I would go and toss in those people get "intimate" with you in Skyrim because you helped them and all that so they have come to love/like the person you are not the gender you are.
In Fallout 4 then.. well let's not dwell into it yet because spoilers.
[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]
Most of the time when people say "pandering" and "Bioware" people mean ME3. When all of a sudden established (as straight) characters become bisexual and then there's gay romance option with no other purpose, as a character, to be there... That kinda does look like pandering to the media (and to weirder parts of the fan-base). Most of the other critique that is thrown at BW's romances comes from mostly just their bad-bad writing.
[QUOTE=Combine 177;49084507]I would go and toss in those people get "intimate" with you in Skyrim because you helped them and all that so they have come to love/like the person you are not the gender you are.[/QUOTE]
love is cheap as fuck in skyrim, do some things and become their friend but if you're wearing your magic sexy necklace they'll marry you
As a non-monogamous non-straight person myself, I can indeed confirm the notion that everyone involved just goes along without a care or concern, never even bothering to bring it up could not be more removed from reality. v:v:v
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49084021]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.[/QUOTE]
He kindof already brings it up fairly often tbh.
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;49084365]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?[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying any generalisation is wrong and immature, I'm talking about the SJW term specifically. SJW is set apart from most other generalising terms (including the generalisation I made myself) by the sheer amount of times it's used badly.
[QUOTE=shozamar;49084821]I'm not saying any generalisation is wrong and immature, I'm talking about the SJW term specifically. SJW is set apart from most other generalising terms (including the generalisation I made myself) by the sheer amount of times it's used badly.[/QUOTE]
Not really. The only over-application of SJW is that people are now using SJW and progressive synonymously, when SJWs are only part of the progressive movement and not the whole.
(SJWs are a very large and vocal part of the progressive movement even if not perhaps the majority, so the mistake is quite understandable)
I'll admit I havent watched the whole video because I dont want to see much gameplay before I play it, but when he says the karma system is gone and instead it influences what your companions think of you, does this mean companions are much more important? I hate using companions, I like playing as a one man death machine but I dont want 90% of side quests locked away from me
[QUOTE=Dr_Zoosh;49084938]I'll admit I havent watched the whole video because I dont want to see much gameplay before I play it, but when he says the karma system is gone and instead it influences what your companions think of you, does this mean companions are much more important? I hate using companions, I like playing as a one man death machine but I dont want 90% of side quests locked away from me[/QUOTE]
They block your view, they block doorways, they make stealth impossible and they "break cinematic" when you talk to people by going in front of the camera.
[QUOTE=Combine 177;49085049]They block your view, they block doorways, they make stealth impossible and they "break cinematic" when you talk to people by going in front of the camera.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, I didnt use them in skyrim or fallout 3/nv and my playthrough was fine.
I guess doing a playthrough as a saint or an evil bastard is out of the window too. What about when assassins were sent after you for being too nice or evil like in previous games? They cant have seriously removed the entire karma system?
[QUOTE=mak13two;49083447]This guy is such an insult to the eyes. He just looks dumb as fuck.[/QUOTE]
Did he kill your dog or something?
This is nonsense.
This isn't representing polygamy, this is Bethesda not taking the effort to implement monogamy.
And whilst I personally don't care too much about developers streamlining relationships in these kind of games, it's about as progressive a representation of polygamy as a Meet 'n' Fuck game.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;49083460]Isn't that kind of his motif/schtick? I'm not saying I'm fine with it or anything.[/QUOTE]
I never understood Jimquisition because of this.
If you're going to make yourself look cringey as fuck as a character- than that character should reflect that as a parody. But there is no parody in Jim- he goes on to make videos and constructs his points and everything normally while looking like a Nazi-colored edge-lord who sometimes puts pony toys on his podiums.
The character he projects has varying levels of effectiveness depending on what he's ranting about. This is one of many vids where he just [i]is[/i] that guy.
[QUOTE=General J;49085959]I never understood Jimquisition because of this.
If you're going to make yourself look cringey as fuck as a character- than that character should reflect that as a parody. But there is no parody in Jim- he goes on to make videos and constructs his points and everything normally while looking like a Nazi-colored edge-lord who sometimes puts pony toys on his podiums.[/QUOTE]
In the previous video he pretty much mentioned that all of this is because he's Jim Fucking Sterling, Son. Obviously a reference to the name given to him by that whole Slaughtering Grounds debacle. Nevertheless his character isn't designed to be cringey. It is to a certain extent, but his motif is that he's Jim Sterling and he can do whatever he wants because he's Jim Sterling. It makes sense considering the tone of his voice, the way he presents his opinions, and how he does controversial shit that gets him blacklisted like with Konami.
[QUOTE=General J;49085959]I never understood Jimquisition because of this.
If you're going to make yourself look cringey as fuck as a character- than that character should reflect that as a parody. But there is no parody in Jim- he goes on to make videos and constructs his points and everything normally while looking like a Nazi-colored edge-lord who sometimes puts pony toys on his podiums.[/QUOTE]
When he started doing the podium thing it was because he was doing a lot of rants about pre-orders, DLC, and online activation codes (remember those?). It made more sense back then, now it's just a weird thing he does that isn't far enough removed from his real personality.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;49083442]I've never heard about people saying that games with LGBT options as pandering...[/QUOTE]
It really ultimately depends.
