Support NeoGAF

[StreetsofBeige]

So after Asmon ragged on it, the devs shut down their Twitter and website? LOL

Give tech, movies and game devs credit. They sure know how to dog and pony show a grift at big corporations to get money to do dumb shit. And the gov too with their loose pockets for arts and tech grants.

As I said a million times, there's always lots of budget in tech and media. These kinds of industries and corporations always have bottomless pockets to chase any idea.

You never see this kind of big freebie money floating around if some guy wants to open up a variety store or a mini assembly line churning out muffins. The guy will be lucky to get a small gov grant hardly worth anything, and he'll still be on the hook for whatever bank loans taken out to cover operations and the lease.

For those of you guys hurting for money with some tech skills, just come up with some stupid idea and program some shit on screen. Show a big company or your local gov your napkin math idea and they'll probably toss you $1M. Take the money, hang around a bit doing a shitty job and then just bail as a failed project. Congrats, you just covered yourself probably 3 years of salary.

 

[Kacho]

But are people cancelling the game or not?

No. The game is literally not cancelled. It will eventually come out and flop because nobody actually wants it.

Look at the video that you shared on this page. Yesterday it was titled "We did it". Today it seems to have changed to "Gamers did it". Asmongold is already being smart with how one title can be perceived versus the other and making subtle moves. Regardless, gamers did what?

A few seconds in he goes "Did I get it deported or aborted?" and relishes that tweet. Both sound synonymous to cancellation, no? But no, there is no cancellation going on.

What's the spin that we are telling ourselves? "Exposing the truth"? Journalism?

I'm not saying canceling this particular game is bad. It may not even be a real game, but just a scam, which would actually deserve to be cancelled. It looks like we will never know. We can all assume whatever is convenient for our conscience, but we may never actually know.

The whole point of the video was the simple act of covering the game sent the devs (grifters) into hiding. They were fine doing presentations at Gamescom, they were fine receiving meaningless awards that gas them up, but as soon as they encounter a hint of friction they ghost everywhere except Bluesky (lol). That's on them.

If you have an issue with the language Asmongold used you can take it up with him. It's not my job to defend that. All he did was cover the Gamescom presentation, provide his thoughts and the rest happened. Nothing was cancelled. Just like Dustborn wasn't cancelled when he covered that.

 

[kpopSuperstar]

Only a postmodern mind would be able to defend such a statement.

You're just as right as Jack or Collective Shout.



If you're for censorship, then you're for it. If you're against it, then you're against it.

If you're for it in some cases and against in others, you're a hypocrite. For any further elaborations, I'd point you to a dictionary.

A person can be for censorship of illegal immigration themes, but against censorship regarding video game violence. That's not hypocrisy, that's just different opinions on different topics. It's normal that people have various takes on what they want censored.

 

[Roni]

A person can be for censorship of illegal immigration themes, but against censorship regarding video game violence.

Yes, they can. As one can be for women to be excluded from voting or the workforce. As one can be for people to belong to another.

The first we call a hypocrite, the second we call a sexist and the third we call a slaver.

You can be whatever you want, the rest of us apply the label based on what you're about.

A double standard on censorship is a form of hypocrisy. You may not like it, but you'll have to live with it.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

No. The game is literally not cancelled. It will eventually come out and flop because nobody actually wants it.


The whole point of the video was the simple act of covering the game sent the devs (grifters) into hiding. They were fine doing presentations at Gamescom, they were fine receiving meaningless awards that gas them up, but as soon as they encounter a hint of friction they ghost everywhere except Bluesky (lol). That's on them.

If you have an issue with the language Asmongold used you can take it up with him. It's not my job to defend that. All he did was cover the Gamescom presentation, provide his thoughts and the rest happened. Nothing was cancelled. Just like Dustborn wasn't cancelled when he covered that.

I find it amazing how few people play these DEI kind of games. I can understand all the normie gamers not bothering, but the player counts are so low on Steam at less than 100 people (which trickles down to 10 or 0), it shows even for their targeted DEI gamer audience they dont even want to play it.

You'd think all the ultra liberal people who love this kind of content would buy these games so there's at least a modest sized but dedicated following.

So it shows either:

1. That audience is insanely smaller than every one thinks, so there's hardly any gamers buying to begin with

2. That audience play games like everyone else but prefers all the usual Minecraft, FIFA, GTA or dude bro shooters etc...

