Fistful of Ebola said:
I'd say you're trying to redirect but I don't think you even understand my point. Regardless, it's still wrong. Even if we accept games aren't to blame for what some people believe they can feed into and reinforce what people believe. Do you think and alternate version of Wolfenstein where you play as a Nazi is so widely played by neo-Nazis because it makes them neo-Nazis or because it reinforces their neo-Nazism?
I'd say it's because they are Neo Nazis and they get to play as people who are on the same side? If Belgium was added in Civilization I'd play as them quite often too. Heck in Civ III i even added it in the world builder. (And I would have made it for Civ IV and V if i wasn't too lazy to mod)
I don't know where this notion comes from, we don't shrug-off casual racism or involuntary manslaughter because they didn't intend to offend black people or kill a person. Similarly, we don't shrug-off video games whose mechanics and subplots have unfortunate implications because that wasn't the intent of the developer.
But we do treat involuntary manslaughter differently than murder. And the reason why we don't shrug it off is because involuntary manslaughter either involves criminal negligence or negative intentions (like beating the crap out of someone) and/or the obvious use violence. On the other hand we do shrug off accidental killings where no malice was involved. And we also shrug off casual racism when it's clear none is actually meant (think of stand up comedians).
Nonsense, society has always dictated what is acceptable behavior and what isn't, yet we don't walk around in a "Scientific Paper-like world where" et cetera, et cetera. Do you really find it that difficult to avoid offending people or do you feel as if you should be able to offend someone without being criticized for it?
And society also dictates what is a legitimate complaint or not. And i'd say society is quite clear on this one: the issues of a few over-analyzing and sensitive people are non-issues. Exactly because if we would make issues out of such issues we would reach that dystopia.
Stop trying to redirect the conversation, we are very obviously not talking about sex work and I very obviously am not unaware of it.
You brought that up. Not me. If you don't want a point addressed why bring it up?
There's another person in your relationship and you both need to be happy and satisfied for the relationship to work. The difference is subtle but important.
And the other person is you. Investing in yourself is hardly investing in the relationship. It's simply investing in yourself.
All character development occurs secondary to the plot, and most stories have multiple story and character arcs running concurrently to the main plot. Look at any work of fiction and cut out everything not pertaining to the main plot, you're usually going to end up with alot of very awful and boring works of fiction. And, please, enough with the economics and player demand excuses. I'm not accepting excuses, it's awful regardless of what the reason is for it.
I beg to differ. In many stories the character development is key to the story. To take MGS as an example if it wasn't for all that happened to Big Boss and how he handled it (also mentally) the plot wouldn't be the same at all.
Yet it's a very valid excuse.
So essentially what I said? You're not here to discuss art and the treatment of sex therein, you're here to make social statements because you feel your preferred form of escapism is under attack. Well good news, no one is accusing games of anything and no is claiming video games with sex involved need more romantic development. So your presence in this thread is still confusing.
I beg to differ. Maybe you need to rewatch Jim's video. Jim calls it a "worrysome" element because of what some people believe in RL and that he decided to interpret it in the worst way. I'm here to simply make one thing clear: there is nothing worrysome about it at all. And what did the reference with the twisted version of the friendzone even do there if this was all about art?
If this was only about "art" than Jim particularly failed at making his point and my presence can than only be blamed on his bad skills at discussing something. Maybe you should send him an e-mail.
I don't think you know what a slot machine is. A slot machine is not an action followed by a scripted reaction, it's a device you pay into until you (theoretically) get a big payout. This is also not what I'm complaining about, see my exchange with theluckyjosh on the previous page.
It's essentially always like that in a game. You always do something and get something out of it. The only alternative would be treating the person of interest like an arsehole and than still get the sex scene? Would that be better? After all in that case you don't "pay" in any sense of the word. But that would be an even more ridiculous alternative, don't you agree?
Consequently as long as this particular aspect requires player input it will be like a slot machine. Because for obvious reasons it will always be the positive actions that will lead to the sex and since a player can hardly bring in some complicated input other than just choosing "option A" or "B" it will always be simplistic. But when mechanics bring in such limitations I believe it's up to the player to use his brain and imagination to think creatively and go beyond what is obviously being thrown at your face.
"Hey, George R.R. Martin here! You guys want an end to A Song of Ice and Fire? Well, you're not getting one! If you're too fucking stupid to figure out what happens then it's your own damn fault!" It's a romance subplot, not a murder mystery.
So? Because it's romance doesn't mean you should always shut your brain off and act like a zombie. What's wrong with filling some gaps yourself? What's wrong with thinking of reasons why character A likes character B?
Or maybe the writing staff were exterminated by a Dalek and Casey Hudson unhinged his jaw and swallowed Ray Muzyka whole. See? I can pull baseless speculation out of my ass too.
Ok, I give up. It's obvious the devs wanted to present the characters in questions as slot machines who only need to be given X stuff and than instantly want to have sex because that's how women work. It's totally not linked to limitations regarding gameplay or budget/time. No the previous explanation obviously makes much more sense!
We're not playing subjectivist's fallacy.
I'm not playing anything at all. I'm saying things how they are. I'd say the fact this topic reached page 13 shows that i'm exactly right. People see very different things into it.
Oh for god's sake, it's up to the fucking developer's they're the ones presenting the damn story. It isn't my fault because I fail to appreciate their shallow, bare-bones, obligatory romance subplot. But let's follow this chain of logic. Hey, let's do an adaptation of Metal Gear Solid but let's hand the project off to Uwe Boll and just film six and a half hours of David Hayter's nutsack. You hate that? Too fucking bad, it's up to you to look beyond what was filmed.
I never said anybody couldn't hate anything. You're totally misinterpreting my point. My point is and has always been that the use of fabricated Real Life links for guilt tripping and trying to make things appear much worse as what it is, is not ok. If someone tells me they don't like violent games, fine. If they tell me they don't like violent video games because it turns people into psychopaths and that's worrysome and devs should think twice before making such games, not fine.
Evidently it's so far-fetched that your sole retort has been illogical rambling on how it's the player's fault for not writing their own script.
Writing their own script? No. Not entirely switching off their brains, yes. Is it too much efforts for you to think of reasons why Character A may wanted to have sex with Character B beyond the scripted events? I'm not asking you to come up with a 500 pages novel.
Aside from the fact that it sounds like you're being taken advantage of, so what? Do you believe anything you've done entitles you to sex with the friend of your choice? No? It should, it's considerably more effort than the player character in Dragon Age goes through to get in half the cast's pants.
Sometimes doing favors =/= being taken advantage of. Not sure if that's how it works in your group but we tend to be helpful :/
And nothing in the game suggests entitlement. So the use of the word "entitlement" is misplaced.
That doesn't make any sense
Actually it does. When you want more than what you have your current situation becomes undesirable.
