have been occasional glitches but nothing out of the ordinary. Then again I have not played any bethesda rpg since fallout 4 in 2017

The best audiologs are in system shock 2, as people are slowly going insane and succumb to the "will of the many" But artifacts and ruins are great too. Like in Tomb Raider.

If the system rewards this kind of behaviour then it is the system itself that is flawed.

I already stated it's not about me, yet you keep trying to make this about me. Funny that you try to defend one developers decision to fully cover women. While at the same time saying I'm immature for not wanting to run around naked in RPGs. Then that would make fully covering women even more immature. At least I Don't discriminate between genders, because I'm just as uncomfortable running around naked with a male character as a female. Don't try to make it about sex, I'm not uncomfortable playing games with nude characters because I'm prudish about sex. It is you, Shagger who again conflates sex appeal with nudism, not me. They deliberately made a change that they knew their fanbase would dislike, I'm advocating against that and the dishonesty the sexism and the disrespect surrounding it. And no I would not want characters to wear nothing in MK either. Do you think the only two options are butt naked or full chador with nothing in between? We've been through this. Of course it changes the game, characters visual appearance is a huge impact on how you perceive them. For example multiple RPGs has evil characters that are represented as either good looking men, or women. And because of the fact that they have sex appeal players become reluctant to punish them or remove them from their parties. So appearance does matter, even beyond the superficial function of eyecandy. Those are direct quotes from the horses mouth, what else do you want? I'd never lie to progress an agenda. Because to me truth and fairness are the most important values. If you are going to accuse me of lying or making shit up you'd better stop talking to me right now. So fucking what? LOL. You have been going around denying that this is going on, which was the central point of your constant mockery of me, and now when confronted with reality all you have to say is so fucking what? It doesn't stop me from enjoying the game, although it slightly diminishes the experience when a game eradicates all sex appeal. The point is if they decide to use the game as a political platform I'm going to show my disapproval of that by refraining from giving them my money. They are free to put as much messaging and virtue signalling as they want in their game, and I'm free to chose not to buy it then. I'm also free to voice my disapproval of their ways by exercising my freedom of speech. Hey mr strawman here we go again. I never said it was the same, I brought up mma fighting because the designer argued you wouldn't want to show skin for a fight. No other reason. You hit the nail on the head. The purpose of the outfits in MK was to be sexy, nothing less, nothing more. Nobody expected any realism from a game where you can break the opponents back, burn them alive, or impale them and they keep on fighting like nothing has happened.

Both. On multiple occasions. There were several interviews where they mention "oversexualized" and how they are toning it down. For example here is a quote from Resident Evil 3 remake's art director: The original design of Jill Valentine was clearly going for sex appeal, that was not the right direction. This is a very strong character, and it is a character that's going through a lot of adversity, so we wanted to home in on that and make sure that there's a certain level of believability in what she's wearing So this person thinks, that a female character can only believably be strong if her sexual appeal is toned down and her body is fully covered up. The characters never set out to go zombie hunting in sexy skimpy clothes, that would be stupid. They are wearing whatever they happened to wear when the outbreak started, so in that sense any clothing is believable. Again realism is used as an excuse here to cover up the characters, when clearly it is not the real reason. Or here is the ominous MK11 quote from the art director: “Our design is just getting more mature and respectful. You’re not going to wear a bikini to a fight. You’re not going to be showing so much skin. I think it’s just what the game is about: You’re going in to fight for your life, and you’re not going to be wearing such scantily clad items. I’m sure that will disappoint some fans. We don’t have bathing suit fighters, and I think that’s fine. If people are disappointed, I don’t regret making that change by any means.” This is just wrong on so many levels. First off if anyone saw a real MMA fight the fighters wear very little tight fitting clothing both male and female, because baggy clothes restrict movement, and the opponent can grab a hold of the clothing which would be another disadvantage. So the realism argument falls on its face immediately. Even if we disregard that the male fighters have much more revealing costumes in the game. But even worse is the mature and respectful part, which implies that all fans of series up to this point were immature. Mortal Kombat was actually very progressive as it completely ignores traditional gender roles and put men and women as equals in the ring, but now this guy comes along and says we must cover up the female characters. Which is actual sexism imho, discrimination towards women, and what they are allowed to wear. A page from the book of Islam, demanding women to be fully covered up lest they use their feminine wiles on men. The reverse is the case. Mortal Kombat had an established visual style and costume designs, which they changed out of the blue, immediately being passive aggressive to the fans by saying we don't care if you don't like it. It's not about demanding the uncovering of characters, it's about honoring the tradition of the series. Nobody is demanding that for example Kara in Detroit Become human be uncovered, because that would actually be piggish. But I literally never seen anyone complaining about that except maybe a few christian groups and the society of prudish, sorry worried parents. As the quote says they did this on their own knowing it goes against fan expectations. This is a fault of the developers own political awakening, they become "woke" and now they want to spread the gospel among gamers because they think that covering up women in their games will somehow magically make gamers less sexist. I guarantee it won't, but it sure as hell pisses of a lot of people, and leaves a sour taste in their mouth, loosing them a lot of business. I specifically did not buy MK11 because of this. And I'm not alone in that. It is a matter of principle, not because I need this game to look at scantily clad women.

