The Derrit

none of which has direct impact on nintendo at all. nintendo is still at e3 by the way. nobody has 'one less competitor'

I mean yes.... but.. nobody can do anything about it. it's not like them noticing and saying 'yay we're glad they're doing that' changes what they'll do and the reaction it will garner. at all.

i agree with everything you have said here but you really need to work on posting like a normal person. just a friendly nudge

I'm personally okay with it because no company knows how to put on a good major conference anymore. The past few years have felt more like investor announcements covered up by game demos done by people who write bad jokes. Even when the games are good, and often one or two of them are, the way the conferences have been handled lately just puts a bad taste in my mouth. I miss the days of 2007-08 where people just threw down huge game names and used teaser trailers well, and weren't so *used* to being on stage. Nintendo has realized that Nintendo Directs have gone over very well, and their conferences haven't. It's a savvy move if you ask me.

different =/= better. different =/= worse. i'm not saying what you're concluding, you're concluding what you want because you're making dumb conclusions. nintendo should try to accomodate THEIR FANS who like the games they've been making for oh i dunno 25 years now and have all been thematically the same and had the same main character. 'halo 5, headed by cortana' doesn't really strike a chord either so what you're saying is all people who like zelda games are straight and white because they like the games the way they've been making them for the past 25 years and that anyone who likes them that way is sexist and wrong, and thinking that if there was a change some people would be upset makes you a misogynist pig congratulations that is the kneejerk feminist attitude that started this thread in the first place it's a shame that the first legit point you've tried to make was terrible and wrong. But seriously, in non-troll talk, there's no good business reason for Nintendo to say 'we're going to change the fundamental process behind the Zelda games and make Zelda the main character.' It could make for a really cool game. Think Zelda's family getting ousted from leadership, her getting trained to be shiek, cool combat stuff, etc. But it won't happen. And if they 'simply' switched the genders, the game wouldn't be better but it would make plenty of people less excited about it. Does that make those people bad for saying 'I like what you were doing before?' No. Because assuming that people dislike that change for sexist reasons isn't reasonable. Think about what changes have been made to games that people dislike. I mean hell, Baird being the lead in the new Gears of War game went over TERRIBLY and all those guys in the Gears of War series are arguably just meathead placeholders. Acting like me thinking this change would ruffle feathers is sexist in nature is completely ridiculous.

i'm saying it wouldn't be objectively better and considering the backlash on this feminism conversation even happening plenty of zelda fans wouldn't like it. not did i even ever say if link could be a girl i said IF LINK AND ZELDA SWAPPED PLACES LISTEN PEOPLE HOLY FUWHEOFIOH. what's so hard about this also this is still off topic stop poking at it

that's implying that it's better. which it isn't. it's different. different =/= better.

stop playing zelda games then

so is dudebro but it hasn't stopped you. and i think just about everyone who plays zelda games would have a problem if they decided to make it about saving prince link as zelda because oh hey i dunno nintendo makes their living off of nostalgia, not role-swapping trying to take me talking about a very specific instance and trying to put the words 'problem with women taking more active roles in games' into my mouth is very sleazy please don't do it

and ocarina of time, and wind waker, and spirit tracks they COULD but why would they, seeing as everyone who's not a raging feminist would be like 'wtf is this'

yes i would imagine not. content a normal person would agree is objectionable is another story. what i'm missing here is at what point in human history the idea of chivalry turned into misogyny. 'rescue the princess' used to be, for the last i dunno FOREVER or so until about the 60s, a chivalrous, valiant, at the very least respectable thing. why is that now not the case?