3. A combo of both

Regardless, the number people buying these kinds of games is ultra small. You even got weird random games on Steam nobody has heard of with zero marketing that has more players.

 

[Kacho]

I find it amazing how few people play these DEI kind of games. I can understand all the normie gamers not bothering, but the player counts are so low on Steam at less than 100 people (which trickles down to 10 or 0), it shows even for their targeted DEI gamer audience they dont even want to play it.

You'd think all the ultra liberal people who love this kind of content would buy these games so there's at least a modest sized but dedicated following.

So it shows either:

1. That audience is insanely smaller than every one thinks, so there's hardly any gamers buying to begin with

2. That audience play games like everyone else but prefers all the usual Minecraft, FIFA, GTA or dude bro shooters etc...

3. A combo of both

Regardless, the number people buying these kinds of games is ultra small. You even got weird random games on Steam nobody has heard of with zero marketing that has more players.

The investments these games need is a drop in the bucket so it's easy to get them off the ground. There's very little risk outside of bad PR on social media.

I think we are in a transition period where these games were funded before DEI/wokeness went out of fashion. However, I think it's important to discuss them and for people to voice their opinions. Most normal people do not like major corporations trying to indoctrinate them.

 

[calico]

Only a postmodern mind would be able to defend such a statement.

You're just as right as Jack or Collective Shout.

I would think most minds would be able to defend such a statement. If you are capable of understanding that one car being red doesn't mean that all cars are red, then you can understand how something can be true about one game without necessarily being true about every game.

A double standard on censorship is a form of hypocrisy.

Do you believe in censoring all pornography or none of it?

 

[Roni]

Most normal people do not like major corporations trying to indoctrinate them.

93% of women and 89% of men in the U.S. claim toilet paper as their go-to wiping material. Most normal people don't mind major corporations indoctrinating them as long as there's no one telling them to be outraged.

 

[Roni]

Do you believe in censoring all pornography or none of it?

None of it.

And before you jump in glee, I also believe in punishment for people who commit crimes such as rape, incest, child abuse, human trafficking, etc.

 

[Kacho]

as there's no one telling them to be outraged

Oh, I love this one. Yes, no one against this has an original thought. It's ze YouTubers and Joe Rogan.

 

[MagusMajul]

I don't want any illegal aliens in my country and people making a game out of an invasion by criminals is not alright

 

[pudel]

I find it amazing how few people play these DEI kind of games. I can understand all the normie gamers not bothering, but the player counts are so low on Steam at less than 100 people (which trickles down to 10 or 0), it shows even for their targeted DEI gamer audience they dont even want to play it.

I consider DEI games just as a niche genre....for the 5 people who like it. And honestly....this game is doing it even right. They make their own little game for their own little audience. Thats fine. What I dont like is when this shit is injected in big and established IP's and just ruining them for everybody else (like DragonAge and stuff).

 

[Roni]

Oh, I love this one. Yes, no one against this has an original thought. It's ze YouTubers and Joe Rogan.

Most people doesn't mean all people. But I understand it is difficult to argue without a strawman when incorrect.

 

[Kacho]

Most people doesn't mean all people. But I understand it is difficult to argue without a strawman when incorrect.

You don't have an argument and I don't take you seriously.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

what evidence would you like I ask again?

My bottom line is simple: a minor mockery is not enough to make them run away instead of engaging in a candid conversation about the project. For someone who preaches openness and compassion, this kind of petty behaviour is not the way to go. Everyone on twitter has clashed a few times for the dumbest reasons. I used to upload videogame screenshots with Photo mode and one day I had some retards calling me out because of a dead shark in the image. I didn't bother to argue with them or even reply. Just blocked them and moved on.

This project is so small that it's impossible that the most rabid haters cared enough to really "cancel them". And haters also attract defenders who never heard of this. Potential buyers could be among them.

So, I would need strong evidence like doxxing or threats to take their decision seriously. Just being told that you suck is business as usual.

For those of you guys hurting for money with some tech skills, just come up with some stupid idea and program some shit on screen. Show a big company or your local gov your napkin math idea and they'll probably toss you $1M. Take the money, hang around a bit doing a shitty job and then just bail as a failed project. Congrats, you just covered yourself probably 3 years of salary.

To me, this is clearly the case. In Europe they give you funding for whatever bullshit imaginable. Our local cinema industry is ruined because of that. Every year there are many "failed videogame projects". Some people have made a permanent job out of it, so they don't like getting exposed and go into hiding when the spotlight is on them.

