VibratingDonkey Comments

Page 2 of 19

  • Project Spark release date set for October on Xbox One and PC

  • VibratingDonkey 09/07/2014

    I clicked this article thinking:
    "Hm, I heard about this thing some E3 ago. Seemed potentially neat."

    Starter Pack will be available.....experience boosts to unlock content quicker.
    Reply +8
  • EA responds to fan outcry over The Sims 4 missing features

  • VibratingDonkey 08/07/2014

    If there hadn't been this whole thing about, it probably would've been part of an expansion. But at this stage it's gotta be a patch. Reply -2
  • VibratingDonkey 08/07/2014

    "You should know that we're building an incredibly strong foundation that is capable of fulfilling every one of your desires in the years to come. The future of The Sims 4 is bright!"
    The incredibly strong and longlasting foundation of being limited to 4GB of RAM and 5-lot neighborhoods with <30s transition loads between lots, public spaces and other neighborhoods.

    Good on them for updating the behavior of the sims, creation and build tools. Improvements is generally expected from a sequel. Which is why it's so disappointing that they've essentially removed the open world. Especially with a more expansive simulated world being the trajectory of the series through the first game to 3.
    Reply +6
  • Inside Sniper Elite 3's Rebellion, Britain's best guilty pleasure developer

  • VibratingDonkey 03/07/2014

    @gizmo
    Sniper Elite 3 is hardly about immersion, authenticity or any of the sort. It's about breezy, non-linear stealth and feeling clever amongst AI as you're systematically shooting nazis in their heads and balls. It's really quite jolly fun.

    I'm yet to encounter any ragdoll glitches except for that one time I threw a nazi at a low roof and he stuck by his elbow, but I'd argue for this game, ragdoll glitches are 100% beneficial to the experience. I don't know why people are always poo-pooing those. They're funny! You people are weird.
    Reply +3
  • Watch Dogs gets new single-player DLC tomorrow on all platforms

  • VibratingDonkey 02/07/2014

    Eh. I feel the game itself was enough. Would rather start up other games than dive back into this one. Also doesn't sound like the most inspired of DLC. More weapons and stats boosts is bleh. If "Black Viceroys" means going back once again to those Freemont buildings, then... Maybe those other two missions are alright.

    No price info?
    Reply 0
  • UK watchdog bans Dungeon Keeper ad, accuses EA of "misleading" customers

  • VibratingDonkey 02/07/2014

    Hurray! These monetization models can be made super gross, good to hear attempts at hiding said grossness in marketing material won't be accepted.

    @TheRealBadabing
    What'll happen the next time EA upsets the ASA? I assume something, or this would be a highly pointless venture.
    Reply +6
  • Advanced Warfare is COD's biggest technological leap since Call of Duty 2

  • VibratingDonkey 02/07/2014

    I haven't played a CoD since Modern Warfare and I still don't feel particularly compelled to break that streak, particularly at the premium Activision always charges. This Steam sale the price of the 2012 edition was finally lowered to the price region of what GRID Autosport and Sniper Elite 3 were day one. So I bought those instead. Oh well, no one's loss really. Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 02/07/2014

    @nothough Are you criticizing Eurogamer or Activhammer here?

    Because the game has some stuff. Most of what I've seen looks pretty minor, homing grenades, that mobile shield thing. But the exoskeleton might genuinely help make things feel more refreshing. Crysis did all that stuff back in the 1800's, but that doesn't suddenly make it a bad idea.
    Reply +5
  • VibratingDonkey 02/07/2014

    Advanced Warfare is COD's biggest technological leap since Call of Duty 2
    Ain't that a thoroughly sad statement.
    So I guess that means this is basically what we'll be looking at for the next 5-10 years then.
    Reply +39
  • BioWare's first "fully gay" male party member in DAI

  • VibratingDonkey 01/07/2014

    Is this wizard known as Dorian the Gray? Or perhaps without the r?
    I feel they chose that name intentionally so that people could make these stupid puns.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 01/07/2014

    Man, I wish his first name was Garth. Reply 0
  • Rainbow Six Siege has male and female hostages

  • VibratingDonkey 26/06/2014

    This outrage is sad.
    Talking about the comments.
    Reply -21
  • VibratingDonkey 25/06/2014

    Oh angry comments. :D
    I will never understand you. Not unless you're responding to literal Hitler.

