Zero Punctuation: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune

[DreamerM]

To be frank, I have absolutely no interest in watching my own gender publicly throw themselves at the feet of a man, making shrewd sexual advances, and then simultaneously get clobbered by the male population on how we all look like whores.

And as usual, we'll all degrade into some mudslinging fight/flame thing, where everyone accuses everyone else of being sexist. So no, not really.

That you would take such a thread so seriously saddens me.

I simply thought it was a funny idea. Didn't realize it'd be detritus, food for the scum of the internet. Please forgive my intense stupidity, most gracious lady.

 

[es-]

That you would take such a thread so seriously saddens me.

I simply thought it was a funny idea. Didn't realize it'd be detritus, food for the scum of the internet. Please forgive my intense stupidity, most gracious lady.

I just think that girls publicly gushing over men in a forum that's predominantly male-oriented is a poor decision, that's all. While I understand the (admittedly girlish) intent behind it, others may not. In this very thread there are already feelings of exasperation about females squealing over how Yahtzee looks instead of focusing on the content of his review. Creating a thread about this will only perpetuate the response.

 

[DreamerM]

I just think that girls publicly gushing over men in a forum that's predominantly male-oriented is a poor decision, that's all. While I understand the (admittedly girlish) intent behind it, others may not. In this very thread there are already feelings of exasperation of females squealing over how Yahtzee looks instead of focusing on the content of his review. Creating a thread about this will only perpetuate the response.

Just about everything everywhere is predominantly male oriented. I admit it's a girlish idea, but that's the point, this is the internet, this a place called "the escapist" this is us getting away from the world. If we continue to let those rules govern our responses here, then they've already won.

Besides, a bit of me loves objectifying men. Not just out of sheer bloody-minded rage for the things said about Jade Raymond during the build-up to Assassin's Creed (that woman is one of my heroes), but also out of a firm belief that; "hey, women have desires just like men do and it's okay to voice them in a playful, good-natured fashion, regardless of what member of the faceless mass is listening."

If I believed every stupid thing I heard any guy say about what they "really" want from a girl, I'd believe that they just want someone to get naked on command and leave them alone when they watch sports. Obviously, in reality gender relations are a bit more complicated then that, for both men and women. That is a fact that deserves all the respect you have in you.

Yahtzee, I think, is smart enough to get it and would take such a thread for what it was.

I personally think that if Lara Croft's backside can sell game after game, we ladies can be permitted one thread to debate the appeal or lack-of appeal of a pale, snarky, lanky british guy.

 

[Wyatt]

you cant objectify men. we allready see ourselves as objects. what? you didnt think we only did that at women did you? if we cant sell it, eat it , kill it, or fuck it, then it doesnt matter.

ill say though you women are welcome to adopt that world view if you like. though i kinda like you just the way you are. dont become more like men, be proud of being a woman i say. God made two sexes for a reason, women can do loads of things men will never be able to, not least of wich is to view the would outside the frame work of those 4 things i listed above.

your more than welcome to say you like men, and comment on their looks and sex appeal thats not my point, but this notion of 'getting back' at men or otherwise trying to be 'equill to men' by doing the same things we do is kinda fuzzy thinking to me, it says to me that your only way to self worth is based on being able to act in the same way men act. the only way your not equill is if YOU choose not to be

in the movie "Tomb stone" (wich you may have noticed my avitar is from) there is a line in it when the lead woman says "Im a woman, i like men, if that makes me not ladylike then i guess im just not a lady" and she was right, she wasnt a lady, she was just a woman just like we are just men. take pride and value in yourself no matter your sex, age, location, skin color, religion, nation, what ever. nothing your ever gunna do or say on the outside will change who you are on the inside.

from a mans point of view all i can say is that you wont ever gain my respect by trying to be like men and acting a part of empty headed giggle machines that just swoon over a 'cute guy', you wont ever gain my respect by going the other way and burning bras and looking down on your fellow women, the only way to gain my respect is to stop looking for it at all.

ive never in my life given a thought to what women in general think of me in particular or men in general and ive gotten along just fine. thats not to say that i dont care what my mate thinks of me, or other women in my life, but its not BECAUSE they are women that it matters its because they are imporiant to me. so why do women in general give any thought to how men in general view them? sure men in general objectify women, as long as YOU dont let the men in YOUR life do it to YOU what do you care? i dont care that women seem too think all men are raving beasts with the only motivation of having sex with as many women as possable as their only goal in life and again im getting along just fine.

the second you stop letting what others say and do effect your view of yourself, your life will change for the better. the only person whos opinion you can actualy controll in this life is your own, once you get a handle on that you find that nothing else really matters anymore. say what you like, live how you like, but do it because YOU want too not because you want to shock someone else, or you think someone else expects it of you.

