Zero Punctuation: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune

[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.

 

[Wyatt]

im not arguing for or against anyone. im just tossing out my opinions. take what you will from them.

if you want a specific opinion of you ES or you dreamer ill say this.

ES comes off as Jane Fonda, with a faint but noticable air of looking down at any women that doesnt behave they way you think they should. they either must act a certian way or they shouldnt act a certian way all based on how you view the world and a womans place in it.

dreamer on the other hand comes across as knowing what she wants and doesnt give a fly rats ass what anyone thinks about it.

your comments ES of

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

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.

are something id expect a burn your bra feminazi to announce. a perfectly innocent comment by dreamer about yahtzees looks seems to have ccalled down your wrath and cause (well not an outright attack) you to jump all over dreamers statments and turn an otherwise innocent and normal remark into some kind of crusade where the only right and proper womens views are those that YOU propose.

as i said, you would have women like dreamer trade one 'master' (men) for another, women like you.

now dont get the wrong idea here im not attacking you ..... exactly, im just pointing out that there is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to be a woman and be equil to a man. you seem to think otherwise when you say that women who comment on mens looks are treated as whores (something i cant agree with at all and appears to be just your opinion). or that even commenting on a mans looks is automaticaly concidered 'gushing' wich is a derogatory statment in itself, she neednt wate to be called a whore your allready calling her a gushing empty headed girl wich is no better than whore it seems to me, either way YOU are by your own words refusing her the first step in equality and that is the ability to make up ones own mind without having to consult ANYONES opinions about a given subject.

she clearly sees this, and i cant help but admire how shes dealt with the issue with her responces. she didnt burn her bra, or call you names, shes basicaly blowing you off. i on the other hand like to point out when people are hypocrits so im not.

men calling her a whore is no worse, than you calling her an empty headed giggle machine, both imply that who she ACTUALY is or what she ACTUALY thinks isnt 'right' and shes only allowed to offer an opinion as long as its acceptable to YOUR views on how women should or shouldnt act.

and no your right you never actualy wrote the word 'should' anyplace, but its there in glowing neon letters if you choose to see it just the same.

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?

*hangs head in shame*

im sorry pink, id never call YOU a tard.

it must have sliped out of my subconscious mind. the part of my mind that says anyone who would spend $600 on a console when a PC of the same price range can do the same thing and a million things more MUST be retarded.

that plus my arrogent PC gaming master race genes kicked into over drive. just ignore that remark and chalk it up to an over abundance of zeal to smite the console tar........ erm people?

 

[DreamerM]

Hey guys? I made the thread.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.55103

Go me.

So lets all move on, sing happy songs, and go back to discussing IMPORTANT stuff, like Console vs. PC gamers.

I hate PC gamers. They've all got such swankier machines then I do. You gotta be a millionaire even to afford the rig to play any of the decent games.

Wow, inflamatory and devisive, huh? Don't you wanna shout me down? C'mon, you know you wanna.

 

[pinkgothic]

[...] and chalk it up to an over abundance of zeal to smite the console tar........ erm people?

) *hands you an extra bottle of smite for use at your leisure*

 

[Thisusernameisjustanotherwasteofspace]

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.

I actually don't think that console gamers are idiots. I would probably buy a console if I had the extra money. But if left with the choice to have a PC or a next-gen console, I would go for the PC. I'm just saying that anybody who thinks that a console is superior to the PC is an idiot.

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.

So you judge one platform based on something that isn't its personal flaw, but you ignore issues of another platform despite them being because of the nature of the platform? I'm sorry for the direct flame, but you do realise how stupid that sounds? I little more objective way of thinking wouldn't kill you...

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.

No.

 

[pinkgothic]

I'm just saying that anybody who thinks that a console is superior to the PC is an idiot.

Well, if with 'superior', you mean 'technically superior', then I'd have to agree (with the typical exceptions to the rule, but they prove the rule).

So you judge one platform based on something that isn't its personal flaw, but you ignore issues of another platform despite them being because of the nature of the platform? I'm sorry for the direct flame, but you do realise how stupid that sounds? I little more objective way of thinking wouldn't kill you...

I don't ignore the issues of other platforms. They are simply not issues (for me). In other words, in my subjective world, consoles don't have issues. The PC doesn't have issues (as a platform), either, but developers have been able to fuck up with Quick Time usage on it (as you put it - whether this is their fault or not is really a different debate, but let's just take that as granted for now), and it's where I work, and it's thus contaminated with 'serious', meaning it's just not as comfortable environment to play on.