    Encouraging people to more carefully consider and reflect on gender/whatever representation seems like a good thing. Even if maybe criticizing Ubi's empathy explanation specifically is a bit windfarty. From what's been shown and said, the game looks perfectly fine in terms of representation. Although the question remains where the hell Ding Chavez is at.
    Reply -30
  • "Definitive spiritual successor" to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. hits Kickstarter

  • VibratingDonkey 25/06/2014

    @Rogueywon
    I think they only show the actual game in brief off-screen footage where you can barely even tell what you're looking at.
    edit Actually, all game footage appears to be one Stalker or another. There's only development footage of the game.

    The pitch video contains primarily footage/CG of Stalker. It's edited in a way that makes it confusing what you're actually watching. They're talking about the game and showing footage of Stalker.

    So it's a lot of: "Is this the game? Is it Stalker? I think this might be the ga...no it's Call of Pripyat."

    I wouldn't be surprised if...whoever owns the Stalker IP these days, takes issue with the video.
    Reply +4
  • VibratingDonkey 25/06/2014

    The way they try to sell their project by so heavily leaning on Stalker CG and footage is rubbing me the wrong way. There's practically no footage of the actual game they're pitching. If you have a game, and you want people to fund it for you, then show it maybe? The hell?

    Also of concern is the low goal, which will obviously not be enough to complete their vision, they even say so themselves. But there's no need to worry, because vague financial options.

    Why WiiU? More work for little gain, potentially hamstringing the game design in the process, having to keep the WiiU's 2MB of RAM in mind.
    Why any console, really? With limited resources (both manpower and funds) it seems wiser to focus on one version and worry about other platforms later.

    Kind of seems like that talk is more about broadening the backer pool.

    It's just a bad, sketchy pitch. Makes them look untrustworthy, or at least not very forthcoming. Not a good look for a kickstarter project. Trust is core to crowdfunding. Stalker was great, I'd love to see more games like it, but I'm not chipping in until they address and clarify these things.
    Reply +4
  • DICE ponders: what did people really like about Battlefield: Bad Company?

  • VibratingDonkey 24/06/2014

    @TroubleMaker411
    BC2 launched with five maps per mode (Conquest, Rush) and had EA's used games tax.

    Almost the entire run of those supposed free maps, were filling out the gaps. If I recall, only the last one added actual new maps.

    It always seemed to me that DICE was stretched out between BC2 and Medal of Honor, EA didn't want to delay the game, something had to give, and they came up with this brilliant plan of spinning a MP focused game launching only with five maps into a PR positive. And it worked. Those maps being free is the only thing anyone ever seems to remember. And it still pisses me off.
    Reply +2
  • VibratingDonkey 24/06/2014

    Bringing back the characters and creating a great single-player out of that, sure, I can understand that.
    Oh ok, so he's talking about specifics that made the multiplayer feel a certain way. I also have no idea about that. Seems secondary to the more obvious differences. BC MP was tighter in scope, maps designed specifically for 32p Rush. That and more potent destruction is what defines BC2 to me. And the more bombastic soundscape. And the unlock system being less of a tedious shitfest.

    BC MP was a nice diversion, and excelled at its specialization. In an ideal world there'd be maps designed separately for both Rush and Conquest, but that's a tall order, and if I had to choose, there's no way I'd forgo good Conquest maps for good Rush maps. They should have a gander at those other things though.

    And they should absolutely aim to build on the campaign of the first game. What they should've been doing from the start. It had some flaws, but they had the right idea making it more open. What I remember is you'd drive around with funky tunes playing from the radio, came upon a little base and could sort of approach it however. That the characters had character was like the cream and cherry on top of fairly robust baked goods.
    Reply 0
  • "That wizard came from the moon!" Destiny T-shirt soars to sales success

  • VibratingDonkey 24/06/2014

    That X came from the Z. Reply 0
  • Should Early Access DayZ be in Steam's Summer Sale?

  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    Early Access is weird. People have different philosophies on pricing and they all seem valid in one way or another. Here it's to deter people from impulse buying an unfinished game. There's nothing wrong with the logic behind that. But personally I think their disclaimers ought to be enough to make people aware.

    Divinity is practically done and people say it's pretty good, which is why I reckon that being on sale is fine and also bought it. Dead Rising 3 would be a more questionable offer. That thing's over two months away and there's been some snafu about the framerate.
    Reply +4
  • EA addresses "unacceptable" Battlefield 4 launch

  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @DoubleDangerous
    However, it does merit a cautious approach to new releases in general.