 

[DreamerM]

why do women in general give any thought to how men in general view them? sure men in general objectify women, as long as YOU dont let the men in YOUR life do it to YOU what do you care? i dont care that women seem too think all men are raving beasts with the only motivation of having sex with as many women as possable as their only goal in life and again im getting along just fine.

Sixty years ago women were viewed by society at large children: socially, mentally, and physically inferior to men. A hundred or more years ago, they were basically possessions, passed from father to husband with so-many possessions in toe.

The concept that women are fully-developed, fully-functioning and fully capable people, worthy of equal protection of the law and equal consideration as people, is a relatively recent concept to bubble to the surface of the public consciousness, yet people my generation and younger are taking it for granted.

Still, I'm not here debating the feminist movement in abstract, but that a woman SHOULD be able to speak openly about her desires without fear of horribly derisive name-calling.

I agree with your points that you should never let anything: not color or nationality or race or gender, interfere with you seeing and appreciating a person for who they are. The overly defensive of either gender or race allow themselves to be defined by that alone. If they never look past it, they can't expect their peers ever will.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

*indulges in denial to thwart you!*

Nah, really, for me consoles > PC because I work on my PC; and it's just more comfortable having a medium that isn't contaminated with 'serious'. And every time I try to install a PC-exclusive game and it refuses to work because it requires (for example) an old version of Quicktime, I'm happy about the general decision.

Or maybe I should get a third partition for Windows 95 or 98.

DOS?

*shudders*

erm you Do know that XP (and vista) allows you to run any program in compatibility mode right? (for XP) just right click the app, select compatibility tab, click the box, use the drop down to select the previous OS to run it and your gold.

i have had to do that with several games, Dungeon Keeper 2 comes to mind right off hand, have to run that one in 95. well thats not exactly true i dont HAVE too it WILL run in XP but its not stable.

and what new game makes you load an old version of quicktime? not doubting you id just like to know so i can avoid it

and while we are on the topic this is yet another reason to go PC for gaming, your games never stop working. it might require a bit of effort on your part but i dont own a PC game that i cant get to play on this computer and some of those games are over 12 years old. try saying THAT about a console. all those hundereds of not thousands of dollers spent on games POOF gone over night unless you want to stack up 3 generations of consoles in your living room you need a friggen PHD in pysics just to keep the wires straight. and if you buy more than one brand of console forget it.

hehe console tards, gotta love em 8D

*falls off chair*
I can't run some 95/98 games because compatibility is a joke and virtual machine can't do 3D graphics (main game I can't run the GL version of Mech warrior 2 titanium in GL/DX mode, I can run it in dos mode but thats kinda degrading since the game was awesome when I ran in it Gl/DX mode.)

Suficae to say compatibility is wonky emulation is a bit more stable,I love emulation save stats,speed throttle, graphic filters, much prefer it over the crappy regurgitation of the console market offerings.

I wouldn't mind paying 15$ a month for a Streaming Xbox emulation service on PC that gives you cheats,save states and what not,sadly corporate is not interested in innovation....

DreamerM
zippy rambling
men get bashed all the time for being men yet because they are a precived majority they can't complain back without being looked at funny, there comes a point when a group needs to deal with the reality of reality and quit whining over every little thing, fight for freedom and eaqaulty in laws within society and man up over being treated poorly by other groups in it because you will always have some in society to make fun of others regardless of who/what/when/where because humans are that petty.

PC zero tolerance on intolerance is not going to protect anyone from humanity being human but it dose not mean we can't be fair to everyone...but the PC nazis

 

[Dectilon]

Yeesh. We should start an "Is Yahtzee Cute?" thread just for itself.

....hey....

In fact, we SHOULD start an "Is Yahtzee Cute?" thread.

To be frank, I have absolutely no interest in watching my own gender publicly throw themselves at the feet of a man, making shrewd sexual advances, and simultaneously get clobbered by the male population on how we look like whores.

