Is he really praising bethesda being lazy as a feature?
I'm curious to know, are there any companions who might get jealous/mad at you for doing these things? Then there'd be true diversity.
Thought I was going to watch a video about fallout 4 and all I got was video of some guy's lust to fuck as many people as he can.
I've never heard about people saying that games with LGBT options as pandering...
This guy is such an insult to the eyes. He just looks dumb as fuck.
[QUOTE=mak13two;49083447]This guy is such an insult to the eyes. He just looks dumb as fuck.[/QUOTE]
Isn't that kind of his motif/schtick? I'm not saying I'm fine with it or anything.
are you telling me that people in a situation where it's especially difficult to build trust wouldn't be pissed off about a breach of trust from the people closest to them?
I typically enjoy the Jimquisition, but this episode felt uneeded really.
I mean I don't think I was gonna go for the fuck everyone route myself, but seriously making a huge deal about how "progressive" it is because of that?
Also his mini rant beforehand about SJWs is obnoxious.
God damnit, Jim. I'll need to see how it's implemented in the game properly, but this just sounds like unfinished design from Bethesda. Like, do the characters not have any issue at all with each other? At least in Fable there was trouble if your partners found out about each other. If the possibility of that is completely omitted in this game, then it's going to come across as very implausible. I doubt the events of Fallout completely transformed a conservative 1950s society into a communistic free-love utopia.
Fine having the option to have these non-traditional relationships, but the characters need to be developed enough so that this allowance is based on character traits, not a universal preference. If the involved characters aren't aware of each other at all, it's going to come across as very alien - almost as if they're so infatuated with the player-character that they put on the blinders to any of the player's other affairs.
Oh jim, normally I love your stuff but this was just dumb. They're not tackling polyamory, they just couldn't be arsed adding consequences to fucking multiple people. This was just pure laziness.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;49083621]Oh jim, normally I love your stuff but this was just dumb. They're not tackling polyamory, they just couldn't be arsed adding consequences to fucking multiple people. This was just pure laziness.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe it all doesn't matter since you could always keep it one person only yourself. Don't need the game to be like "YO BRO, CHEATING IS A BAD THING BROSEF STALIN!"
But still doesn't change that this is a stupid video trying to make this sound progressive as fuck when it ain't.
I won't say it's lel lazy and proof that beth sucks balls.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49083651]Or maybe it all doesn't matter since you could always keep it one person only yourself. Don't need the game to be like "YO BRO, CHEATING IS A BAD THING BROSEF STALIN!"
But still doesn't change that this is a stupid video trying to make this sound progressive as fuck when it ain't.
I won't say it's lel lazy and proof that beth sucks balls.[/QUOTE]
I'd have agreed if different characters had different personalities, some didnt mind, others got pissed off.
This however is just bethesda couldn't be arsed.
[QUOTE=Coffee;49083397]Is he really praising bethesda being lazy as a feature?[/QUOTE]
What's weird is that I don't think that Bethedsa was lazy with this. Remember how the game can have multiple NPCs in a conversation?
Well, in a clip in the video the PC asks for the help of a female companion, and one of the other male companions behind the female companion interrupted and said "Make sure you keep our mutual friend safe."
Either that's about the romancing, or more likely about swapping companions.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49083651]Or maybe it all doesn't matter since you could always keep it one person only yourself. Don't need the game to be like "YO BRO, CHEATING IS A BAD THING BROSEF STALIN!"
But still doesn't change that this is a stupid video trying to make this sound progressive as fuck when it ain't.
I won't say it's lel lazy and proof that beth sucks balls.[/QUOTE]
It literally is though, assuming it goes the most likely path of literally not even bringing it up, which is what Jim seems to imply in the video.
Well, whether it's proof that beth sucks balls is pretty subjective I suppose, but it's proof that they're too lazy to actually give your actions any kind of impact.
So, he says he dislikes it when a game punishes him for roleplaying out his polyamorous character, but what I fail to see is how a character within the game disliking it is Bethesda punishing the player.