this guy gets it. in any 'academic piece,' whether it be a master's thesis or a high school research paper, if you say only what you want to say when others can clearly discredit or throw doubt on your argument, you're going to eat the big one. it may not be her job to 'argue against herself' but if she doesn't make an argument that even attempts to be informed of other points of view then she did it wrong. like pixelpanic said if it were an opinion piece that's one thing. but it's not. you don't just get to say whatever you want and call it academic. also... there have been no updates since the last video came out. not even for supporters. my theory on this is that she's having a REALLY hard time finding examples of damsels in distress over the past ten years that aren't a) peach or zelda. like seriously. try naming some off. what can you come up with? edit: in fact, i just did a little test with the games i own. of any games in this current generation (wii/xbox360/ps3/ds/3ds) that i own (re-releases of snes games etc. not included), the ONLY ONE that has a damsel in distress theme and isn't a mario or zelda game is tomb raider. and lara croft is rescuing another girl.. so... yeah. and if you count final fantasy XIII. which i really really don't seeing as the overall game has so little to do with Lightning's sister, and there are several other males in the same distress/the person trying to save her is her sister. and her boyfriend too but it's not a male-driven enterprise. edit edit: the same even holds true for my GBA collection. for playstation 2, the only games that applied were Kingdom Hearts games, and even that's a hard sell. for gamecube? the ONLY one is starfox adventures. edit edit edit: you know what fuck it let's just do the whole thing. dating all the way back to NES and Game Boy there's only two more that aren't mario and zelda. banjo-kazooie and banjo-tooie. in conclusion? the bulk of my video game collection dating back all the way to 1996 is, with a notable exception or two, completely free of this 'overbearing stereotype' when peach and zelda are taken out of the equation. i can't wait for someone to be like 'anecdotal evidence blah blah' but for real. it's not 'pervasive' and 'troubling' when a lifelong gamer such as myself literally can't find more than six games that fit the bill in their ENTIRE collection.

because I hate all of you by some woman named KiteTales

this is essentially why. because most games, this happens

that's because it's true. while mega man fans were complaining about no new mega man games, they came out with mega man 9 and 10. EVERYONE KEPT COMPLAINING. if a new mega man game gets cancelled it's because capcom are assholes. if a mega man game comes out and is bad, it's because capcom are assholes. if capcom makes a good, critically acclaimed mega man title (read: 9) nobody says anything because fuck capcom. if this game came out? everyone would buy it and say 'this is a shitty game. fucking capcom.' mega man fans have set the bar so that unless a new game is 11 out of 10, there will be widespread rage. capcom knows this. why do you think they stopped making them? because any mega man press will be bad press unless they make a game that's bigger than mario and halo put together, and quite frankly mega man holds such small market share it's not worth the trouble. and it's not going to be pulling in a new demographic anytime soon either; the core games are platformers with no physics and a guy with a gun. ask anyone that started this generation or last and they'll ask you why you think that's an interesting concept. platforming, hell even platforming with shooting has been done LOADS better in the past few years than megaman ever did. to follow the mega man formula is to intentionally make games that have less depth than their modern counterparts. on top of that, there are people who STILL post on capcomunity all the time being like 'WHY DID YOU CANCEL MEGAMAN LEGENDS 3 I HATE YOU' and that happened years ago now. this is from 2 hours ago: this reads to me as 'i don't want to support the franchise i love unless you do exactly what i want with it.' it's bratty and self-centered to think a company is going to devote its time and money to a game franchise that very few people other than the vocal minority care about. especially given that when they've done it in the past, that vocal minority has ignored it and kept whining. i'm sure there are good mega man fans out there but the mega man *FANBASE* is worse than the sonic fanbase. and that's saying something.

this looks like every run-of-the-mill shooter ever. putting mega man on the box really *is* enough for some people, at least until they can find a reason to say it's not 'real' mega man and then they can complain about capcom again mega man has worse fans than sonic saying it up front

really? i thought it was pretty good all in all. some of their faces were slightly off but jonas especially was pretty solid. and the movements themselves were good. faces are hard to get right but they got lara's down pat. i guess i see it now that you say that but when i played it it was never more than a passing 'that mouth looks slightly funny' type deal very fun game though.

everything else notwithstanding there's just no way to argue building a computer is hard. i had literally never done anything regarding computer hardware before, and 3 years ago i built one in like an hour and a half. maybe 2. i'm on it right now.