If the game is really trying to push the fact that you can have LGBT relationships to the point where the game goes out of its way to point out and shove down your throat that certain characters are gay with no other redeeming character qualities introduced, then I'd say that's pandering.
I honestly haven't seen that much (even in Bioware's games which get shit on a ton for having LGBT relationships), but I'm sure it does exist or will exist at some point, with LGBT social concerns only becoming ever more prevalent in society.
This is pretty Kotaku/Polygon tier thinking.
I also don't understand how, even if it wasn't sheer laziness, this would be a good thing. It would essentially be saying "No your ideals are wrong and immoral" and arguing that's a good thing.
It would be like praising a game for not having gay relationship options because you personally disagree with it. I am sure that Jim Sterling wouldn't be hypocritical and argue against it when it goes against his ideals.
[url]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/9181-Tomodachi-Strife[/url]
Frankly it seems like if you agree with Jim he's willing to overlook shitty programming or dress it up as something amazing.
I like Jim but this episode seemed off. I see what he's getting it and all, polyamory [I]hasn't[/I] been touched upon in games much if at all, but it doesn't strike me like this was Bethesda's intent, just a byproduct of a half-assed relationship system v:v:v
That being said, I don't have a problem with the idea, and if he's happy with it that's great! He also said "Sometimes doing nothing is surprisingly groundbreaking, especially in a world where others put effort into gating off the options.", so it seems to me like he understands this may not have been their intention but that it ended up being the case anyways. And that's fine. if he's happy that a game allows him to play the way he wants whether it's the developers intention or not, then why is that a bad thing? I think people are reacting to this a little... harshly? If this is what he gets out of it, fine. I don't see much reason to get upset about it. But I guess that's just the internet's prerogative.
this guy looks like a parody of a parody
[QUOTE=Skyward;49089212]I like Jim but this episode seemed off. I see what he's getting it and all, polyamory [I]hasn't[/I] been touched upon in games much if at all, but it doesn't strike me like this was Bethesda's intent, just a byproduct of a half-assed relationship system v:v:v
That being said, I don't have a problem with the idea, and if he's happy with it that's great! He also said "Sometimes doing nothing is surprisingly groundbreaking, especially in a world where others put effort into gating off the options.", so it seems to me like he understands this may not have been their intention but that it ended up being the case anyways. And that's fine. if he's happy that a game allows him to play the way he wants whether it's the developers intention or not, then why is that a bad thing? I think people are reacting to this a little... harshly? If this is what he gets out of it, fine. I don't see much reason to get upset about it. But I guess that's just the internet's prerogative.[/QUOTE]
Except when Jim sees lazy stuff in games, he loses his shit and goes on half hour pejorative tirade with every profanity ever invented, but this time it's his (literal) fetish so it's [i]fucking amazing[/i].
Hypocrisy?
Yes the reactions are absurd as anything on the internet dealing with sex is, but they're no less inflammatory than his usual "fuck fuck fuckity fucking bollocks fuck fuck fuck".
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49084414]
All characters being bisexual is a bit silly.[/QUOTE]
It's just as silly as making all characters straight.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49084414]"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]
All characters being bisexual is a bit silly.[/QUOTE]
I'm still insulted about the whole gay pilot who lost his husband wanting to fuck shepard shit. Bioware, and by extension Bethesda, have no tact.
I mean the intro in Fallout 4....I could give less than three fucks about the wife and kid. It was so forced and the world itself.
I'm just glad for the lone wanderer perk.
[editline]10th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Garrot;49089758]It's just as silly as making all characters straight.[/QUOTE]
Statistically speaking? Not really.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;49083442]I've never heard about people saying that games with LGBT options as pandering...[/QUOTE]
A certain group misconstrues what some gamers say about LGBT in video games. A lot of gamers don't have problems with LGBT characters just as long as they aren't forced out in the open and are the only trait about that character. That certain group misconstrues that into "pandering" hate speeches trying to discredit people.
[QUOTE=Swilly;49089837]Bioware, and by extension Bethesda[/QUOTE]
wait what?
how does Bioware in any way affect Bethesda?
[QUOTE=Garrot;49089758]It's just as silly as making all characters straight.[/QUOTE]
Why are you just assuming he thought all characters being straight wasn't silly?
[QUOTE=Swilly;49089837]Statistically speaking? Not really.[/QUOTE]
Statistically speaking, walking outside to a post-apocalyptic Boston is quite silly, though.
[editline]10th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;49090527]Why are you just assuming he thought all characters being straight wasn't silly?[/QUOTE]
Because that's what people usually say. See Swilly's post.
Nothing against the guy but that was probably the most worthless "review" I've ever listened to.
Intro that takes a third of the video length, and the rest is about how he can fuck freely, okay got it, now how about actually reviewing the game..
[QUOTE=Bragdras;49091377]Nothing against the guy but that was probably the most worthless "review" I've ever listened to.
Intro that takes a third of the video length, and the rest is about how he can fuck freely, okay got it, now how about actually reviewing the game..[/QUOTE]
...but it's not a review? His review is here: [url]http://www.thejimquisition.com/2015/11/fallout-4-review-s-p-e-c-i-a-l/[/url]
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;49091321]
Because that's what people usually say. See Swilly's post.[/QUOTE]
And statistically speaking there would still be gay, lesbian, asexual, trans and genderqueer people.
Even in the wasteland.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
