If it's sarcasm, why would it be a question? Or vice-versa for that matter.frobisher said:
I don't think you know what sarcasm is.
The Witcher Dev: Booth Babes Are the "Cheapest Trick"
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
I don't think you know what sarcasm is.
There's a stark difference between a women in a videogame and a booth babe. For one thing, booth babes are actually women, some of them even play videogames. I'd rather spend time with Jessica Nigri than spend time playing The Witcher.
Personally, I find sex in videogames a bit creepy, a bit pathetic, when it's taken too seriously. GTA:SA had it right, make it a mini-game, have the players balling some NPC and have some mad dialogue going on, make it funny - because the minute you take it seriously is the minute you go from being a gamer to being a pathetic gamer.
Sex and videogames do not mix. When was the last time your girlfriend invited you round for an evening of sex and videogames? - in my experience it's either or, either I stop playing videogames and (maybe) have sex, or I keep playing videogames and (maybe) never have sex again
If sex is so important, save your £40, don't buy another Witcher game, and put the money towards a prostitute instead. They are kinda like booth babes, but less attractive, less skinny, less teeth, less rack, but they will have sex with you. Or you could put it towards a decent haircut and go the old fashioned route. There are options, hating on booth babes is like arguing with the tide - as if anyone important is ever gonna object to them, he obviously has some deep-seeded rejection issues, maybe his mom didn't hug him enough, maybe a booth babe ran off with his daddy, maybe he's pissed off that the only truly memorable thing about The Witcher is the creepy sex.
Sigh, I personally find sex in games no worse than a lot of movies where they tack on a gratuitous sex scene for the sake of it and you just want to say, yeah ok, let's move on with the plot now. I will say that the Witcher 2 scenes are the most tasteful in video games that I've seen. The sex cards I had no problem with, I admit it was a cheap thrill for a quick laugh though the vampire card freaked the hell out of me and I had to get rid of it and I really didn't need the lady of the lake one.
Still people seem to be taking issue with Witcher about using raunchy cards and yet no one has mentioned Shadow Hearts: Covenant which used raunchy cards so you could get 2 very effeminate campy homosexuals to make you a dress for your doll. These raunchy cards are beefcakes, so who will complain about that game objectifying men?
Also will say that booth babes will put me off games because I think what are you trying to distract us from about the game, but I wouldn't call CD Projekt hypocrites because they didn't make the sex in game a selling point. I find the sex in it as more following the source material. Show of hands, who's read the book?
Still people seem to be taking issue with Witcher about using raunchy cards and yet no one has mentioned Shadow Hearts: Covenant which used raunchy cards so you could get 2 very effeminate campy homosexuals to make you a dress for your doll. These raunchy cards are beefcakes, so who will complain about that game objectifying men?
Also will say that booth babes will put me off games because I think what are you trying to distract us from about the game, but I wouldn't call CD Projekt hypocrites because they didn't make the sex in game a selling point. I find the sex in it as more following the source material. Show of hands, who's read the book?
I am sure you do know. Specifically, about that hidden rule stating that sarcasm cannot be present in a question.Clearing the Eye said:
Oh, who am I kidding, way to go - clinging to some faint hope some (failing) smoke screen of semantics can be a substitute of tackling anything else in that post - but that, again, requires involving something else than (personal) dictionary.
Also, +rep to post above: source material.
What's left if someone does not know source material (and let's even forget about understanding it
) ? Ah, yes - random opinions and like/dislike. Awesome, kthxbye.
Well if that wasn't a cavalcade of grammar and limp insults. I think you tried way too hard to seem condescending.frobisher said:I am sure you do know. Specifically, about that hidden rule stating that sarcasm cannot be present in a question.Clearing the Eye said:
Oh, who am I kidding, way to go - clinging to some faint hope some (failing) smoke screen of semantics can be a substitute of tackling anything else in that post - but that, again, requires involving something else than (personal) dictionary.
Also, +rep to post above: source material.
What's left if someone does not know source material (and let's even forget about understanding it
Clearing the Eye said:Well if that wasn't a cavalcade of grammar and limp insults. I think you tried way too hard to seem condescending.frobisher said:I am sure you do know. Specifically, about that hidden rule stating that sarcasm cannot be present in a question.Clearing the Eye said:
Oh, who am I kidding, way to go - clinging to some faint hope some (failing) smoke screen of semantics can be a substitute of tackling anything else in that post - but that, again, requires involving something else than (personal) dictionary.
Also, +rep to post above: source material.
