Jumbs's forum posts

#1 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

If you give "Gamer" as a self descriptor and your one defining quality, go outside

#2 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

What exactly is the point of this article anyway?

Kim Kardashian hollywood is a game, that has become incredibly popular. This is a video game website. Patrick wanted to share his experience with this game.

#3 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

@eternalgamer2 said:

@jumbs: There have but not to the extent it exists today. And I never said anything about her not being a "smart business woman" (though I'm not sure how anyone would know this because I'd be willing to bet anything that someone else, probably a committee of people, are making a lot of the business decisions).

Patrick's perspective that "empty calories are not the end of the world" is one that I personally strongly disagree with. Not because I entirely disagree with the notion of an occasional guilty pleasure, but because American culture overrun with them. While I don't expect all cultural critics to necessary hold back the ocean with a broom, I'd appreciate it if they didn't just take a laissez faire attitude towards the problem. If this critical attitude doesn't breed political and cultural complacency, it at least is making the decision to make no attempt to stand apart from it. And I find that depressing. Critics should strive to stand apart from it. Elsewise I don't know what makes it worth a damn.

But it comes down to the point of this: Who makes the decision as to what is a guilty pleasure, what is bad, what is an "Empty calorie"? Bad things have always existed. People have always liked bad things. People are not going to stop liking "Empty calories". I know tonnes of people that think ~THE REAL HOUSEWIVES OF THE GIANTBOMB OFFICE (I would watch this)~ is really entertaining. Who cares? What media are you consuming is totally overrun with these "Empty calories"?

#4 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

@yummylee said:

Well, at least you're not going around claiming that 'the game industry could learn a thing or two from Kim Kardashian'.

Actually, the gaming industry could. The way this game handles LGBTI characters and their relationships, and women in general, is better than almost all AAA games. So there's that.

#5 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

"Two, people are dicks about Kim Kardashian. People really dislike her, and I can't quite figure out why. She's played the celebrity game pretty damn well. If everyone could do it, they would"

I want to address this point because I desperately hope we are not at a point in evolution of pop-culture to where we can no longer object to fame due to a lack of talent and substance. It is really sad to me that in the 21st century people become famous not because of their amazing talent but their amazing talent to "play the celebrity game." People hate Kim Kardashian not because they are all misogynistic or because "stop liking what I don't like," but because she is a metonym for bankrupt pop-cultural system that has nothing to say outside of it's product placement.

There is room for cultural critique on the basis of shallowness. I'm not sure what is wrong with that.

This just in: There has always been people "playing the celebrity game". This is not a new phenomenon, and you have to realize that whether or not you think she's worthy of being famous is entirely subjective; she's clearly a smart business woman and just because you personally think she's "shallow" or whatever doesn't make it so.

#6 Edited by Jumbs (246 posts) -

Guess what: It's google's store and they can choose to delete or keep anything they want.

If you don't like it, don't use their system.

If you are on the side of israel, please get off the internet and lock yourself in a bomb shelter so we never have to hear or see any of your words again

#7 Edited by Jumbs (246 posts) -

haha cool, a video game making light of a bunch of innocent people dying, pls dont take it down, censorship!!!!

Get over yourselves

#8 Posted by Jumbs (246 posts) -

@garnsr said:

Doesn't a gay couple bring sex into a game, where a straight couple doesn't? Parents don't question how they have to explain to a kid seeing a man and woman together, but a common reason I hear for not having gay couples in public is that straight parents have to explain what's going on there. I'd guess that a sexual situation involving whatever group would be treated as a sexual situation by the raters, but just having a gay couple not even having sex might be called a sexual situation in the ratings, just because it's not a common enough experience to most people right now to not bring up sex.

This just in: LGBTI couples have a relationship, it's not all about sex