 

[Roni]

You don't have an argument and I don't take you seriously.

I suspect you don't take anyone who can show you you're wrong seriously, so no sweat.

 

[calico]

But no, there is no cancellation going on.

I think ultimately it is quite difficult to make a case for 'cancellation' if the devs / publisher themselves have made the decision to take their media down and close their accounts, even if Asmon does take a victory lap (he always will if he can).

If they were taken down by the platform/s against their wishes, I would agree it amounts to cancellation.

 

[Kacho]

I think ultimately it is quite difficult to make a case for 'cancellation' if the devs / publisher themselves have made the decision to take their media down and close their accounts, even if Asmon does take a victory lap (he always will if he can).

If they were taken down by the platform/s against their wishes, I would agree it amounts to cancellation.

This reverse uno "b-but I thought cancellation was bad guys " comes up every time people criticize woke games. It's very obvious what they're doing.

 

[viveks86]

If you have an issue with the language Asmongold used you can take it up with him. It's not my job to defend that.

Of course it isn't your job. I just like you so I'm quoting you to say my piece for anyone interested to read and ponder over, you included. Just because I think people here are right leaning teddy bears who mean no harm does not mean I will extend that sentiment to Asmongold's fans. So I have no interest in taking it up with him, and by extension, them.

It will eventually come out

Only time will tell

and flop because nobody actually wants it.

We can at least agree on that

 

[Kacho]

Of course it isn't your job. I just like you so I'm quoting you to say my piece for anyone interested to read and ponder over, you included. Just because I think people here are right leaning teddy bears who mean no harm does not mean I will extend that sentiment to Asmongold's fans. So I have no interest in taking it up with him, and by extension, them.


Only time will tell



We can at least agree on that

It's all good, man. We aren't beefing.

To be clear, I understand what you're getting at, we just disagree.

 

[MikeM]

So… the Underground Railroad?

Didn't watch the video- complete guess.

 

[calico]

None of it.

And before you jump in glee, I also believe in punishment for people who commit crimes such as rape, incest, child abuse, human trafficking, etc.

But you would not censor the publication of the recordings of those acts after the fact and would consider anyone who believes they should be censored to be hypocritical (unless they believe in censoring everything)?

I think 'hypocrite' was the least bad option you left yourself but fair enough.

 

[Roni]

But you would not censor the publication of the recordings of those acts after the fact and would consider anyone who believes they should be censored to be hypocritical (unless they believe in censoring everything)?

I think 'hypocrite' was the least bad option you left yourself but fair enough.

A recording of a sexual crime is a recording of a sexual crime, not pornography. No sane person would consider that pornography. What is wrong with you?

PS: Victims have the right to privacy so their pain and humiliation is not broadcast to the public and courts have the right to pursue its removal. Not that that works wonders today, but I believe in a judicial system.

 

[calico]

A recording of a sexual crime is a recording of a sexual crime, not pornography. No sane person would consider that pornography. What is wrong with you?

Put whatever label you want on it, this does not change the predicament you have placed yourself in one bit. Are you censoring that recording or not?

It seeeeems like you may be backtracking towards 'some things are different to other things and you can unhypocritically support censoring a thing with supporting censoring everything'. ie. towards a sane position.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

wait....people believe this is a real game?

 

[Roni]

Put whatever label you want on it, this does not change the predicament you have placed yourself in one bit. Are you censoring that recording or not?

It seeeeems like you may be backtracking towards 'some things are different to other things and you can unhypocritically support censoring a thing with supporting censoring everything'. ie. towards a sane position.

Pornography is created by consenting adults for sexual arousal, without hurting anyone. Just as "Take Us North" is not actually bringing any Latin Americans into the US. I wouldn't censor any pornographic content or "Take Us North".
As for your example, authorities have the right to take down a recording of a sexual crime; especially if the victim wants it taken down, just as ICE has the right to jail and deport illegal immigrants.

It seeeeems like you think a recording of a sexual crime is pornography, I'd talk to someone about that. Though that would explain why you act like "Take Us North" is commiting illegal immigration. But in that case, GTA is commiting car theft, Modern Warfare is committing war crimes, etc. You can take this stance if you want, bat shit insane as it is, but at least take it consistently.

 

[Omnipunctual Godot]

I find it amazing how few people play these DEI kind of games. I can understand all the normie gamers not bothering, but the player counts are so low on Steam at less than 100 people (which trickles down to 10 or 0), it shows even for their targeted DEI gamer audience they dont even want to play it.

