If this were any other election I would be more sympathetic, but to many of us, Trump represents an existential threat to the country, categorically different from any American politician in living memory; we're going to get a little worked up about the people who are validating him as "normal" and acceptable (see the response to Trump appearing on Jimmy Fallon's show).
A lot of people view Clinton as an existential threat.
They see her as the ultimate insider of a system run by two nakedly corrupt private organizations that have conspired to rig the system so that only their candidates have a real chance of winning. Both parties have more or less agreed to impoverish American workers by sending their jobs overseas and bringing in millions to compete for the jobs that are left. And both parties waste the lives and bodies of patriots in conflicts that only serve the interest of the donor-class in "stability" and have nothing to do with the defense of the United States.
Trump scares the crap out of me, too, but I'm pretty sure that a country that can survive Nixon and Reagan and W can (probably) survive Trump. But just because I think he's awful doesn't mean I think that anyone who supports him must be awful - most of them just see things differently than I do.
Is that the quickest Time to Brad ever? It's got to be up there.
If you base it on the start of the gameplay, it's 6 seconds and might very well be the new champion. No extra points but yes extra fun for it being during the cinematic intro scene.
But I think official Time to Brad is based on the start of the Quick Look, not the gameplay. By that standard I'm not aware of anything that has topped Nexuiz from @mustard's list.
Personally, I don't count multiplayer shooters so New Super Mario Bros. Wii is still first in my heart, especially since he bullshits about the first death being someone else's fault and runs out of lives in about a minute before anyone else has died once.
So tell me, how is this different? Why can't people just deal with it? The writer wrote their character and made an artistic choice, why not let that choice stand? Isn't that what we say when someone talks about Quiet's attire? Or some if the story beats in the new Fire Emblem game? Or the satire in a GTA game? I don't really see a difference. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
I think the comparison to Quiet is illustrative. Both criticisms are based in skepticism of the legitimacy of the artistic choice. Simply put, Quiet is there to pander to horny boys and Mizhena blurts out how trans she to pander to the progressive gaming press. Both are valid criticism and both are hard to care about from the other side.
The principal difference as I see is the unrepresentative gaming press. The NSA is building another data center just to hold all the articles and comments from the gaming press about how "problematic" Quiet's boobs and clothes are. This despite the likelihood that a majority of Metal Gear Solid players approve of gratuitous sexiness. Meanwhile, the only people who care about the poorly-written, obviously shoe-horned character are the people who played the game. The gaming press dismisses any criticism as transphobia.
Maybe I don't follow gaming press that closely, but I haven't heard of any games being cancelled because of moral outrage from the press. I mean, MGSV got a shit ton of flak, but there was no way in hell that game wasn't going to come out because of some negative press.
I feel like this is unresponsive to my argument since I just acknowledged that KT would go ahead and release DOAX3 in North America if they thought it would sell 726,231 copies on Steam and more than that on PS4 and XONE.
For what's it is worth, I think the criticism of of Quiet was mostly fair and almost entirely sincere. But if - for whatever reason - the expected sales were only a tenth of what MSGV sold, wouldn't it be a bummer if that great game weren't release in North America over the Quiet controversy? Because that's what's happened with (an admittedly inferior game in) DOAX3.
I think that it would be certainly but that's not a particularly good reason for that criticism to go away, or for any blame to cast on those people if that's how it did shake out.
The criticism should not got away but the press should present it fairly and with respect for a balance between elitist criticism and populist representation of consumer opinions in the press
@justabard: I am not exactly sure what you mean. Whatever consumers think about a game, KT regularly releases games in the NA region that sell far fewer copies than DOAX3 could reasonably be expected to sell. I admit that DOAX2 was panned by critics and likely a commercial disappointment in the North American region. But come on if you think DOAX3 and too-hot-for-disc DLC binkinis wouldn't make more money than Nobunaga's Ambition. If you can't deny that fact, that means this is not a "raw-ass business decision". All I'm asking is for folks to acknowledge that this is not just business.
Maybe I don't follow gaming press that closely, but I haven't heard of any games being cancelled because of moral outrage from the press. I mean, MGSV got a shit ton of flak, but there was no way in hell that game wasn't going to come out because of some negative press.
I feel like this is unresponsive to my argument since I just acknowledged that KT would go ahead and release DOAX3 in North America if they thought it would sell 726,231 copies on Steam and more than that on PS4 and XONE.
For what's it is worth, I think the criticism of of Quiet was mostly fair and almost entirely sincere. But if - for whatever reason - the expected sales were only a tenth of what MSGV sold, wouldn't it be a bummer if that great game weren't release in North America over the Quiet controversy? Because that's what's happened with (an admittedly inferior game in) DOAX3.
sciential's comments