And as usual, we'll all degrade into some mudslinging fight/flame thing, where everyone accuses everyone else of being sexist. So no, not really.

You do realize at least half of those reponses will be made by men, don't you? ^^

As for PC vs Consoles (which is strange considering the PC is yet another console... I guess it's sort of like PC vs Mac, Macs being PCs ) I'd say the PC is superior as far as possibilities goes. If there's an old game that you want to play you just know someone has made their own little patch that makes it work. If a great game is neglected by it's original maker then eventually the talents of the community will step in and right the terrible imbalance (see Bloodlines for example). The things that favor consoles are:
- The lower price, if the only thing you're going to use the machine for is games.
- The guarantee that if you buy a game it WILL work on the first attempt, and that it will play like it's intended to.
- And... uh... Fighting games (at least 3d-fighters) are meant to be played with a controller!

I think the reason why we got to this point is because game producers view PC users as stinking thieves, whatswith torrents, DC and all that stuff. For a console gamer to pirate games he needs to mod his machine first, something not everyone is prepared to do, either because they don't feel like voiding their warranty (The red ring of death is actually a pretty clever ploy ) or they're not prepared to pay 200£ to have it modded. So, with the semi-irrational fear of pirates producers prefer consoles, but feel that they need some more reasons to rationalize their decision, thus sparking the superiority debate : P

Personally I enjoy both, but if a game comes out on PC as well as console I'm going to get the PC-version (most likely).

 

[Thisusernameisjustanotherwasteofspace]

PC vs Console discussion:
Allow me to point out emulators for all but the newest systems. While you can't compare a real system with an emulator, I would rather have 20 systems at 90% functionality than spending the cash at that many real ones. The XP comptability works only on 50% of the games, and DOS games are almost nonworking, but imagine, we have a working emulator even for that. Also, I'll point out the various MODs for games that increase the lifespan of a game greatly. And, if we ever get a game with controls unthinkable for the keyboard+mouse configuration, we just plug-in a controller.

Somebody said that a PC "is for working". Tell that to the many many companies making gaming gear for the PC, before they lose their jobs... I'm sure ATI and nVidia will be thankful for such advice.

Regarding the installation of an older version of QT to run a game. That is not the fault of
the PC as a platform, but the game company for being idiots.

To get things strait, I would LOVE to get a console, it saves a lot nerves when searching fot the right configuration for a game, but saying it's better than a PC is just stupid. Then again, I have no intention proving that to any of you any further, since you have shown that I was right when saying you all live in denial.

 

[EGOinside]

Is having a Young Indiana Jones Ad after that not pushing the whole targeted advert theme a little! lol

Loved the quick time use.

 

[es-]

Besides, a bit of me loves objectifying men. Not just out of sheer bloody-minded rage for the things said about Jade Raymond during the build-up to Assassin's Creed (that woman is one of my heroes), but also out of a firm belief that; "hey, women have desires just like men do and it's okay to voice them in a playful, good-natured fashion, regardless of what member of the faceless mass is listening."

I would love to start a discussion over this (although this will become really off-topic, but what the hay).

How do you feel about female objectification? In my view, any type of objectification is undesirable. Objectification focuses on looks and sexuality rather than merit, and reducing a person to a vagina (or dick*) is degrading.

I actually blogged about this previously, but it does bear repeating - just because men openly want to rape Jade Raymond doesn't mean that, for equality to happen, women should do the same to men. The concept is objectification, in and of itself, now employed by both genders. It smacks of hypocrisy when a female types out 'HE'S SO HOT' while complaining about how men still perceive the female population.

You mentioned in your second response that females have had a history of oppression, being paraded around as objects. That, somehow, makes is acceptable for females to objectify men, because if men aren't called names, women shouldn't too? Two wrongs don't make a right. As you mentioned, the things said about Jade Raymond were awful. We're going down that very road as well.

There are some men who thought Jade Raymond was a whore (how they reached that conclusion, I don't know). Creating a thread to objectify men will, as mentioned, only confirm that belief that all women are whores. Don't hand sexism on a silver platter.

... a woman SHOULD be able to speak openly about her desires without fear of horribly derisive name-calling.

The problem is that it's still not. It's nice to idealize and all, but in the context of an (Internet!) forum it's simply not possible.