    That's what I've taken from all this; pre-ordering/day-oneing is dumb. It's not just about knowing whether you'll like a game or not, it's about knowing how/if it will work, and you can never know that until users start reporting.
    Reply 0
  • Ubisoft explains why Watch Dogs on PC contains hidden graphics files

  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    Can anyone offer an explanation as to why particle effects for shots hitting dirt and water do not exist?

    Because that just seems bizarre to me.
    Reply +4
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @muzzakus
    Your premise is faulty. Watch Dogs both runs and looks better on PC.

    The DOF was silly the way it was in the images I saw. Eventually modders may work that out in a way that doesn't impede gameplay.

    Objects in headlights casting shadows is something that would objectively enhance the visuals. But apparently this unfinished implementation of it may cause some glitches.

    I don't know what else there is beyond that.
    Reply +4
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @EricJohn004
    If these kinds of hostile, angry, insulting, demeaning, belittling, combative attitudes didn't exist there'd be peace on Earth.

    So, you know, stop it. Do a little dance. Make a little love.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    We test and optimise our games for each platform on which they're released, striving for the best possible quality.

    The PC version does indeed contain some old, unused render settings that were deactivated for a variety of reasons, including possible impacts on visual fidelity, stability, performance and overall gameplay quality.
    Meanwhile the texture setting recommended for my 780 by Ubisoft and Nvidia produces stuttering so severe it renders the game unplayable.

    Also, what's not reported in this article, is that some have seen performance improvements from this mod, decreasing stuttering.

    It seems to me they just didn't consider optimizing for higher end PC's too important of a priority.
    Reply 0
  • Editor's blog: I am sexist

  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    Y'all downvoting comments in an attempt to make them invisible to the vast majority of users are the worst. Reply +1
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @dirtysteve
    So you reject the notion that women being more commonly exposed to sexism and discrimination than males as a reason for it being highlighted, and are instead implying that sexism towards women is being talked about on game sites in order to suppress white male suffering?

    I don't even know what's going on any longer. I'mma go to bed. Good night everyone!
    Reply -1
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    Rami Ismail is the most reasonable human being I've ever encountered on the internet, and he says he appreciates this article. So that's that, time to start packing and go home.
    https://twitter.com/tha_rami/status/479748834944634882
    Reply -2
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @dirtysteve
    Sorry lil buddy, wait your turn.

    ;)

    I meant to say that I believe sexism is a bigger problem for women and as such that group should probably get priority. Not that I believe children should become slaves.
    Reply -1
  • VibratingDonkey 20/06/2014

    @Sir-Elton-Pr0n
    Kind of related, saw this pop up in my twitter feed recently.
    http://phys.org/news66401288.html

    What I mean to say is that, while it may be true that men also get objectified, when it comes to sorting out social injustices, perhaps we should wait our turn. Don't tread on the dreams of others. And then at some point in the future, maybe we'll be able to live entirely without incident.

    Somehow Equilibrium entered my mind and came out through my fingers there.

    Netherrealm totally ripped off that face slice.
    Reply -2
  • VibratingDonkey 19/06/2014

    @Deionarra
    No one gives half a fuck, you say, in a thread with 500+ comments, while seeming to give quite a bit of fuck.

    discerning game enthusiast :D

    Are you attempting satire, perchance? I can never quite tell on the internet.
    Reply +5
  • VibratingDonkey 19/06/2014

    Long way to go. Reply +4
  • Notch defends Minecraft dev Mojang from "worse than EA" claims

  • VibratingDonkey 17/06/2014

    @KDR_11k
    Haha, oh wow.

    A quick google says a Minecraft server costs roughly €1 per player slot, up to 100 slots. While that's potentially a substantial sum, at some stage it ceases being about offsetting or paying for server upkeep and becomes about turning a profit.

    When you're selling the ability to fly or never having to wait to teleport for $50, you've thrashed through that stage with the tact and vigor of a thousand ninjas on fire racing through a hospital zone at 5000 mph on rockets made from pure carbon that can smash through planets.

    That shit's super gross. I now believe absolutely 100% that Mojang is doing the right thing.

    (Some) Minecraft server admins are the ones who are worse than EA. What a twist.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 17/06/2014

    @TarickStonefire
    You must be reading with your butt or something.