You always make it out about me, but it's not my standards, it's a generalized notion of what is considered attractive. If they went by my standards the outrage mob would be larger than in the case of TLOU2. Because my standards of attractiveness goes 180 to that of most men, but I know that and I'd be a selfish bastard if I still insisted that they cater to me. They themselves admit it that they want to reduce the attractiveness of female characters, to defeat that evil male gaze. It's not about realism, that's only the excuse they give. Like for example they said they covered up female characters in MK11 to make it more realistic because "you wouldn't want to show much skin in a fight", but then half of the male characters are topless. They don't just deliberately want to go against fan service, they even lie about it straight into your face. Or they made the Asari faces quite bad in ME:Andromeda, which is a race that is supposed to be attractive by lore, so much about realism. And nobody said it was a conspiracy, it is individual bad faith actors working towards the same goal which is to perpetuate their politics by using games as a platform. Just as they ruined western comic books. Just as they are using star trek as a vessel for politics.

If anything seeing my mirror image relfected back at me from a game would make me self conscious, which is the last thing I want. This modern notion of representation is based on a false premise. We never looked at the characters and said, oh that protagonst has a different gender or race than me, now the game is ruined. Represent characters that make sense in the game's setting, that's it.

A character can be idealized and realistic at the same time. Idealized as in better looking than average. Who says beauty can't be realistic?

That some people treat their chosen platform as a religion. Even going so far to getting mad when games are published on other platforms as well. Which does not change their experience at all. But they want all for themselves and exclude others.

If we learned anything about games, is that violent games don't actually cause violence in players. So why would any other in game behaviors and value systems "teach" anything to them either? There were a few games where some in game value system was extremely dubious. But who would take it as an example to follow? Just because something is in a game, that doesn't mean it should serve as an example. If we banned everything from games that could be considered undesirable behavior in real life there wouldn1t be much left.

I wish Fallout had vehicles. It would suddenly make the world much more fun and accessible. OFC, this is only a fantasy as I really don't trust bethesda to be able to do a passable driving mechanic for the game, and the gamebryo engine would really struggle at faster travel speeds.

Was there any game that translated well thus far? Assassin's Creed : Awful Max Payne : Awful Tomb Raider : Mediocre What else? Arguably the most successful videogame adaptation is Resident Evil, it is not good, and has nothing to do with the games apart from having zombies, but at least it found a niche audience in the direct to video market. Sure you can say the problem is not with the games' suitability, but with the creators of the adaptations, but still, with this track record, I'm less than enthusiastic for any adaptation.