* Of course, not that I know if men actually mind being regarded as sexual objects. Maybe Johnny Depp does take comfort in knowing that he's in the sexual fantasies of prepubescent girls everywhere.

 

[Allan Foe]

Let's play a game now... Find 10 differences between these two pictures!

[http://imageshack.us]

[http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=yzhb1.jpg]


Maybe finding 10 similarities would be easier? ... 5 similarities?

 

[LoJo]

Pirates of the Burning Sea has a pretty big Australian community. Any thought of reviewing it? Also consider Audiosurf. $10 steam download. Worth looking at.

I agree, the game looks great. I would love to see Yahtzee do a review on Pirates of the Burning Sea, I believe it just went live for New Zealand and Australia.

 

[DreamerM]

Es- While I agree that any type of dehumanizing objectification is undesirable in the abstract, I personally think that if only women could break the taboo, the taboo that ONLY seems to apply to them, on even mentioning or discussing sex in public, maybe we as a civilization could stop hiding from it and would finally be forced to address it INTELLIGENTLY for the first time ever. Maybe then we could finally figure the damn thing out and move on as a species.

But this is a VERY off-topic discussion so I'm offering an olive Branch? Agree to disagree?

As for the two photos:....hm.....'

Differences:
1. Um, angle?
2. Color of shirt (black vs. white)
3. Hairstyle (parted vs. quaffed)
4. Facial expression (enigmatic shyness vs. lordly distrust)
5. Um........... I donno. Age? (Goatee vs. No Goatee)

I've run out.

 

[Wyatt]

two wrongs might not make a right but they DO under certian conditions make equality. i guess it depends on what your goal is. do you want the world to be 'right' what ever that means or do you want equality for good or ill?

when you start using subjective terms like 'right' and 'wrong' your not apt to go far since the first person that you run across that thinks your 'right' is 'wrong' and is willing to kill you over the issue pretty much ends the debate unless your willing to be ready to kill them as well, then you have equality and 'right' or 'wrong' loose all meaning.

reality allways trumps theory. ask yourself whats your goal and how do you reach it, leave 'right' and 'wrong' to the after action reports made by people that werent willing to do anything about a situation but talk.

women gain equality with men simply by being, its something you either have or you dont, its not something that somone can give you, or even something you can 'take' it just is. either you accept it by your views and security in your own self worth or you dont. the only way you loose your equality is if you let someone else convince you you never had it in the first place.

as to the argument that what someone did 100 years ago, or even 25 years ago (not to mention the last couple thousands years of human history) isnt aplicable. times have truly changed. either you have truly broken the chains or you havent. your future starts right now today as you read this. if you drag along all the 'history' with you your doomed. i feel no connection too the fact that my grandfathers were responcable for the biggest war in human history (twice) why should women feel any connection to how your grandmother was treated in society then?

all i can say to ES is that judging from your posts you simply want to change a womans subserviance to men into a womans subserviance to women, you want women to behave as YOU would like them too instead of behaving as men would like them too and all thats really ammounting too is changin one 'master' for another. all in the name of YOUR notion of whats concidered 'right' behavior for women.

equality isnt when people behave as you expect them too, equality is when people are free to choose how to behave for themselves. and 'right' or 'wrong' dont even enter the picture since 'right' and 'wrong' are moral opinions and have nothing to do with equality wich is quantifiable. if a woman CAN do everything a man does then they are equil, dont confuse that with questions about what a man or a woman SHOULD do, those are moral choices and are a whole nother subject.

geez we really got side tracked here, guess that means this weeks review was actualy pretty dull huh?

 

[es-]

two wrongs might not make a right but they DO under certian conditions make equality. i guess it depends on what your goal is. do you want the world to be 'right' what ever that means or do you want equality for good or ill?

etc etc

I'm not sure what you're addressing (and to whom you're addressing your argument to), because I cannot find any connection between what I've said and what you've argued. I suspect you're arguing with DreamerM, not me. From what I can see, you've simply picked out phrases and went off-tangent.

I have not mentioned any expectations of how women should behave - in fact, I've never even mentioned the word 'should'. What I was pointing out to DreamerM was the hypocrisy in women complaining about female objectification when they too subscribe to the same beliefs. I too did not argue about the idea of the history of female oppression - DreamerM brought that up, and if you read my post properly, I did not argue in favour of it.