I don't think normies started to notice or care until it was shoehorned into normie games like CoD, BFV, Spider-Man 2, Naughty Dog games, etc.

I think Concord/Dustborn was the inflection point when people started asking why so many modern games had this bizarre aesthetic and writing like they were pumped out of the same factory. Then people started openly clowning the masculinization of feminine characters (like Joanna Dark and Lara Croft) and mocking them for what they are: changes that appeal to nobody, requested by no one.

The days when idpol would deflect any rational ctiticism are officially over. Mediocre content won't get a pass anymore.

In fact, it's the opposite: if you want to make a DEI-focused game, that shit better be fire, because it's no longer viewed as a feature or a shield, now it's a red flag.

 

[Madserb2023]

Sony has Ghost of Tsushima and Microsoft has Ghost of Mexico.

 

[viveks86]

I think ultimately it is quite difficult to make a case for 'cancellation' if the devs / publisher themselves have made the decision to take their media down and close their accounts, even if Asmon does take a victory lap (he always will if he can).

If they were taken down by the platform/s against their wishes, I would agree it amounts to cancellation.

Difficult indeed.

Some food for thought:

1. A group of people are gathering around your house. You have a sense that they are not happy about the woke-ass film you are making. You are weak and mentally unstable. You automatically assume they are there to set your house on fire. Being the mentally unstable person that you are, you decide to control your destiny and set your own house on fire, burning with it.

2. A group of people are gathering around your house. You have a sense that they are not happy about the woke-ass film you are making. You are strong and resilient. You have a purpose and will to fulfill your dream, come what may. You are prepared for whatever consequence. The people around your house see your defiant stance and decide to approach and criticize you. One thing leads to another, things escalate and somehow the house is on fire.

Your argument is that (1) is self sabotage and (2) could be cancellation depending on who set it on fire. And if no one sets it on fire, then all is well. Can't argue with that. It makes perfect sense. It's ridiculous to blame the people outside for self-sabotage in (1).

So for someone who just doesn't want any house on fire, all I can appeal to, is to reflect on what intent the group of people had in the first place. What label we give it is not material to me. Was Asmongold, with his journalistic integrity, trying to shed light on the industry's affliction of wokeness, foster genuine discussion and debate? Or was it sensationalist vigilante-ism feeding on the anti-woke trend, farming engagement and relishing in taking down yet another pointlessly woke endeavor? I'm not even making a judgment call that one is bad or not. I don't approve of the latter as it goes against my sensibility. But does that make it immoral? I actually don't know. It depends?

I don't know the answer. My exposure to Asmongold has almost always been in negative light, so I'm unable to give him the benefit of the doubt. So I admit my bias. But like I've said before, this would be my defense for the rape game too, as much as it sickens me. I'm not seeing hypocrisy in my stance. But I'm not an activist and I'm not here to effect change of any sort or even change anyone's mind. Just expressing my stream of thoughts and learning from others.

 

[laynelane]

wait....people believe this is a real game?

That was my first thought when she mysteriously ran out of time to show the totally really trailer.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Hey first of all thanks brother. Obviously super nervous for number 2 but I have a pretty strong belief you kind of your kid that lifelong best friend. First one was a girl this one's a boy so hell yea.

Secondly that's all I'm saying. Live and let live is a pretty golden policy but he doesn't do that. I mean shit one of his newest YT videos looks like the devs of this game had to delete their socials, or maybe it's just clickbait. Like the dude against censorship is gate keeping what a game can or can't be about as if illegal immigrants have ever played any role in his life.

I got a 19 yr old and a 13 yr old. We are sat watching twisted metal together! Best thing ever.

All the best, my man.

 

[calico]

As for your example, authorities have the right to take down a recording of a sexual crime

Assuming you support that right, then we have established you support censoring some things but not other things.

This was your previous position: "If you're for censorship, then you're for it. If you're against it, then you're against it. If you're for it in some cases and against in others, you're a hypocrite."

You will be pleased to know I do not consider you being for it in some cases and against it in others to necessarily make you a hypocrite. Some things are different to other things.

I disagree with your assertion that consent is inherently implied by the word 'pornography' -and indeed, your initial response to the question I asked would make no sense if you did not interpret my question as including non-consensual forms of pornography- but this distinction seems irrelevant at this point.

 

[Roni]

Assuming you support that right, then we have established you support censoring some things but not other things.

Just as we've established you support Collective Shout, Visa and MasterCard removing adult games from the marketplace because they might help perpetuate sexual crimes. Or Counter-Strike and GTA being banned in countries because it perpetuates violence.

If we're ignoring categorization and distinctions in this conversation, I might as well partake in ignoring it as well.

... indeed, your initial response to the question I asked would make no sense if you did not interpret my question as including non-consensual forms of pornography- but this distinction seems irrelevant at this point.

You really think you're the first one to come at me with the take "one can masturbate to rape" when talking censorship and pornography? Please...

 

[calico]

Your argument is that (1) is self sabotage and (2) could be cancellation depending on who set it on fire. And if no one sets it on fire, then all is well. Can't argue with that. It makes perfect sense. It's ridiculous to blame the people outside for self-sabotage in (1).

I would argue the picketing of someone's home alone in either scenario would be improper and akin to cancellation, even without getting to any fires.

Once you take the stage in the public forum your right to not be challenged becomes entirely different.

I appreciate you mean these scenarios as analogies rather than literally, but I consider the baseline in both scenarios to be inappropriate, whereas I don't consider the robustness of Asmon's public response, or his rallying of opposition, or his using his influence to convince people to not buy it to be inherently inappropriate.

Now, if some resorted to death threats and the like then those of course would be inappropriate and should be condemned, and I believe Asmon himself would do so. If steps were taken to actually prevent the developer even being able to reach the audience (deplatforming etc.), effectively denying them access to the public forum, then I consider that inappropriate too. I think the devs have a right to take the stage in the public forum and speak, but I don't think they have a right to expect a receptive audience.

 

[viveks86]

I would argue the picketing of someone's home alone in either scenario would be improper and akin to cancellation, even without getting to any fires.

Once you take the stage in the public forum your right to not be challenged becomes entirely different.

I appreciate you mean these scenarios as analogies rather than literally, but I consider the baseline in both scenarios to be inappropriate, whereas I don't consider the robustness of Asmon's public response, or his rallying of opposition, or his using his influence to convince people to not buy it to be inherently inappropriate.

Now, if some resorted to death threats and the like then those of course would be inappropriate and should be condemned, and I believe Asmon himself would do so. If steps were taken to actually prevent the developer even being able to reach the audience (deplatforming etc.), effectively denying them access to the public forum, then I consider that inappropriate too. I think the devs have a right to take the stage in the public forum and speak, but I don't think they have a right to expect a receptive audience.

Agree with all of that. I haven't seen evidence of inappropriate acts, so I can't make a strawman claim like that. And yes, I was just making an analogy to explore this independent of what is actually happening.

I'm only questioning intent as what's happening behind the scenes is unknown to any of us. What really provoked them to close down their website? An inappropriate act that we don't know about or a simple lack of mental fortitude to withstand even the basic public scrutiny? We can only make guesses. And our personal bias, including my own, to the topic will determine where we land.

 

[calico]

If we're ignoring categorization and distinctions in this conversation...

"If you're for censorship, then you're for it. If you're against it, then you're against it. If you're for it in some cases and against in others, you're a hypocrite."

Your words not mine. Not much room for distinction there. I have repeatedly asserted that distinctions can and should be made throughout this conversation. You put yourself in the position where you had to support all censorship or none, not me.

Don't presume to put me in this all or nothing predicament you created for yourself. I am perfectly able to take the position that one game seeks to perpetuate the illegal activity it depicts while another does not, precisely because I am able to make a distinction between one game which does and another, different game which does not.

Having made such a distinction, someone could -if they had a mind to- absolutely support censorship for one and not the other without being hypocritical. Doing so would be setting a lower bar than the current test in the US (which also considers intent) for which speech is censorable by the government and which is not, but this would not make it hypocritical.

 

[Roni]

"If you're for censorship, then you're for it. If you're against it, then you're against it. If you're for it in some cases and against in others, you're a hypocrite."

Your words not mine. Not much room for distinction there. I have repeatedly asserted that distinctions can and should be made throughout this conversation. You put yourself in the position where you had to support all censorship or none, not me.

Don't presume to put me in this all or nothing predicament you created for yourself. I am perfectly able to take the position that one game seeks to perpetuate the illegal activity it depicts while another does not, precisely because I am able to make a distinction between one game which does and another, different game which does not.

Having made such a distinction, someone could -if they had a mind to- absolutely support censorship for one and not the other without being hypocritical. Doing so would be setting a lower bar than the current test in the US (which also considers intent) for which speech is censorable by the government and which is not, but this would not make it hypocritical.

You wanna wiggle out of this by focusing on the fact I didn't write "If you're for censorship of games, then you're for it. If you're against it, then you're against it. If you're for it in some cases and against in others, you're a hypocrite."? Go ahead. For someone who has "repeatedly asserted that distinctions can and should be made throughout this conversation", you sure can't seem to differentiate between media made for entertainment and video evidence of a crime for the past few exchanges.

 

[viveks86]

Having made such a distinction, someone could -if they had a mind to- absolutely support censorship for one and not the other without being hypocritical. Doing so would be setting a lower bar than the current test in the US (which also considers intent) for which speech is censorable by the government and which is not, but this would not make it hypocritical.

Agreed. There is nothing hypocritical about selective censorship. Censorship, by its very nature, is selective.

My issue has never been with censorship per se. You do what you need to protect the interests of your community. It's with the inherent power structure needed to uphold the kind of censorship that would always be in the best interest of community and human progress. There's just no right solution I can imagine that protects it from corruption. Centralizing makes it susceptible to the whims of the central body and crowdsourcing it makes it susceptible to the loudest voice. Unlike political systems, a vote is meaningless, as no one has the time or will to be voting for every single piece of media. So I would rather live with no censorship at all and let the market decide with their voice and wallets, with very loose regulations such as "intended and targeted violence towards real living individuals or groups", rather than any selective censorship. Just put a rating on it with explanation and let the people decide.

It's why I love both the first AND second amendments. There's nothing quite like it in most countries. They are the closest things to protect a country during its worst phases. And yes, that's not exclusive to a conservative's way of thinking.

 

[Renozokii]

So? Events happen and he talks about them. That's what a lot of streamers are about. Simple as that. News media is also talking about it. Reddit is also talking about news. People on forums too. Each with their own spin or take.


Most of the people don't like bald women. Just like you don't have fat men n games in 90%+ of the cases if not more. And yeah MK making characters ugly was a bad idea - who wants to play as a middle aged woman? C'mon. Who wants to play a bald snarky woman (who will probably leave more comments than Atreus or whatever)? People want attractive characters in game - almost evey man in game is either fit or thin for example. Who wants to play as elderly balding fatso unless only for lulz?


I can shit on anybody and I am not trying to pretend like I have a higher moral ground or anything. The reality is - people don't like ugly. Everybody wants to look cool or attractive if it is possible - it is just certain groups have been trying to push the idea that if you are fat you are entitled to adoration, love and treatment the same way as famous, fit or attractive person. And other opinions on that were banned or restricted.

>So? Events happen and he talks about them. That's what a lot of streamers are about. Simple as that. News media is also talking about it. Reddit is also talking about news. People on forums too. Each with their own spin or take.

Because it's a direct contraction to what I was replying to. Claiming asmongold speaks exclusively on wanting attractive woman in video games is equivalent to saying Ben Shapiro speaks exclusively on Cardi B songs.

And again, I made plenty of points about my thoughts on that, my spin if you would.

>Most of the people don't like bald women. Just like you don't have fat men n games in 90%+ of the cases if not more. And yeah MK making characters ugly was a bad idea - who wants to play as a middle aged woman? C'mon. Who wants to play a bald snarky woman (who will probably leave more comments than Atreus or whatever)? People want attractive characters in game - almost evey man in game is either fit or thin for example. Who wants to play as elderly balding fatso unless only for lulz?

So that's why people take the piss out of you weirdo's. So MK1 is still easily the best selling fighter of this generation. I was just saying I wouldn't mind the ninja assassins showing more cleavage. I also don't care much.
And yes that bald snarky woman you so sadly don't find attractive will obviously be very poorly written, ND is a bottom tier developer after all.

>I can shit on anybody and I am not trying to pretend like I have a higher moral ground or anything. The reality is - people don't like ugly. Everybody wants to look cool or attractive if it is possible

Hence why every go woke go broke game flops massive and you totally don't have to cope every time one succeeds.

> - it is just certain groups have been trying to push the idea that if you are fat you are entitled to adoration, love and treatment the same way as famous, fit or attractive person. And other opinions on that were banned or restricted.

Those evil shadow groups turning all video game girls into ugly grandmas