@Ravenlight: Any show or anything aimed at a female demographic have hot men in them. It's just that we have a harder time seeing it. I can't think of a large show like E3 aimed at woman right now though.
Let's take an example on how most people usually think about this. There are always popping up debates everytime a new Bond film is announced that it's degrading to women that every girl he gets are hot as hell. No one seems to complain that he himself have always been played by very hot men. Why can't she be a plump short girl? Well why can't he be a short, fat, balding man?
Or the example you brought up. Why do so many people think a female stripped is degrading but a male counterpart is perfectly OK. Not saying you did. I know several women that hate everything regarding sexualisation of women in any media but have no problem with how men are portraid. The usual reponse when I've brought up the hypocricy have been "Well, that's how men should act and look."
Men are just as poorly and disgustingly marketed as woman are. Men are however often better dressed.
Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with booth-babes or how they are displayed. I simply think people are too aggresive when they criticize it. They are not forced to be there. I also definitely don't think gaming is responsible for this. When was the last time a woman in her early 40's was the female lead in a large Hollywood blockbuster? This is simply a marketing issue with anything aimed at a male demographic.
Is it an issue? Yes it is but it's not about E3 or gaming not growing up. It's purely about marketing. You will always have hot women at the time and place where there are a larger male demographic. It's the same reason there are no shortage of hot muscular and handsome men at shows or meetings with a large female demographic.
Is it potentially unsulting for the men and woman that's displayed like this? Maybe, but it's not like they don't know why they are there.
Yep, a person whose job is to judge luxury items are bad talking people for doing so as well on the internet. If this was a person outside the gaming "journalism" side who said this I might have cared. It's just a stupid internet poll.
I get what you're saying but for the love of god step off the high horse Alex.
I have zero problems about every ending being either humanity is screwed to humanity is almost screwed. I have a problem that my Shepard, the Shepard I created and played as for three games weren't present at the end of the game.
It's sad that in the end Binary Domains very shallow, brief moral choices had the same impact as the choices I did in Mass Effect 1-3. Which is to say non.
My idealized version of kickstarter is a platform for supporting people who are DEAD BROKE. Not established industry veterans with securable assets like cars and property, and access to a relatively large and well developed dev pipeline, and more importantly access to conventional lines of credit. Maybe I'm old fashioned. I don't think businesses are my friends. I get suspicious when the people selling me something try to pretend that our relationship is about anything other than the product, because presumably they're trying to fleece me at some stage of the bargain.
It's such a shame you do just that every day in your live.
If they believe in the project, why not? It's exceedingly common for entrepreneurs to leverage their family's asset pool to capitalize their business. Or do you think Doublefine or inXile are somehow qualitatively different than other entrepreneurs? If so, why? Tim Schafer isn't MY friend. I've bought a lot of games that he's been involved in, but my friends don't charge my $10000 to sit down at their dinner table and chat.
My only hope is that people realize that these developers aren't choosing to go to Kickstarter because they're just too real for publishers. It's because Kickstarter offers $ benefits above and beyond what a conventional financing and distribution deal does, and it ONLY DOES SO because people mindlessly squee instead of sitting back and asking why they're being asked to take a risk that the developers themselves won't.
Any proof of that? Do you have any experience with publishing, funding or financing? Or do you simply talk out of your ass?
It is very clear what you are spending your money on on either of these projects. There is no difference between this or take a publisher announcing Halo 4 and thousands of people immediately pre-ordering the game without seeing anything of it. It's clear that the DF Adventure game is a pet project by adventure fans for adventure fans.
Again, where's the hidden agenda? The scam? the dark secret?
All I get from you is "It's different, so it has to be wrong"
I'm expecting an RPG that, if anything, is more in line with the original Wasteland than with Fallout or anything resembling that nature. I'm not sure why you're so bent on shitting on this.
And I'm expecting a hack job more in line with Fargo et al's output since the 90s. Your hypothesis: they've been waiting to make this game for YEARS but have been held back by NARROW MINDED PUBLISHERS who underestimate REAL PC GAMERS and their AUTHENTIC DESIRES. My hypothesis: Fargo smells like failure to people who actually care about getting a tangible return on their money. But Kickstarter gave him an opportunity to take his quack show to a fresh, gullible audience that wants to believe. I swear, you guys are like a car with the doors unlocked and the window rolled down.
Do he fire you or something? You seem to have a very personal vendetta against him.
Log in to comment