What's left if someone does not know source material (and let's even forget about understanding it
Geting better - personal dictionary AND feeling insulted.
Prediction for next post - Department of Irrelevance presents: Pink Ponies.
How is that "sarcasm cannot be present in a question" rule by the way? I am sure making no sense feels better than grammar issues
And, if you want to pretend you are kettle so much, condescension goes both ways. The only difference is you seem to know next to nothing about the subject. And, quite predictably, chose to focus on *how* I am speaking about it.
You're actively making less sense with every post. Starting every other sentence with "And" isn't helping, either. Something about ponies and some rule you are going on about? If you slow down and think about what you type I might be able to respond with more meaning. Like this for example:frobisher said:Clearing the Eye said:Well if that wasn't a cavalcade of grammar and limp insults. I think you tried way too hard to seem condescending.frobisher said:I am sure you do know. Specifically, about that hidden rule stating that sarcasm cannot be present in a question.Clearing the Eye said:
Oh, who am I kidding, way to go - clinging to some faint hope some (failing) smoke screen of semantics can be a substitute of tackling anything else in that post - but that, again, requires involving something else than (personal) dictionary.
Also, +rep to post above: source material.
What's left if someone does not know source material (and let's even forget about understanding it
Geting better - personal dictionary AND feeling insulted.
Prediction for next post - Department of Irrelevance presents: Pink Ponies.
How is that "sarcasm cannot be present in a question" rule by the way? I am sure making no sense feels better than grammar issues
"And, if you want to pretend you are kettle so much, condescension goes both ways."
What are you trying to say? If you're going for the black kettle reference, that makes no sense, because I would be trying to get away from being the kettle.
Or this:
"But that, again, requires involving something else than (personal) dictionary."
Something about something or another requiring and involving... else than... (personal) dictionary?
I don't know if you are intentionally trying to sound confusing, but you can hardly expect someone to make sense of that and are entitled even less to pretend it's my fault when I fail at it.
Look guys and gals, if you can't tell the difference between dressing up women in hot pants and bra-tops to sell a military shooters or a racing games at a convention, and having a role-playing game which true to its world and its characters has some sex in it, then the problem isn't CDProjekt Red.
It's like the difference between a slasher flick and a film about surgery. One is clearly ONLY about the gore. Booth babes are ONLY about the sex. Within a story that is 99% NOT about sex, the sex scenes certainly do not qualify as the same.
It's like gamers today must be contrarian about every little thing. So much of it is pure equivocation, and if you don't know what that means, look it up. Chances are you're guilty of it.
And I'm not even sure about the reading comprehension of the people who post. The article's source and a post here fully illustrates the context of the man's statements, and it is certainly true that American attitudes to sex are far more conservative than in Europe. From the his point of view, the sex cards were not intended to be a reason to buy and play the game, but in markets like the USA they were percieved very differently.
If anybody has contrary evidence to refute this, please bring it up alongside the various accusations of 'hypocrisy' and 'hipster'ness (WTF?)
Any logical mind out there can easily understand the difference between sex which serves a story, world and character and sex which is simply an eye catch and has no relation whatsoever to the game in question. Also anybody with even a tenuous knowledge of the Witcher series knows that it's quite hard to have sex with anyone in that game without making the decision to do so. As a role-playing game it's simply providing an option with which to roleplay. Adults are able to have sex and not giggle and gasp about it.
It's like the difference between a slasher flick and a film about surgery. One is clearly ONLY about the gore. Booth babes are ONLY about the sex. Within a story that is 99% NOT about sex, the sex scenes certainly do not qualify as the same.
It's like gamers today must be contrarian about every little thing. So much of it is pure equivocation, and if you don't know what that means, look it up. Chances are you're guilty of it.
And I'm not even sure about the reading comprehension of the people who post. The article's source and a post here fully illustrates the context of the man's statements, and it is certainly true that American attitudes to sex are far more conservative than in Europe. From the his point of view, the sex cards were not intended to be a reason to buy and play the game, but in markets like the USA they were percieved very differently.
If anybody has contrary evidence to refute this, please bring it up alongside the various accusations of 'hypocrisy' and 'hipster'ness (WTF?)
Any logical mind out there can easily understand the difference between sex which serves a story, world and character and sex which is simply an eye catch and has no relation whatsoever to the game in question. Also anybody with even a tenuous knowledge of the Witcher series knows that it's quite hard to have sex with anyone in that game without making the decision to do so. As a role-playing game it's simply providing an option with which to roleplay. Adults are able to have sex and not giggle and gasp about it.