(I didn't take that as a flame, by the way.)

Honestly, it depends on what you're aiming for. In my case, the sort of games I play are few and far between, and about half of them, by some freak chance, are console-only, which just adds to my personal gain in the matter. ("Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath", "Okami", "Kula World" (though the Playstation 1 can be reliably emulated by now, 'course, even on fairly lame PCs), as the three that immediately come to mind.)

I can acknowledge that the PC is the better choice for a lot of people - it is. I'm just not one of them.

Where exactly do you want me to add more objectivity?

No.

In that case, I'd like to reveal to you a pivotal truth of debates, in honest hope it may help you on your way: insulting people does not tend to make them listen to your actual discussion points. With the exception of a handful of people (to which I may or may not belong - but aspire to), you might as well save your breath... you merely anger them, you won't get your point across, and so everyone loses.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

As someone who plays on consoles and has an IQ of 136, I find the term "consoletard" quite amusing. I can see how MMORPG's work better on PCs *FFXI online on the 360=crap* and RTS's work better on PC's as well. However, automatically saying that every game has to be dumbed down in order to go onto consoles seems a bit elitist to me. Can you imagine playing Smash Bros. on a keyboard? Or Guitar Hero? Maybe consoles are more geared towards casual gamers,
but that does not mean that every game on a console is a relatively casual game, as compared to the godliness that is every single PC game.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

As someone who plays on consoles and has an IQ of 136, I find the term "consoletard" quite amusing. I can see how MMORPG's work better on PCs *FFXI online on the 360=crap* and RTS's work better on PC's as well. However, automatically saying that every game has to be dumbed down in order to go onto consoles seems a bit elitist to me. Can you imagine playing Smash Bros. on a keyboard? Or Guitar Hero? Maybe consoles are more geared towards casual gamers,
but that does not mean that every game on a console is a relatively casual game, as compared to the godliness that is every single PC game.

I look at it from a quality standpoint PC games can be in general better built, while console games focus on mass market and streamlined oversimplifications to sale products, this mind set has degraded PC quality some.

One of the reasons why PC games tend to be more polished is because they don't not have as many cooks and head chefs arguing over direction and release dates.


A solid in quality game is kinda a crap shoot now adays its still reasonable to say consoles lean in the cash in low quality direction but even with that said Capcom has surprised me these last few years choosing to build more solid products for the main title line up than going with the cash in route they are famous for crating using for so long, I can;t wait till them make a new Mega man game thats a cross between lost planet and DMC with alil metroid prime tossed in for good effort, frankly polishing MML's gameplay system would be great as well the last few MMX games have been crap yet they still beat that series with the cheap stick.

Konami only really has MSG they have kinda let everything else go..I wish they would put more effort into Castlvina the design team just can't do it right in 3D they need to relook at it and redo how they build a 3D castlvina.

So its really it comes down to what the publishers let the devs finish I blame 2K for BS begin broken on the PC and both the dev and the pub for the game being oversimplified.

There are 2 things I would like to see the console game industry do 1 full control over the control I want to be able to plug a KB and mouse into a console and play any game with it with any button customization I want the same for a pad I want full control over where the buttons go and how sensitive the analog sticks are and I am willing to pay 90$ for the KB and mouse set they could sale and overcharge for like they do with controllers I am hip to their game but they are not selling what I want to buy!

Another thing is cheating I love my SP cheats because most games have STUPID gameplay mechanics that either make the game annoying or imposable to play this to can be done via so many ways from buying game cheats online for a buck to have a streaming cheat server that process's cheats and blocks the ones that damage the integrity of the unit,os,onlinestore,MP server and mod/homebrew running code.
Via a subscription you request cheats and if you are skilled enough get the 25$ code editor kit and hash code these codes will be slightly monitored once you have made the code that has the desired effect you can submit it for final processing and have it with your handle/name put with the rest of the codes for that game, any codes that are malicious to the integrity of the service will be weeded out and this can lead to controlled and healthy game tweaking(cheating) online where its in a controlled environment meant not to let people god mode but change gameplay mechanics to add life to a game online.

I would be fine with spending a buck a game or 2$ a month or 30 a year for cheating to make most games worth a play through..

There is a gold mine waiting there for the right person to pitch the right plan to the big 3.