I already noted that in my view, objectification is undesirable. If you're looking to get into a tiff over the subjectivity of what 'moral values' constitutes I suggest you find another person to badger, because this isn't about that.

 

[pinkgothic]

erm you Do know that XP (and vista) allows you to run any program in compatibility mode right? (for XP)

Yes. Except you can pretty much forget it, unfortunately. (Or so's my experience - I envy you if you've had more luck.)

and what new game makes you load an old version of quicktime? not doubting you id just like to know so i can avoid it

It's not NEW games that are the problem. I'm an adventure gamer. When you try to install Riven (from the newer Myst collections, which run on XP) on Vista or Win2k and it just doesn't work, you end up idly despairing. I see myself caving to the, "Install XP on some partition, already!" eventually, since apparently it works there (I love the irony). But I don't want to! >.> Much like you guys don't want to buy a console, I guess.

Really, the whole crux of PC gaming seems to be the rut Quicktime got itself into in regards to backwards compatability... I don't think anything else ever seriously exploded in my face, but that keeps happening, sometimes to irreparable levels. Eventually, one simply comes to the conclusion "Fuck that" is a good opinion to have.

hehe console tards, gotta love em 8D

Wow, was that necessary? I find it hard to believe you honestly consider me a 'tard', so who are you catering to with that statement?

Somebody said that a PC "is for working". Tell that to the many many companies making gaming gear for the PC, before they lose their jobs... I'm sure ATI and nVidia will be thankful for such advice.

Huh? I'm assuming you mean me, since I'm the only one the mentioned something of the sort (that I can see - please accept my apologies if I'm missing something). However, you grossly misread what I said. I didn't say the PC is working, I said *I* use the PC for working (I'm a computer scientist), and I don't like playing games on it for that reason. It's a purely personal decision.

Unlike some people here, I have no interest in making broad, sweeping statements about any sort of medium. I was simply pointing out that the reverse broad, sweeping statement - that console gamers must somehow be utter idiots per definition, as is being implied repeatedly - isn't in any way given.

That is not the fault of the PC as a platform,

No, of course it isn't. However, it ruins the platform for me, personally, because I don't want to deal with it. Consoles simply don't have that issue. They have other issues (as you and Wyatt have been pointing out), but those in turn just don't bother me.

Then again, I have no intention proving that to any of you any further, since you have shown that I was right when saying you all live in denial.

I hope you're joking.

 

[DaDude9211]

That was quite interesting when you talked directly but... WHERE WAS YOUR FAMED HAT?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

And for those of you who have just tuned in.

Yahtzee didn't have a hat because he had headphones.
Some girls think he's cute but are scared that men would look down on them.
Consoles are for tards.
He didn't have a hat.

And now, back to your regular forum, after this word from our sponsors.

If objectification focuses on looks and sexuality rather than merit, what happens if your merit IS looks and sexuality? Answer : Paris Hilton or Peter Andre.

 

[pinkgothic]

If objectification focuses on looks and sexuality rather than merit, what happens if your merit IS looks and sexuality? Answer : Paris Hilton or Peter Andre.

Argh, no, no, no, no! Neither of those are even remotely pretty (though I had to look up Peter Andre)! >.> *shudders, stomps foot in a fake childish temper tantrum!*

(I guess 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' goes both ways. *shivers*)

 

[DreamerM]

I'm not sure what you're addressing (and to whom you're addressing your argument to), because I cannot find any connection between what I've said and what you've argued. I suspect you're arguing with DreamerM, not me. From what I can see, you've simply picked out phrases and went off-tangent.

I have not mentioned any expectations of how women should behave - in fact, I've never even mentioned the word 'should'. What I was pointing out to DreamerM was the hypocrisy in women complaining about female objectification when they too subscribe to the same beliefs. I too did not argue about the idea of the history of female oppression - DreamerM brought that up, and if you read my post properly, I did not argue in favour of it.

Thank you, es-.

Were Es and I differ on our views is that Es argues against all objectification, by both genders, everywhere. I'm of the opinion that some level of objectification is inevitable, and that a more level playing field is the way to go. Because double standards for men and women can go stuff themselves, and I'm gonna do what I want to.

I don't really think you're wrong, I understand your point, and I'm fully prepared to just agree to disagree.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled distraction.