Mostly by having someone to discuss games with, as none of my IRL friends are gamers.

Too many: Rage, Rage 2, Doom (2016), Titanfall II, Watch Dogs Legion, Battlefront 2, Ace Combat 7, Dragon's Dogma Dark Arisen, Nioh2, Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD, The Witcher 3, Life is Strange, Prey (2017), Resident Evil 7, Resident Evil 3 Remaster, Shadow Warrior (2013), Shadowrun Returns, This War of Mine, Transport Fever 2. Sniper Ghost Warrior 3, Conan Exiles, Crysis3, Dead Space. And probably more.

Yes, if I have not played the game yet myself. If I already played it then any review trying to change my perception would be in conflict with my first hand experience.

English is one of the easier languages to learn. I always laugh when some English speakers talk about how they have much more words than other languages. Then you look at the dictionary. And the Hungarian -> English dictionary is almost twice as thick as the English -> Hungarian one.

I suppose this would have to be the series of which I liked the most games of. Splinter Cell Deus Ex Mass Effect Gran Turismo

Hungarian - Some say it is the hardest language to learn, I wouldn't know.

I'm pretty sure nobody here has played Revenge on School, since it was only ever available in my native language. It's a text adventure game from 1994, it is full of gratuitous violence and it's so absurd and grotesque that it's actually hilarious. There was only one thing certain: that every computer at school had a copy of it somewhere hidden away in a folder.

On my first playthrough of a game I always go for full immersion. I do the content that makes sense for the situations and what feels natural. If the game is absolutely brilliant, I'll do a second play through where I try to do all meaningful side missions, but I'm still not going to be collecting rocks. The concept of 100%-ing a game is completely alien to me, I never did that even in my most favorite, beloved games, ever.

In the context it is the exact same thing. The player's actions are the character's, and if they turn out to be in vain, then the character's actions are pointless as well. Everything you (the player character) does in those games turns out to be a fools errand.

I'm uncomfortable playing characters in their underwear or nude in RPGs, that doesn't mean I want to ban others from doing that if they want to. I'm always for giving people options. Instead of nude I prefer appropriately clothed, for a sex scene obviously nudity makes sense. Having a sex scene where the characters are fully clothed would be about as jarring as running around in ancient Greece in nothing but a loincloth. Or worse in Scandinavia. I was not referring to god of war. I have never played any of the God of War games and don't intend to.