If you want to be immersed in a world and meet realistic characters, some of those characters will want to be monogamous. Just because Kaidan fucking Alenko in Mass Effect doesn't want you to bang Liara and him doesn't mean Bioware doesn't want you to be immersed. They just write fucking characters, not sex dolls.
[editline]9th November 2015[/editline]
I'm sure there will be a mod that will add consequence to cheating. A loss of all respect from that NPC, turning them hostile, etc.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;49083491]Also his mini rant beforehand about SJWs is obnoxious.[/QUOTE]
He's completely right. People use "SJW" in the same way idiots on Youtube use "haters". It's a way of putting everyone who says something that frustrates you into one easily dismissed and vilified camp. Not to mention the hordes of teenage boys who leap at the chance to call anything remotely socially progressive or just fucking [I]different[/I] as "SJW".
I can't get through the intro anymore. Before I could but now I can't stomach going through all that just to see an overweight guy in red tinted glasses with a nazi-esque theme even if most the video is just gameplay
[QUOTE=shozamar;49083847]He's completely right. People use "SJW" in the same way idiots on Youtube use "haters". It's a way of putting everyone who says something that frustrates you into one easily dismissed and vilified camp. Not to mention the hordes of teenage boys who leap at the chance to call anything remotely socially progressive or just fucking [I]different[/I] as "SJW".[/QUOTE]
You realize you're doing pretty much the exact same thing, right?
It's essentially impossible not to do it. Putting people into categories is pretty much essential for human society, because obviously it's not possible to deal with every single person on a completely individual basis. It sucks, but it's necessary.
I really did not enjoy the mental imagery at 3:45
This felt purely made for the purpose of telling the world that Jim is poly and not straight rather than for any actually good reason.
i enjoyed boston a nut
[QUOTE=Jacob_sword;49083440]Thought I was going to watch a video about fallout 4 and all I got was video of some guy's lust to fuck as many people as he can.[/QUOTE]
Such a lust for progress.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;49083442]I've never heard about people saying that games with LGBT options as pandering...[/QUOTE]
There are people who say that believe it or not.
You can "mingle" everyone because of you receive quests, otherwise you would be locked out from everything else after you give your dog a bone and tell it to fetch a stick.
[editline]9th November 2015[/editline]
It isn't step to "muh progress".
[QUOTE=elowin;49083917]You realize you're doing pretty much the exact same thing, right?
It's essentially impossible not to do it. Putting people into categories is pretty much essential for human society, because obviously it's not possible to deal with every single person on a completely individual basis. It sucks, but it's necessary.[/QUOTE]
Haha, good point I totally did. I stand by my point though, with certain categories it becomes way too exaggerated. SJW is one of them, just like haters. Plus I think my generalisation was fairly accurate. The people who throw the word SJW around do tend to reek of the kind of logic employed mostly by guys around that age who haven't yet matured to a degree where they can approach the relevant issues sensibly.
[QUOTE=shozamar;49084204]Haha, good point I totally did. I stand by my point though, with certain categories it becomes way too exaggerated. SJW is one of them, just like haters. Plus I think my generalisation was fairly accurate. The people who throw the word SJW around do tend to reek of the kind of logic employed mostly by guys around that age who haven't yet matured to a degree where they can approach the relevant issues sensibly.[/QUOTE]
Uh nah. SJW is generally a term used for people who take progressiveness to the extreme. Of course it's used erroneously very often, just like every other generalising term. How do you fail to see your hypocrisy when you say those who use this term are immature for using it to generalise, and yet you're generalising them? Are you therefore not immature, according to your own logic?
"Its just there"
Perhaps they were just lazy? Seems like you should have have some fallout or character options when getting into multiple relationships.
[editline]9th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=RichyZ;49084372]Oh boy, see: any modern Bioware game.
People can go on for decades on why those games are pandering to the spooks because they have gay relationships and etc.[/QUOTE]
All characters being bisexual is a bit silly.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49084414]All characters being bisexual is a bit silly.[/QUOTE]
Bioware did that better, some characters were straight and others bi. Bethesda simply made everyone bi in Skyrim (and apparently Fallout 4 too) which is indeed silly.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
