The Derrit

i see i really want to do that with paper mario favorite game of all time

you can just access it from the wii menu on your wii u... or if it's on a different system transfer it to your wii u

or be 100% honest

i'm sorry for your loss? that's going to be there for the rest of your life

i don't think it's unfair to expect someone making strong claims, in language practically as fact no less, to support their claims, not just make them and walk off. backing up your claims is the most basic of tenets when it comes to making informational material. she doesn't get a free pass because sexism is 'nebulous and subjective.'

your point is wrong they shouldn't

having played this game already it is not a big screen game by any stretch of the imagination, and would look significantly worse given that the 3d effect adds a ton to background art

it's not as outrageous as it sounds, really at all. 2 dollars for a 60 dollar product seems crazy but %revenue of most (quality) retail products is very low. clearly it's not killing anyone as just about any store involved in selling *things* sells videogames

oh i see what you were saying i just assumed you would be 'noting' the thing that was actually relevant to the conversation, which would be women taking the brunt of the abuse. my bad yeah that's cool. it's also completely moot because there are just plain less female protagonists. as we've clearly visited however, it doesn't matter if there are women in roles doing the things feminists want them to be doing (and there are, in several cases) unless it's everyone all the time no it doesn't have to be 'noted.' that notation has no bearing on action games in which a damsel in distress may exist. that's about as poignant as saying 'in the action movie genre, it should be noted there are more male action stars than female. (troubling...)' and if it's not 'troubling' then there's no point in noting it. i take exception to the idea that you think there's needling to be done, like 'yeah you're not wrong. but inequality!' if you think i'm wrong somewhere, say so. if you don't, don't find something inconsequential to pick at while not-disagreeing.

because as she also made cringingly clear, nobody would care if a man died in a video game. because, you know, that happens all the time so it's okay.

can we make a reverse pachelbel test that goes 'if you can replace a male main character with a female main character and have it not change the basis of the story you can't pretend like there's some pretense of sexism?' because that cuts out so many of these 'examples.' seriously. like if you change max payne to mia pain and her husband and daughter get killed, it's the EXACT SAME GAME. they literally wouldn't have to change anything else. dishonored. if you were female and they killed your best friend and your family, exact same game. nothing changes. maria instead of mario. nothing changes. legend of zelda with link-ette. halo 4 with mistress chief. mass effect is self-evident. the new tomb raider is self-evident; her best friend gets captured. if lara croft were male (insert irony here) the game would have been the exact same game. obviously personalities are different but if you put ethan drake into that game i wouldn't blink an eye. are you seeing the pattern here?

or everyone will by a smart TV and have absolutely zero use for an xbox one *except as a games machine* and there will be a lot of useless doilies that drive up the price of the system seriously. smart tvs already do all of these things.

i'm fairly with this. conclusory (whether it be a real word or not) is right; she makes her points, talks about how devlopers "manipulated" a "power fantasy" in order to entice young males and then at the end of it makes her little blurb disclaimer of 'well maybe they're not doing that though!' the first 20 minutes and the last 5 can't really coexist. either she needs to turn her femilanguage WAY down or cut out the last 5 minutes and just go balls deep with her accusatory style you can't really have it one way or the other

nice potshot that says absolutely nothing valuable about the content of my post and clogs up discussion lurk more

also she is wearing the exact same outfit with her hair falling the exact same way as the first episode. which means she's just been sitting on this for months i'm done i can't do this again

the price is only gonna go up, if i were you i'd bite the bullet and pay the 120 for it now rather than 300 later i made the same mistake with the metroid prime trilogy

...wut i'm gonna go out on a limb and say pretty much nobody knows that

yeah the thing about dragons bugs and ghosts is that they have natural, sensical strengths and weaknesses. dragons kick ass, so only other dragons can touch them. bugs get burnt (by magnifying glasses) but make it hard to focus (so they're strong against fighting). ghosts are nebulous so normal attacks don't work, but darkness drowns them out. what would be good or weak against fairies? who knows. there's literally nothing that pops to mind for "fairy" archetypes other than they're small, magical, have wings, and don't fight. everything except that last one is already covered.

and it sucks and fails harder every time they do. thank you for expounding on my point.

Well, Nintendo can thank Microsoft for selling all those Wii Us. people are jumping ship faster than politicians on SOPA.

BOOM. ROASTED. w

it's the same as them saying "we can definitively say that the system is not 'always online' required. just ALMOST all of the time." which they tried but didn't fool anyone. all this means is that if someone uninstalls their game from a system another person can install it for free. note that they didn't say 'there will be no fee associated with sharing, loaning etc.'

maybe i missed something in the thread but who was doing that? people were like 'i don't care that it does other things' but most everyone who's complaining about 'all-in-one' is complaining either about how everything new and different about the system has to do with things that are not games OR that it's now a hassle to play them in the first place because internet/nailed to your account/other nonsense i don't think anyone is upset that there are other features than videogames. also to your earlier point regarding the smartphone comparison, you're not exactly right. it *is* convenient to have a phone that does everything at basic capacity. but why is that convenient? it's because you can do it from anywhere. that's what makes it good. when you take that away, and you have your xbox which is for better or worse nailed to your tv, having an "all-in-one" place to do things isn't really all that special. why? because you already have specific places and ways you do things in your daily schedule. watching tv? turn on the tv. checking email? go to your computer/phone. social media? phone. it doesn't save steps to do these things on your xbox. turn on your xbox -> watch tv is not more convenient. turn on your xbox -> twitter is not more convenient. hell, even turn on your xbox -> watch tv while using cool immersion thingys is not significantly more convenient. because you can watch tv and do the same thing on your phone. convenience only exists when it actively makes something you're doing easier and less complicated. in this case they have created something that is *possibly* as convenient as what people already do. somewhat relevant, they've made games less convenient to play. so all in all i'm not seeing this as a hugely positive move forwards. similar to the same way that the idea of 'smart watches' rubs a lot of people the wrong way. "why do i need to check my email on my watch? is this supposed to be better?"

it is, but then again find me a person who says 'i used to be a handheld gamer but i left that market for smartphones' and i'll give you 20 bucks. on the other hand, multi-purpose would be good if not for the fact that in the meantime the ability to play games easily and conveniently is being encroached upon. if you want to be able to play multiplayer games online, that's what, 150 (don't quote me but it was a big difference) for 2 years to get that in-box? and i have to be online even if i *don't* want that? and if a friend brings his copy of some trivia game over to play on the weekend, which I actually do regularly with You Don't Know Jack (awesome game) then it's just straight up not going to work? watching tv/multitasking doesn't make most people say 'well i guess i can put up with that.' because nobody should have to.

that's false. sorry.