OK, fair enough. It's not about challenging my views, it's dragging me up as some kind of bad example. That's completely uncalled for. I have no interest in the God of War franchise, and I have no opinion on fat Thor either way. As I don't know if this is a new character they are bringing to the game (in that case I don't see a problem with this depiction) or it is an established character in the franchise. Well, you should know by now that throwing insults my way doesn't work, as I've already said it only hurts if it's true. Now it seems that it is you who can't have their views challenged, and unable to even agree to disagree. For me, and it seems millions of others, the aesthetics of characters is a fundamental part of their persona. It is impossible to detach the look from the persona. The two together makes a whole. Well, not exactly, since many times they don't just change characters' looks but personalities too. Because I never even read that topic, I can't be responsible to follow you around everywhere to see where you did a take on some topic I might disagree with. You assume malice immediately where none exists. I might address that thread at a later date if you wish, but not if you take this attitude. As I've already stated I have no opinion on this either way, as I'm not familiar with the franchise and I don't like to run my mouth about things I know nothing about. You are taking posts out of context, yeah I'm a stickler for realism of games as far as having realistic phyisics,as in adherence to newtonian physics. Not in the sesne of games need to be a mirror image of the real world in the proportion of ugly people who don't take care of their body and good looking, fit people. Whether you like it or not beautiful people do exist in reality, it's too bad that I don't see them all the time, hence why I wish to see them at least in fiction more often. Re-stating the same thing makes no difference. It is exactly the small flaws that make people look beautiful and unique. I agree 100%. But emphasis on small. There is a far cry between characters having small flaws vs covering them in almost burka like outfits and giving them masculine jaws, square faces, hairstyles that can not be considered feminine and so on. I'm not saying all developers do it. For example I'm fine with the depiction of women in The Last of Us series. I take issue with clear agendas where they even admit to trying to de-sexualize characters and to not feed the "male gaze". TLOU2 can hardly be called asexual. I actually know something about it, and I often add imperfections to the characters I design. That's what makes them more human. As for Forbidden west, I'm not that much bothered about the design, I want to see it for myself in action before I judge it. From what I understand the problem comes from that some people think it doesn't look like Aloy in the first game. I'm more concerned by the narrative of the upcoming game, but that's entirely another topic. I think the mistake here is that the so called "perfect" depiction is with makeup, which makes zero sense in the context of the game. And the facial expression makes it impossible to compare anyway. I'd argue the two could be considered the same, the only difference being the expression and makeup effects. I'm really not the right person to argue about this, I'm not going to play devils advocate, as I've said I have no immediate complaints about that design, the cheeks look a bit puffy, but that might be due to the expression, as said i want to see the game before judging the character design, and I especially want to see the selection of outfits in the game. That's a much better sign of whether it is being deliberately de-sexualized I tell you exactly who am I: A potential customer. And if I don't like what I see in a game, I won't be an actual customer. It's that simple. I come from a traditional merchant family, where we used to try to sell things to the customer that they wanted. Instead of trying to belittle them for not wanting what we as sellers thought they should want. And let me ask you this, how do you know that the design changes implemented by these studios are the creative decisions of the artists, and not a mandate from top down to avoid backlash from those advocating for non-sexualiezed depictions? I mean you know exactly how vile and disgusting some can be, going as far as doxing people for having different opinions or doing something not in line with their views, calling employers demanding the firing of the person etc. Nobody wants that, so what if they are just going in the direction of least resistance? GAmers might complain, but they'd never go to your home to throw rocks in your window, or call your employer because you made a tweet 10 years ago. I can understand where do you come with the selfish part, but where does misogynist comes from? How is it misogynist to prefer fictional women who are more attractive? I freely admit that I'm selfish of course I want to see characters that 100% match my type. Too bad that almost never happens. I can count to two so far in the history of gaming. But who doesn't want to see characters that they like? Don't tell me you prefer to see characters that go counter to your notions of beauty over ones that are a closer match to it. Just because you refuse to accept it, doesn't mean there aren't traits that are associated with feminine beauty, or even male beauty in men's case. If your notion that beauty is completely subjective were true none of the beauty pageants and sports judged by aesthetics could exist. I didn't say they were forced to change it, I said there is outrage about it. At least we agree on one thing. Now when the admin of neoGAF was ousted as a sexual predator, they went on to form Resetera which is even more toxic and vile. But I've never been there myself either. I just saw snippets where they outright banned people not just for defending Project Eve, but even for being neutral about it. It doesn't hurt me specifically. I was never a fan of that type of design myself. I'm just pointing out that the same behavior is going on on the other end of the spectrum. I haven't even heard about the DF take before, I was just referring to the resetera forums, that are considered the de-facto insider forum these days for game developers after neoGAF's fall from grace. And REsetera are banning people for not condemninig this design outright. So there is a reality check for you for how hostile some of these people are against dissenting opinions. And I can guerantee you if they could they'd absolutely force the developers to change the design.

Sometimes I do much more clicks during work than gaming, so it happens that my wrist gets sore. To alleviate the issue I can switch the mouse to my left hand during work, so my right hand can be rested enough for gaming 😛

But that is exactly what they are not doing. They are actively changing designs to reduce their appeal to their established core audience. Which raises the question of what is their goal with it? Because it certainly seems it's not making money. And I can't see any other explanation, but politics.