Because the illustration is annoying.Lunar Templar said:>.> ... then your posting here because?Don Reba said:I don't watch this. The illustration alone is annoying enough.
Because the illustration is annoying.Lunar Templar said:>.> ... then your posting here because?Don Reba said:I don't watch this. The illustration alone is annoying enough.
It's called Deranged Art. It's fun/interesting to look at and prevents the show from being a podcast.Malignanttoe said:Why do half the drawings on here have penises? It just seems a little juvenile and detracts from the intelligent point being made.
People's grievance wasn't "i think the ending sucked, change it." it was "This is NOT what you have been promising us all through development."DugMachine said:How suprising. Someone who doesn't agree with changing the ending "OH YOU JUST DON'T GET IT" and then Jim here agrees with y'all and "OH MY GOODNESS THANK YOU, SOMEBODY FINALLY GETS IT <3." This whole ending thing is just silly. You beat a game, you either like it or you don't, then you play another. Sheesh
Wait. Weren't you just saying something about leaving the politics to MSNBC and FOX? Apparently, you just wanted to replace one badly drawn comparison with the badly drawn comparison you like more.Nicolaus99 said:/eyeroll Right or wrong of X political movement is irrelevant. Jim, good liberal that he clearly is, wants a failed group of unrealistic protesters to invoke as a negative comparison to the Retake Mass Effect protesters. But lets take it right from Jim's mouth around 5:20.J.d. Scott said:Relax. Deep breath. I don't think he was commenting on the right or wrong of the tea party, just the hard line they take on their stance. I think his position is like a lot of political analysts do that the tea party undermined their viability and threatened their longevity by refusing to compromise on any point in their agenda whatsoever. Some people, even within the Tea Party itself believe they could have a much more powerful effect and prevent being marginalized by understanding the limits of what they can affect at the moment and being reasonable about it and working to get their principles included in more laws instead of just rejecting laws that don't match their principles without even considering editing, and refusing to edit laws they propose with the full knowledge that they will most likely be summarily rejected.Nicolaus99 said:Gee Jim, taking notes from Bob now in that you have to drag your liberal politics into the episode? You want to talk unwelcome protesters of whatever and you drag out the Tea Party; why not the rapist, public defecating, anarchist infested Occupy movement?
Leave the politics to MSNBC and Fox, Jim. This IS a gaming site last I checked.
"and they need to be reasonable about what they can influence. Looking at the Retake Mass Effect folk while their extremists risk becoming the Tea Party of game culture..."
If you want a failed, unreasonable, extremist protester group, you need look no further than Occupy Whatever. The Tea Party put chosen butts in Congress seats. What have you got for results/influence? Occupy committed vandalism, robbed churches sheltering them and cost their victim cities millions of dollars, all while accomplishing nothing at all. But when Jim needs to invoke a group of failed political extremists, he reaches for the Tea Party because that's just what typical liberals do. I expect that from Libs. My grievance is that he chooses to do so here on The Escapist. A site for video gaming and geek culture. Jims, and Bobs for that matter, politics? Neither. On-Topic. Not asking for much here.
I'm sorry, but I can't help but disagree with this argument. Believe me, you're not the first, nor will you be the last to make it, but... This simply isn't true, and I get more and more upset with the state of affairs every time I see another person say this. I'm sure that this was by no means Bioware's intent from the start. In fact, the more evidence I see, the more I believe the contrary. Bioware never intended this to be a shit ending, nor did they realize it was one (hard though it may be to miss). One of the lead project designers indicated that it was supposed to be 'polarizing'. While they may have intended it to be controversial (not the best idea, in my opinion), they certainly didn't intend for it to be DLC bait.Azex said:Biowares intention from the start was to have a crap ending so they could milk us for more DLC. It's a really sad state of affairs and it seems to be the new trend in dlc
Of course MovieBob doesn't respect the outrage of the plebians, because they obviously have no clue what they're talking about. Besides, his own outrage is always justified.DVS BSTrD said:I can see you've thought long and hard on this issue Jim.
Thank-you. There is a difference between art and property and change is not fundamentally good, bad or wrong.He won't. We all know Bob doesn't respect fan outrage unless it's his own.anthony87 said:It's actually pretty fucking refreshing for Jim to admit that his initial impressions about the people wanting the ending changed were wrong and that he can even see where they're coming from once he'd LOOKED INTO IT A BIT MORE*
Fair play to you Mr. Sterling.
*Caps'd and bolded on the off chance that Moviebob comes into the thread and gets a clue about the proper attitude to have towards something like this.
So promises mean nothing? I guess that means that after all of the hype and promises, they could ship Bioshock: Infinite as a side scrolling adventure with ponies teaching the player the values of love and friendship. Their promises don't mean anything, right?DugMachine said:Yes, I get what the problem is. My point is who cares what they promised? It's a video game, meant for entertainment and to invoke some feelings or whatever. If you enjoyed 99% of this game and the last sucks, who cares? Why should any choices we make really matter when everything is wiped out? Just realistic to me.
But this is just my opinion. I thought the ending was meh but i'm not up in arms over this. So they went against what they said they were going give us. At least we still got a solid ass game.
Some members of the tea party would have a problem with Jim because he's English and working in America.Nicolaus99 said:Snip
Also this is a valid concern.Sylocat said:Here's the problem:
All that Jim said about "showing that endings matter" would be a great lesson... but that's not what publishers or gamers are going to take away from this. The precedent that actually WILL be established is: "Publishers will change an established game to popular specification, if the fans scream loud enough!" That's the only lesson that's going to be learned from this.
And if the publishers start caving to THAT precedent, then no writer worth a damn will ever work for the big-name publishers. They're ALREADY incredibly risk-averse, and this will just make things even worse. They may churn out a lot of garbage now, but you would not believe the garbage they'll be knocking off if they think that their work can be tossed out at the whim of internet hatedoms.
There isn't going to be a happy ending to this mess, but this campaign is the ultimate in short-term self-gratification against long-term potential.