If that is your opinion, that all of the sexual references in the Witcher were 'forced' into the product, than that is your opinion, but it certainly isn't what Mr Iwinski actually said during the interview.Thaliur said:
What he did say in the original full length interview was that he and his team used sexual themes to help create a depiction of a dark, gritty medieval setting and a hero as flawed as the setting with which he is interwoven. Just like the Isle of Westeros, the land Geralt calls home is a nice place to visit and play hero from time to time, especially with infinite second chances through reloading, but you'd hardly want to settle down and start a family there.
And here we go, "Pink Ponies" in terms of relevance, as predicted.Clearing the Eye said:
See above for ponies. Oh, and is that one yours? "If it's sarcasm, why would it be a question?". If there is a rule about sarcasm AND questions I'd like to hear it.Clearing the Eye said:
Of course it makes no sense - but your "you do not know what sarcasm is" and irrelevant "grammar remarks" are anything *but* trying to get away, they are more like attaching "kick me" card to your behind. But hey, if you are so eager to be called hypocrite as well as "black", I can happily edit it into "Pot".Clearing the Eye said:
Oh, you mean that dictionary you found definition of sarcasm in? Yeah, that "Sarcasm & Question" dilemma, apparently very important for you, considering you chose it as "derailing tool" right after I suggested you were not exactly familiar with the subject.Clearing the Eye said:
The funny thing is, we are still talking about Pink Ponies, so it doesn't matter how confusing it is for you (irrelevant metadiscussions usually are). By all means, let me know if there was something confusing (or, the horror!, grammar issues) in original post - preferably by typing few words about ... I don't know... overly beautiful characters... sex cards... or handsome mutants.Clearing the Eye said:
Booth babes are a person reduced to an ornament used to attract male attention.
Attractive main characters might be the same, or they might be a well written character that happens to be attractive in order to up the escapism. I'd argue that the Witcher 2 leans towards the latter, while the first game's cards are just shallow trash.
I don't know, would you want box art to go back to ridiculous women in chainmail bikinis? The way I see it, booth babes are pretty much that. Tits used to attract attention and an assumption that the viewer will mindlessly follow after anything sexy.
Attractive main characters might be the same, or they might be a well written character that happens to be attractive in order to up the escapism. I'd argue that the Witcher 2 leans towards the latter, while the first game's cards are just shallow trash.
I don't know, would you want box art to go back to ridiculous women in chainmail bikinis? The way I see it, booth babes are pretty much that. Tits used to attract attention and an assumption that the viewer will mindlessly follow after anything sexy.
"Using sex to sell a story is different to using sex to sell a product"
Uhh, no it's not. The Story is the product you're trying to sell and it's not like the sex in The Witcher (especially the witcher 1) is carefully woven in as to be full of context...I mean FFS I'm pretty sure in the first game one of the first people you get to hump is just some random townswoman who you pick flowers for.
Not even going to mention those Sex Cards, goddamn they were both forced and, frankly, aimed at exactly the same audience for exactly the same reason that booth babes are.
Uhh, no it's not. The Story is the product you're trying to sell and it's not like the sex in The Witcher (especially the witcher 1) is carefully woven in as to be full of context...I mean FFS I'm pretty sure in the first game one of the first people you get to hump is just some random townswoman who you pick flowers for.
Not even going to mention those Sex Cards, goddamn they were both forced and, frankly, aimed at exactly the same audience for exactly the same reason that booth babes are.
This is very true. I've never understood why though, sex ain't that great; neither is desire or lust, it's just some primitive that makes me frustrated if I leave it but certainly not wanting to buy anything.Sober Thal said:
To you and everybody shouting:Zachary Amaranth said:
"YOU DID IT YOURSELF! SEX CARDS, ETC!"
Look again. Yes, there were Sex Cards in the Witcher and you were able to have sex with many women, etc, but then again it is part of the story and the background of Geralt.
(Well not the cards, ok)
And what is even more important, it wasn't really used to sell the game.
I for one, have not seen any ads of half naked triss or vess or waitress C for that matter and the Box art, also doesn't show any sexy poses, but just geralt himself (Witcher 2) or the medaillon (Witcher 1).
Badmouthing CD Projekt at the moment is not something I would consider rational: They're still the only devs who bothered to make PC exclusives recently, with no DRM, and not spam some fucking DLC every 2 weeks out the window for some cheap cash in. Plus, hey, guess what, the games are actually good.Clearing the Eye said: