dDoc
Member
that steroid cure tho
3 years since 2017 she buffed further lol
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Last of Us: Part II - State of Play announced 05/27 (1pm PT / 4pm ET / 9pm UK)
- Thread starter JareBear: Remastered
- Start date
3 years since 2017 she buffed further lol
Tomeru
Member
You don't need to make everyone happy, only the sensible people.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
I agree. But I still feel that the reasons why an author makes a creative choice are somewhat irrelevant to an appreciation of the work basically its shifting the fulcrum of judgement onto the artist not their art.
I guess its why the whole issue of Druckmann's "agenda" kinda irks me. At the end of the day, even if its all true does it actually matter? Its why I brought up the relevance of the excerpt you posted; I wasn't trying to indict you as a closet homophobe, just to point out how little relevance and import his choice of a same-sex realtionship has in itself and the context of the game.
The sentiment being stressed in that exchange is not that its great to be gay, just the convenience of being able to mix personal and professional business. You could change it to be a hetero relationship and the meaning wouldn't change to be pro "family values"!
Yet, you are judging it with suspicion based on what you know about Druckmann's politics. Like I said, its the perspective creating a good/bad conclusion out of something essentially neutral.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Suspicion isn't the word I'd use. I'm not trying to dissect it in order to draw a conclusion, I'm merely laying out potential indications of his agenda but also acknowledging without context no conclusions can be made. Break that last sentence down a bit more, please. I'm not exactly sure what you mean there.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
I feel like the problem of "woke" politics being rammed down our collective throats being annoying, as opposed to the specific political sentiments being expressed, is the real issue.
I've had times myself where I've bristled because I felt like I was being preached at in games, movies and TV shows.
But on reflection and examination of my feelings it occurred to me that what was actually bugging me was not the thing in front of me, but the overall cultural landscape. My general annoyance with the sanctimony and judgementalism of woke culture was making me react negatively to things that I would say I'm personally supportive of if asked directly.
My point is that I feel like we're all being drawn into taking sides on a culture war, where the prime motivator isn't the "cause" but because of dislike for the "other side". Its a psychological trick.
Coolwhhip
Neophyte
It’s a nervous laugh occulting the pain for losing the bazonkas of the real actress in the game character model.
Press F and blame the evil male gaze.
Luckily with Unreal 5 they can use all the assets immediately.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
OK, I'm completely on board with you now. This is something I've also been weary of. I've had many conversation with my son about it. You begin to see the labels yourself when before you only saw characters and that's because of the woke culture and the way they're pushing it constantly. Trust me when I say, that final evaluation, with context, will certainly include a great deal of self-reflection first.
Eiknarf
Banned
So wait
Imagine the game is only filled with gay characters? Hahaha - Maybe the virus in the sequel only kills straight people?? Jk
REE Machine
Banned
Dude shouldnt have been paid, clearly he cheated by looking stuff up after hw stopped streaming. Kidsmoove is a hack for a gamer.
Tripolygon
Banned
Every piece of dialogue in a script is written on purpose. You know the saying when you are a hammer all you see are nails? That is exactly what is wrong with some of you. You have it in your head that there is an agenda so now you're dissecting every piece of dialogue to find the hidden 'nefarious' meaning.
We have a lesbian happy for her current assignment to be over so she can go be with her partner on her next shift. There is an innuendo comment made by her male cohort after she remarks about working with her partner which could just as easily be read as they slack off on the job.
He literally just said "Are you shitting me? They put you with Jordan" in a tone that shows a mild displeasure and or jealousy with that arrangement because he doesn't get to be with his partner. To which she replies date a soldier, implying that he too will get to spend time with his partner on the job thereby making the job so much easier. "Time flies while you're having fun" Sorta statement or having someone you love makes it easier in regards to the terrible things they have to do or see on the job.
Then again it could just be an innuendo about them fucking on the job and I see nothing wrong with that. It is a M rated game in a post post apocalyptic world, ain't nothing to do but fuck, read a book, kill people and apparently play a PS Vita. Everybody fucks. I somehow doubt Naughty Dog will pack their game with dialogue filled with sexual innuendos. That was not a random dialogue.
May i remind you that Bill from the first game had a stash of gay porn and also had a partner who he talked about with Joel after he discovered he had taken his life.
Speaking of overt queer representation in games. Also loved the Witcher 3 with their agenda. Lol
REE Machine
Banned
That and also playing as Ciri a powerful woman with powers that imo exceed Geralts due to her quickness and agility
THEAP99
Banned
exactly man. i wonder if they will delay the game again cus it 'it's not appropriate to release at this time."
Eiknarf
Banned
That would be dumb if they did that
THEAP99
Banned
It must be hard for them to market the game tbh. They've been pretty weak on the marketing so far.
REE Machine
Banned
Just because America is falling apart with racism, bigotry and protests doesnt mean the rest of the world is, Trudeau can close the boarder as long as he wants but if he delays the game for sensitivity Ill due everything in my power to ruin his perfect hair
REE Machine
Banned
As much as your right i keep remembering that this is TLOU and a naughty dog game, they are getting close to rockstar status where they dont need to market it and people
Know its coming, hell state of play was prob their biggest marketing push for it and will be, video has some good views already at 1.2 million.
THEAP99
Banned
Hope ur right. It's gonna be embarrassing if they don't break any records.
But why is everybody so in your face lesbian in this game i dont understand. So "see we have lesbians in our game, you biggot!" ? So preachy lesbian? Is there some kind of lore to explain it? Maybe the virus changed something in human beings? Tell me
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
There's nothing wrong with me, mate. The problem is with people like you who, for what ever reason, don't want to acknowledge the agenda Neil spoke of. You're in denial. I'm pointing out 'possible' indications that the agenda is overt but I'm not discounting the agenda might be handled subtly and not spoil the story. But the agenda does exist and I do not understand why people pretend it doesn't. I'm a big ND fan and consider TLOU to be the greatest game ever made. The last thing I ever wanted was to have to consider an agenda, but here I am 'facing reality'. And I've noticed once again, you, as have others, are reducing it to the acts themselves and not understanding it's about the agenda. I don't give a fuck if lesbians fuck, gays fuck, same sex people kiss or Bill was gay. Jesus FUCKING Chrst.
I'm not making a judgement here, I'm laying out the indications it could have an overt agenda. I'll save my judgement for when I've played it.
Read that last sentence a few times. I've highlighted it here because I've said it hundreds of times at this point but for some reason no one is understanding how it gives what I'm saying context. Am I saying it IS overt in terms of an agenda? Am I saying it isn't overt in terms of an agenda? Or am I saying 'I don't know, I'll wait and see'? The answer is obvious, so why are people misunderstanding what I'm saying?
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
I acknowledge and support Neil's Agenda and creative vision. Now we have established that i am not pretending to not know Neil's agenda. If he wants to create less sexualized female characters that's his prerogative, if he wants to represent more queer people in his games, that's his prerogative. I however don't see anything wrong with that and don't go dissecting every word spoken by a character to have a nefarious agenda. In your own words
Neil's agenda was in the first game as well. That didn't stop you from considering it one of the best games ever made. His agenda did not ruin your enjoyment of the first game until he made a speech and talked about one of his reasons why he created the women in TLOU the way he did. You are going in cocked and locked, ready to find an agenda so every word said must have a meaning that confirms your suspicion. Imagine those two characters were men having that conversation, does that change anything about it? No, it would just be a normal conversation of 2 paramilitary men talking about their partners.
You have made a judgement and are looking for evidence of it. Save the objectivist bullshit for someone else. Nobody is objective. He said his agenda for the first game was to create powerful women his daughter could look up to, not the damsel in distress trope architype. He accomplished that as all the women in TLOU were capable women.
I watched the same video as did millions of people. You are the first person on this forum who made the effort to transcribe the conversation between those two characters to find an agenda.
Lets be frank here.
What exactly is the agenda in that conversation?
Exhibit A
Now what is it you
GribbleGrunger
think the agenda is?
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
I'll continue responding to this post but it's clear there would be no reason to continue beyond this post. I think less sexualisation is a good thing but forcing other genders into narratives just for the sake of it is absolutely counter to writing good stories. It's trash and more people are seeing it. Of course, that's why more people are now homophobes, racists, misogynists of course. It's not a signal to consider your motives for adding it, it's just a signal that bigotry is a virus that spreads even to the most intellectual commentators. No need to check yourself, just blame the world and watch the bigotry grow as your bubble gets ever smaller. Just round those wagons up comrades, the bigots are coming and growing stronger! 'This is even more proof we're victims and not loud mouthed oppressors of freedom of speech.'
It's really odd how you can observe this and still not understand where I'm coming from. The agenda exists and you know it does because you support it. Yeah? I know Neil's agenda exists too. The only difference between you and me is that I'm 'concerned' that the agenda 'could' (maybe, possibly but not necessarily) affect the quality of writing and become too overt. If it's the same as the first game, I'll be fine with that ... get it?
The only problem is, the reactions to the leaks at least 'suggest' (but don't necessarily PROVE) that the agenda HAS affected the narrative overtly. I have not seen the leaks and so can only assess the situation based on responses, and any instances from the footage I HAVE seen that 'may' give credence to the responses. I have NOT made any judgement yet but I will when I play the game and see for myself.
Laying out reasons for my concern is not making a judgement. I haven't made a judgement yet. I'm waiting to play the game ... I may have mentioned that before.
I watched the same video as did millions of people. You are the first person on this forum who made the effort to transcribe the conversation between those two characters to find an agenda.
Lets be frank here.
What exactly is the agenda in that conversation?
Exhibit A
Now what is it you
I'm not trying to FIND an agenda, I'm showing a conversation that 'could' be related to an agenda that you yourself agrees is there and Neil openly mentioned. You support Neil's agenda but think it doesn't exist? Oh, you do think it exists so you're angry I found possible proof of it? Which one is it? You like Neil using his agenda or you don't like me pointing out it may be overt? Which?
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
What constitutes as forcing? Why does the presence of other genders in the game have to justify its existence while Male characters are a default shoeing that do not have to justify its existence in the narrative. Have you ever questioned why a particular character is a man and not a woman? I can honestly say that I have not. I just simply accept it as their creative vision for the game. When Nathan Drake and Joel were introduced as a straight Men, I did not question their existence and ask if that will ruin the narrative.
I thought you didn't make a judgment yet and just waiting to play the game? Lol
I'm sorry, i don't recall calling you a bigot. Matter of fact you and I get along pretty well in other threads. I thought we were Dreams buddies? For shame
GribbleGrunger
. I didn't realize we were at war.I trust the artistic process will not ruin my enjoyment of the game despite his stated agenda. Again in your own words
I told you, you had made your judgement already and now looking for evidence. At least we are moved past pretending to be objective, quite with the MAY and own your shit. You couldn't be more wrong. The agenda has been railed against ever since the speech was made years ago. The agenda was had during the inception of the very first TLOU. It permutates all over the game. Bill is gay because one of the character artists asked what if Bill was gay, would that change the story and the answer was NO so bill is gay, despite the story. If my recollection is right.
And back to pretending you haven't made your judgement.
You found one that "could be" considered as one. Lol and dude I said
The existence of the character themselves are the proof that Neil wants to represent more people in his work. The sequence of words spoken is not because the character is lesbian, being lesbian did not change the narrative, it could have been spoken by a man and it would not change its meaning.
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
What constitutes as forcing? Why does the presence of other genders in the game have to justify its existence while Male characters are a default shoeing that do not have to justify its existence in the narrative.
I thought you didn't make a judgment yet and just waiting to play the game? Lol
I'm sorry, i don't recall calling you a bigot. Matter of fact you and I get along pretty well in other threads. I thought we were Dreams buddies? For shame
I trust the artistic process will not ruin my enjoyment of the game despite his stated agenda. Again in your own words
I told you, you had made your judgement already and now looking for evidence. At least we are moved past pretending to be objective, quite with the MAY and own your shit. You couldn't be more wrong. The agenda has been railed against ever since the speech was made years ago. The agenda was had during the inception of the very first TLOU. It permutates all over the game. Bill is gay because one of the character artists asked what if Bill was gay, would that change the story and the answer was NO so bill is gay, despite the story. If my recollection is right.
And back to pretending you haven't made your judgement.
You found one that "could be" considered as one. Lol and dude I said
The existence of the character themselves are the proof that Neil wants to represent more people in his work. The sequence of words spoken is not because the character is lesbian, being lesbian did not change the narrative, it could have been spoken by a man and it would not change its meaning.
I never said it is proof his agenda has stepped over the line into overtness. I can't know that until I have the full context and don't want to know that because it could be spoiler territory. I haven't made a judgement yet. If I had, I wouldn't buy the game. Perhaps if I saw the spoilers, I wouldn't buy the game, or I might laugh at people interpreting things incorrectly and buy the game. I don't know because I haven't made a judgement yet. All I know for certain at this point is that the writing isn't anywhere near as good as the first game. I've made a judgement on that, yes.
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
That's a judgment i reserve until i have beat the game if i decide to play it. Can't decide if i want to play it now or wait for the PS5 version. I did the same for the first one on PS4.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
We've heard stacks of dialogue from this game. More than enough to judge whether it's as good as the first. You're only saying that for affect, man.
Tripolygon
Banned
Dialogues in trailers or little snippets do not decide for me if the writing is good in the game as a whole and neither does it decide if I'm going to play a game. Gameplay decides that for me. I played Knack 1 and 2 and it has terrible writing. The dialogue in the first scene of TLOU between Sara and Joel was what set the tone for what I should expect from the game and what established it as one of the most memorable piece of writing in any game i have ever played was the scene in the ranch. I waited until the PS4 version released before I played it. So no i have not decided if the writing is up to that standard yet. I don't know what effect you think I'm trying to achieve here.
Everyone can agree that this scene and the ending Ok was a truly inspired piece of writing. Nothing in the trailers came close to these. Heck the scene with Joel interrogating those cannibals' was chilling and the scene with David "how'd you put it? Tiny pieces? Paraphrasing here of course. That's how memorable those scenes were for me. Not the trailers.
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Clearly the writing hasn't made me decide not to buy the game or I wouldn't be buying it. The writing isn't as good but that's likely because it's written by someone else. Just to point out that saying something isn't as good, isn't saying something is bad.
REE Machine
Banned
So your okay with censoring sexualized characters but Now you want to censor a directors creative freedom...? Isnt that one in the same? Its their creative freedom to design characters which you support but you want to censor their ideas they come up with for stories and characters? Im a fan of no censorship, if a director has an idea let them do it, im not sensitive to ANY agenda. Hell is Neil decided to make a game with conservative views that did bad things, as ling as it hasa good story and characters thats all I want in a game, why should I be entitled to say "no you cant"
What exactly is forces about Ellie for instance being the new main character for the sequel? How is it forced? It literally plays upon the first game and transitions it, we knew it was coming all along, its not like its a curve ball. Joels story was finished in the first game, he got what he wanted and is content with what he did. For selfish reasons he gave up the cure for man kind and used Ellie as thee catalyst for his redemption for his failure of saving his own daughter. Ellie isnt shoe horned in, its transitioning to the next stage of the story and frankly thats not trash writing and story telling, that good story telling and writing. What would have been trash is having another game star Joel when his story is done.
this is literally just concern trolling st its finest. The firsr game had an agenda yet you claimed its one of your favourite games....but it has an agenda and yes that agenda was in your face when you see and look for it. There were not only gay characters but strong female characters as well. Your concerned that the agenda is going to harm the story did you ever think it may help the story? Ellie has a gf and cares about someone, something tragic happens which starts the cycle of violence in which the plot takes place, Ellie goes down a path that could meet her demise but she doesnt care because she lusts for revenge, without having that factor then there is no depth to her character and not justification for her rampage we will be playing.
Umbral
Member
Around 96% of the population of the U.S. is heterosexual. It’s the default because otherwise there wouldn’t be any humans. That’s also part of the reason heterosexuality is the default for fictional characters. Ellie’s being gay (nobody cares) isn’t the issue, but if bad actors were to acknowledge that then they would have to contend with actual arguments. So, strawman and label is the name of the game nowadays.
Too many people today are ideologically possessed. If I can guess most or all of your worldview off of a small aspect of your beliefs, there’s a chance you’re possessed by an ideology and the words that come out of your mouth are not yours at all. I’m speaking of you in the general sense, not you specifically.
The Last of Us attempts to ground its story and gameplay in realism. The writers and developers have said as much. A story has to have rules to be believable and the audience needs to be aware of the rules. Since The Last of Us is attempting realism, any deviation is easily spotted by most people because the world we are most familiar with is reality and therefore are familiar with its rules. This constrains what you can do narratively and maintain believability. If you want to get outlandish, stay away from realism.
Now, when you have women in combat when humans are on the brink, that’s one rule broken. Why would any group of people put their most valuable biological asset in harms way needlessly? Men are the practitioners of war, violence, and are the more expendable sex. This justifies men being the default when it comes to media centered around violence and war. Look at prison populations, it’s almost all men. Murders; almost all men.
When you have a woman the size of a large man in a post-apocalyptic scenario with food scarcity, no steroids available, and the biological reality of women, hormones, and building muscles, that’s another rule broken. Abby’s physique is comically large. Her body is something a man would aspire to. Building and maintaining that physique would require so much food, work, rest, and steroids to achieve for a woman in today’s world that it’s laughable that no one within the studio called it out.
When you have lesbian and gay characters everywhere, despite their very low population percentage, that’s another rule broken. Nobody actually cares if there are gay characters or female characters. Games have a long history with many varied characters. It’s all in how it’s handled. The statistic probability of this is so low that people notice. You see people in this thread, however jokingly, trying to justify how it could make sense narratively.
It’s attempting to bend reality to fit beliefs and wishes. It breaks too many rules and people have a hard time suspending disbelief when that happens. It seems they were much more deft in their approach for the first game, then decided to crank the ideology knob to 11 in the second. I don’t even know that they’re doing this consciously, it could just be possession and echo chambers. Noticing it does not say anything about the observers and their motives.
I’m sure there are more examples, but this is long enough already. Ultimately, it will be decided by the market. It will sell well, but probably not as well as it would have had the leaks not happened. I also suspect there will be a lot of people who don’t know the leaks who will find themselves not very happy either and will think twice about picking up TLoU 3, should there be one. That is, if the leaks that have gotten out are as bad within context as they seem outside of context.
Last edited:
In a world where society breaks down it would be survival of the fittest and that fittest can include women. Where I am from women while maybe not having as much physical strength can be as vicious as any man and anybody that hasn't dies or turned into a clicker at that point would have to be tough as nails. The women still left alive are most surely not delicate flowers.
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Where you from, playa?
I grew up in Asbury Park NJ and I currently live in Lavalette.
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
I watched Jersey Shore, and based on what I saw, Jenni would definitely survive the apocalypse.
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Friendly reminder, this game is co-written by Halley Gross
Tripolygon
Banned
How about no, that's an illogical reason. 96% of the population of the US is straight so gay people have to justify their existence in games? How about non heterosexual people exist so they get to also be represented in games as well. By that token since we are going by percentage, how about women get represented 50% in all media, want to get a little more scientific? All games have only women because scientifically for a long time female were thought to be the default sex in mammals seeing as fetal development into a male occurs due to the activation of the SRY gene on the Y chromosome in the second month of pregnancy. Of course we have since discovered those without SRY, those with duplicates that have both a penis and ovaries. I have not once called anyone here any label so cut with that strawman bullshit.
You also includes you, the words you are speaking is informed by the society you grew up around. Everybody has an ideology, a set of beliefs that guard their day to day interactions with people. It could be political, religious, philosophical and everything in between.
Your reality is as real as anyone's. TLOU attempts to ground its story in reality and in that regard it succeeds, the story is as old as time. Human story as told through the ages has fundamentally not changed, when it comes down to it, we do what we must to protect the ones we love and survive. That's the story. The fungus infection is real in insects but not in humans and in that regard it is grounded in reality but it is hyper real. The TLOU has a cast of characters from different ages, sexes, gender, race, ideological and religious beliefs and in that regard it is grounded in reality. Grounded in reality does not mean real. Have we as humans experienced a fungus infection that turned us into zombies? No, it is just a trope that is used to tell the basic human story of struggle and survival.
Jesus fucking christ, gtf out of here with this women are precious asset bullshit. Without Men there will be no procreation, it takes both the sperm and gamete to make a baby. Men are no more expendable than women so to say that is pure egotistical hubris. What's next the prison population is majority Black so Blacks have more violent tendencies? How about the socioeconomical gender roles assigned to us. Men got drafted to war by force. Women could not work in the factories until 1918 because the war effort needed more workers and they had a shortage. Same thing happened again during world war 1. The toys we buy our kids, girls get a starter oven while boys get an action figure. How about religious gender roles? Men are supposed to be the head of the household and women are supposed to be subservient to their husbands. We push men towards violent roles and we wonder why they are over represented in the prison population and also there is also an inherent bias in the laws as well. Men get sentenced harsher for committing the same crimes as women, a big example would be sex crimes.
I almost want to see what you look like with your chiseled manly self. Her body is modeled after an actual person not a fictitious person. I would expect a person who is always on the move, fighting, hunting etc to be buff. I am not a buff individual by any stretch of the imagination. It does not offend me that a woman is portrayed as such.
Everywhere where? Have you counted?
They can crank it up to 20 if they like and it still would not bother me. I play Call of Duty campaign and i don't question why there are few or no women nor do i question why there aren't any gay characters. I just play it because that is the game they are trying to make. Shit they can make all the characters chickens and it still won't bother me. It would be funny though.
The game will sell very well in the end. They will make their money back and keep on creating games.
Last edited:
Tripolygon
Banned
Excellent writer who has written for various shows i liked.
Tripolygon
Banned
You should meet my family. Grew up in a house full of Sisters who fought with guys almost everyday in my neighborhood. Of course everyone is grown now, some with kids etc.
Last edited:
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
I keep watching the footage and I wonder if we'll play the game from the hospital bed to the 'OK' line and then continue into Jackson (or was it Jacksonville?).
Umbral
Member
You are either not following what I’ve written or you are being dishonest in your arguments. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume it’s the former.
96% of something is going to skew one’s view toward using that as your default. Males being bigger, faster, stronger, more aggressive, and quicker to recover is going to make males the default choice in genres where the main mechanic is physical conflict, particularly when you are setting your game in the real world. Bayonetta can kick all sorts of ass all day and nobody bats an eye because of the world in which it takes place. Anything goes there. Realism has stricter rules.
Having beliefs and being possessed by ideology are not the same thing. I try my best to pursue truth. It only requires the willingness to let go of ideas and beliefs when they no longer make sense when scrutinized. Ideological possession will not allow you to do that because your entire worldview is constructed on those beliefs being true. You can minimize subjectivity if you choose to. I find it to be too slippery because you can always use it as a trump card to get out of an argument.
No. There is simply reality. We study it and measure it. There is no “my reality” or “your reality” or ”their reality”.
The Last of Us succeeds in some ways in grounding itself in reality.
The reason the cordyceps was chosen for the basis of the story is because it’s real and plausible. If they didn’t care about grounding it in reality then they could have had the zombie-ism spread by the handling of Matchbox cars or maybe when you eat cotton candy.
The game is set in the U.S., in the Pacific Northwest, Utah, and Wyoming. It’s meant to be as close to reality as possible. They’ve said as much. If the whole cast and enemies were Japanese, people would think it’s then some sort of alternate reality version of the U.S. because we know the Japanese population isn’t high in the U.S., so there has to be some narrative justification for it being that way. We’re now moved away from reality.
The “human story” you refer to can be grafted onto all sorts of settings, genres, and characters, but The Last of Us is set in our world, not some wild, imaginative world. If real isn’t the goal, then why not have Ellie be able to turn into a horse instead of having to ride one? You can still tell the “human story” there too. Why have Ellie use chemicals to burn her scar and then tattoo over it? Why not have Dina use magic to make the scar disappear? Why can’t Ellie jump 40 feet into the air and be able to lift 18-wheelers? They don’t do it because it makes no sense in a game world attempting to mimic reality.
Men are less valuable because they can produce sperm on demand and late into life. Women have a limited amount of eggs from birth and when pregnant they cannot have another child for 9 months or more. Once they run out of eggs, that’s it. If you’re trying to repopulate the world, you want more women than you do men. Men are biologically less valuable.
We don’t have to push men toward more violent roles. It’s in male nature, mostly due to testosterone. Talk to a female-to-male trans person and they can tell you what it feels like to have testosterone all of the sudden, and they’re at a level way below natural males. Biological males have upwards of 10 times or more the amount of testosterone that women have. As male testosterone drops with age so does aggression, musculature, etc.
Spare me the nurture/social construct stuff. There’s plenty of cross-cultural studies disproving a lot of that. There’s also studies on children who haven’t been socialized yet and it still shows that boys like the truck and girls like the baby doll. It’s more nature than people like to admit. Men and women have different interests and that’s not a bad thing, not all of them can be chalked up to “society”.
I’m fit and lift weights. I’m not a bodybuilder or Ryan Reynolds or anything but I know enough and I know several trainers.
There is no doubt in my mind that the woman they modeled Abby on (I’ve seen her) is on steroids. It’s impossible for a woman to reach that size naturally. Don’t believe me, go ask someone who knows more than me. You can see it by just looking at her masculinized features as a result of it.
The body doesn’t like to hold onto muscle it doesn’t need. It’s inefficient. Look at nomadic tribes that are on the move and hunting constantly. Look at runners. They all have lean muscles. Lifting heavy things with a surplus of calories, lots of protein rich food, and testosterone gets you muscles. Bodybuilding is a luxury afforded to those with a surplus of food, time, rest, and lots of determination.
I was referring to the example of the dialogue from the latest gameplay. You’ve already got a lesbian lead, her bisexual girlfriend, and now another lesbian relationship. The probability is low of that being reality, though not impossible. I’ll give you that.
Well, yeah, because almost all people involved in war are men. It shouldn’t cross your mind or stand out as improbable. It matches what you know.
I expect it will. If the sales take enough of a hit, I would expect some changes though. Sony isn’t a charity.
96% of something is going to skew one’s view toward using that as your default. Males being bigger, faster, stronger, more aggressive, and quicker to recover is going to make males the default choice in genres where the main mechanic is physical conflict, particularly when you are setting your game in the real world. Bayonetta can kick all sorts of ass all day and nobody bats an eye because of the world in which it takes place. Anything goes there. Realism has stricter rules.
Having beliefs and being possessed by ideology are not the same thing. I try my best to pursue truth. It only requires the willingness to let go of ideas and beliefs when they no longer make sense when scrutinized. Ideological possession will not allow you to do that because your entire worldview is constructed on those beliefs being true. You can minimize subjectivity if you choose to. I find it to be too slippery because you can always use it as a trump card to get out of an argument.
No. There is simply reality. We study it and measure it. There is no “my reality” or “your reality” or ”their reality”.
The Last of Us succeeds in some ways in grounding itself in reality.
The reason the cordyceps was chosen for the basis of the story is because it’s real and plausible. If they didn’t care about grounding it in reality then they could have had the zombie-ism spread by the handling of Matchbox cars or maybe when you eat cotton candy.
The game is set in the U.S., in the Pacific Northwest, Utah, and Wyoming. It’s meant to be as close to reality as possible. They’ve said as much. If the whole cast and enemies were Japanese, people would think it’s then some sort of alternate reality version of the U.S. because we know the Japanese population isn’t high in the U.S., so there has to be some narrative justification for it being that way. We’re now moved away from reality.
The “human story” you refer to can be grafted onto all sorts of settings, genres, and characters, but The Last of Us is set in our world, not some wild, imaginative world. If real isn’t the goal, then why not have Ellie be able to turn into a horse instead of having to ride one? You can still tell the “human story” there too. Why have Ellie use chemicals to burn her scar and then tattoo over it? Why not have Dina use magic to make the scar disappear? Why can’t Ellie jump 40 feet into the air and be able to lift 18-wheelers? They don’t do it because it makes no sense in a game world attempting to mimic reality.
Men are less valuable because they can produce sperm on demand and late into life. Women have a limited amount of eggs from birth and when pregnant they cannot have another child for 9 months or more. Once they run out of eggs, that’s it. If you’re trying to repopulate the world, you want more women than you do men. Men are biologically less valuable.
We don’t have to push men toward more violent roles. It’s in male nature, mostly due to testosterone. Talk to a female-to-male trans person and they can tell you what it feels like to have testosterone all of the sudden, and they’re at a level way below natural males. Biological males have upwards of 10 times or more the amount of testosterone that women have. As male testosterone drops with age so does aggression, musculature, etc.
Spare me the nurture/social construct stuff. There’s plenty of cross-cultural studies disproving a lot of that. There’s also studies on children who haven’t been socialized yet and it still shows that boys like the truck and girls like the baby doll. It’s more nature than people like to admit. Men and women have different interests and that’s not a bad thing, not all of them can be chalked up to “society”.
I’m fit and lift weights. I’m not a bodybuilder or Ryan Reynolds or anything but I know enough and I know several trainers.
There is no doubt in my mind that the woman they modeled Abby on (I’ve seen her) is on steroids. It’s impossible for a woman to reach that size naturally. Don’t believe me, go ask someone who knows more than me. You can see it by just looking at her masculinized features as a result of it.
The body doesn’t like to hold onto muscle it doesn’t need. It’s inefficient. Look at nomadic tribes that are on the move and hunting constantly. Look at runners. They all have lean muscles. Lifting heavy things with a surplus of calories, lots of protein rich food, and testosterone gets you muscles. Bodybuilding is a luxury afforded to those with a surplus of food, time, rest, and lots of determination.
I was referring to the example of the dialogue from the latest gameplay. You’ve already got a lesbian lead, her bisexual girlfriend, and now another lesbian relationship. The probability is low of that being reality, though not impossible. I’ll give you that.
Well, yeah, because almost all people involved in war are men. It shouldn’t cross your mind or stand out as improbable. It matches what you know.
I expect it will. If the sales take enough of a hit, I would expect some changes though. Sony isn’t a charity.
Tripolygon
Banned
I'll keep it real brief because I've had these discussions before, they take more out of me than I gain from them. Pointless for the most part. My comments are my honest thoughts and I don't need you to give me the benefit of doubt neither do you need mine. I'm sure your comments were your honest thoughts and I have no reason to think you are being dishonest.
For me, it is really simple. Nobody ever has to justify their existence to me, everybody has a need to feel connected and to be a part of society. I know first hand what it feels like to see myself represented in all facet of life and i see no problem with others being represented. I see no reason to question someone's artistic liberty through which they create.
Naughty Dog pays the bills so other Sony studios get to have artistic freedom. They are just about the only Sony studio that hasn't suffered any loss since they were bought, they have been consistently putting out well received critical and commercial games. Even if this games bombs, Sony has shown a willingness to fund games that they do not expect to get massive commercial success. I hope Neil does not change his artistic voice.
Jbomb19
Member
Explain how these characters are “in your face lesbian.”
Ellie is in a relationship. She’s 19, that’s normal. She’s the star of the game so her relationships, be it romantic, violent or platonic, are going to be part of the story. People in this world have relationships. That’s normal. What about any of that makes you start reeeing about “in your face lesbians?”
The lore is gay people exist.
A random lesbian soldier that has a lesbian partner that you randomly stumble upon is not in your face "we have lesbians in our game!" approach?
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Gonna say it again:
What is "correct" representation? What's the best ratio of male to female, gay to straight, black to white, etc. That creators should be striving towards so as not to upset somebody who's keeping count for their side? Think about how hard it it'd be across a long game with a lot of characters, locations, and scenes.
I don't think its an attainable goal, or a desirable one for creators.
What is "correct" representation? What's the best ratio of male to female, gay to straight, black to white, etc. That creators should be striving towards so as not to upset somebody who's keeping count for their side? Think about how hard it it'd be across a long game with a lot of characters, locations, and scenes.
I don't think its an attainable goal, or a desirable one for creators.
Last edited:
turtlepowa
Banned
What backlash? Those type of games are reviewers favorite and that's why Sony keeps making story focussed 3rd person action adventures. I guess more people will get bored with thoses games at some point, but i don't see that in the near future.