just looked up a video it's like namco x capcom but more over the top

for starters, i said because *feminism,* not because she's a woman. and i don't see where you're correct, given the multitude of free passes she's been given by some people here. why is this video series so tardy? 'no one knows, but feminism is bad!' why is it okay for her to keep her audience uninformed as to why it's taken so long for her to make these videos, even though they paid her to do it (and her advertised finish date to these paying customers was over 4 months ago, for ALL of them)? 'well there's probably a good reason! she must be taking her time to make sure these videos are good (0 for 1) informative (0 for 1) and higher production quality (0 for 1) than usual!' why is her first video clearly of no higher production quality than her previous videos, when it's a specific stretch goal on her kickstarter that was passed *and then another 100 thousand dollars*? 'i'm not sure, maybe the next one will be better, you don't know the circumstances! sexism is really important though!' why is her first video full of poor writing as djp has explained multiple times, and fiercely slanted towards implications of developer intent and people intentionally choosing to 'take away women's power' when in many cases, even in the ones she's used as examples, it's just not always true, and certainly not persuasive enough to be used as a scientific article? 'well you don't know she intended that for sure, you'd have to ask her. but she's tackling a tough feminist issue, she should get credit for it!' why is it okay for her to intentionally stir up controversy by putting up a combative intro to her kickstarter, and then intentionally leaving the comments section open (which she never does) to funnel in the hate attacks that she KNOWS are coming, and use that as publicity for her kickstarter? 'don't blame the victim, that's typical chauvinism. women have it so hard.' why is it okay to make a video about bayonetta essentially lying about what's actually in the game to try and make her point, and when she gets called on it, deleting it and never owning up to the inaccuracies? and why can she pull examples directly from the tvtropes and wikipedia pages on this exact subject (damsel-in-distress) and act like she actually did substantiative research, seeing in any other instance that would be, oh i don't know, plagarism? well, those two nobody's answered yet. what bothers me is that these sleazy things that she's doing are protected by the cover-all of feminism, and that what she's doing in talking about sexism in games is important. it is an important conversation, but not only has she done a bad job initially, she's done several incredibly shady and under-handed things along the way which people are apparently willing to overlook because she is trying to take feminism to games. even if she is doing it poorly. so yeah.

i'm not sure how everyone can possibly be like 'computers are more expensive than consoles what are you talking about' when a) everyone owns a computer a basic, out of the box laptop that i bought from best buy 2 years ago for about 600 runs every possible indie game i would want it to, and also runs the most current prince of persia, arkham asylum, and burnout pretty much without a hitch. and, you know, is a computer. which everyone not living in the dark ages needs. you would have to actively look for a shitty old computer to find one that can't run current indie games. the argument is that everyone already owns a computer, and unless your computer is on it's last legs and was bought 6 years ago, has the ability to play any game that could possibly hit the ouya from a specifications standpoint. plus dancing around this issue is even further moot because it started at PSP, and frankly you CAN get a PSP for 100 dollars or less, easily. and specifications be damned, no one that's developing ouya games is going to make a game prettier than the best-looking psp games for a good while.

because feminism. the main reason for most everything that this woman is being excused for. to whatever your name is who thinks the delay could totally have a reason, you haven't been paying attention and your idea is not why. at this point this thread is grasping at really small straws. it's pretty much been settled as far as this thread is concerned that her argument was vapid, poorly written and full of questionable information posed as truth. and plagarism. there's no one left saying 'yeah she really nailed it' because if you look closely, she didn't. i don't see where there's much room to continue other than to keep trying to act like this woman isn't being incredibly shady about this whole operation. gender equality in videogames can continue to improve. okay, we get it. nobody's disagreeing. a woman being like 'look at all this sexism' with middling examples and strongly biased wording throughout her crowd-funded video isn't the solution. the... end?

it's pretty fun. not as crazy combat as it looks though there's a set combos (a + up, down, left, right and y if you charge it up) and it's a matter of timing. its still a fun strategy game though

the argument i'm getting here is that the ouya is not for 'my' type of games. what kind is that? good ones? let me explain something. i like indie games. however, having spent enough time around indie games, if there's one thing i know about indie games its that for every good indie game there is about two hundred billion bad indie games, and making a system based around the inconsistency of indie games is not going to draw the attention of anyone except people who only play indie games and nothing other than indie games. on top of that the people who make indie games aren't as good at 3d models and rendering as professional, so arguing the 1080p thing over the psp is kind of moot seeing as no one will be able to make a beautiful 1080p rendered game on an indie game budget. unless they want to be making it for 4 or 5 years. indie games. and i'm not sure where lyrai is infuriating you so other than using funny words instead of ouya. because ouya is a really stupid name. he's pretty much spot on in that people who got caught up in the dream are like 'this is going to be so worth it' and literally anyone else who's not is like 'eh, why does this exist again?' even indie developers who have clout are better served to put their games on psn or xbl, or even wiiware, and instantly reach an audience orders of magnitude bigger than the ouya's. this is what he's talking about when he talks about business sense. the only thing the ouya provides is a lower barrier to entry, meaning if you make a bad game that fails it's not as dangerous as if you had taken it to another service. other than that for developers, it doesn't give you anything except less opportunity at an audience and recognition.