    Cosmetic items like costumes, hats and pets are fine, Mojang wrote. "Swords, invincibility potions, and man-eating pigs are not. We want all players to be presented with the same gameplay features, whether they decide to pay or not."
    You are allowed to sell in-game items so long as they don’t affect gameplay
    https://mojang.com/2014/06/lets-talk-server-monetisation/
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 16/06/2014

    @TarickStonefire
    Gameplay tweaks, yes, not cosmetic customization items.

    @AOFanboi
    That too. Must be wasting some amount of time and patience for everyone. Paragraph in the FAQ about making sure those who sell stuff clarify that they are not Mojang.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 16/06/2014

    @d0x
    I don't know the specifics of how Minecraft works, so, you know, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like it's up to server admins whether players get to keep the stuff that affects the gameplay. They just can't have it be exclusive to those who've donated to the server. Either everyone gets it or no one does. Then what they could do is come up with replacement perks that are purely cosmetic.

    The general idea of servers offering customization options for donations sounds fine to me, and evidently Mojang as well. People would rent servers anyway, but I do suspect this helps bring in more donations, offset rental costs and just makes for a happier community in general.

    The problem with all this seems to be a messaging one.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 16/06/2014

    @d0x
    That sounds fine in theory. But Mojang's worry seems to be that those perks could get out of hand and give players an unfair advantage in whatever way that means in Minecraft, and they don't want to encourage environments where people who pay get to lord over those who don't.

    If those servers have to shut down or relinquish their rewards over Mojang apparently now enforcing this rule, then whoopdedoo, basically. Everyone involved ought to realize that offering gameplay advantages for payment is a terrible idea.

    This is what I gather, having never played Minecraft and just now learning about any of this servering and donating.
    Reply +8
  • Rainbow Six: Siege stands apart from other shooters

  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    @AgentDaleCooper
    Was just confusing the first time they did that last E3 with The Division. Thought they were showing single player. Because no one ever talks or acts like that online.

    Nowadays all it does is highlight that the demonstration is machinima scripted to present their idealized vision of a round.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    @kristaylor
    My first experience with Rainbow Six was on PS1. Probably the worst PS1 game I've ever played.

    Rogue Spear on DC, little bit of 3 beta on PC. Vegas is probably the one I've spent the most time on as well. It was incredibly much more Hollywood action, but it did retain tactical bits that made things interesting.

    But really everyone, SWAT 4.
    At this stage I don't even know if this game will have a campaign, but if it does, please let it be 5WAT. Tactical shooters always tend to be so damn clinical, dry and boring, either in the German way, or the Tom Clancy's way. With SWAT 4 it was just a complete tonal shift, shit got real.
    Reply +5
  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    This is more like what I expected out of Hardline. Was looking forward to seeing Visceral's interpretation of some weird Rainbow Six/Payday 2/Battlefield mashup. Instead it's kind of just Battlefield 4 with two new modes. Which, as a fan of Battlefield, is fine, but somewhat disappointing.

    And while for a brief second it looked like Ubisoft might finally unleash salvation by showing Beyond Good & Evil 2, it was still great to see that someone is making a game in this vein.
    Reply +5
  • Nordic Games buys THQ name to use when publishing

  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    I like Nordic THQ, they don't seem to give a shit. Hopefully they won't inherit THQ's trajectory. Reply +1
  • Assassin's Creed Unity is a backward step for progressive games

  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    People get so angry about these things. It's so weird. I don't understand that at all.

    Let's copy paste this thing, so people hopefully read that instead of some of the rubbish bickering on here.

    Sorry for the hijack/piggyback. Most of this post isn't directed at you, but is more general ranting I need to say.

    Producer/Project Manager with more than a dozen shipped titles across every major platform chiming in, including more than a couple with 8-digit budgets.

    Different words get used with different context within the game industry that have a different flavor internally than it might to the general public. Words like "cost", "expensive", and "feature" can mean ENTIRELY different things depending on who you're talking to.

    Something "costly" could mean it takes up a lot of bandwidth cycles within a game engine. Something "expensive" could mean that the project manager feels it's going to take a lot of work/effort/complexity during a particular release cycle. Something that's a feature could simply be a particular requested item from a designer (could also be called a story, an epic, an ask, an item, or whatever terminology that team is using at the time, often depending on the methodology the team is using for production).

    On my current team, EVERYTHING that is requested by the EP, CD, or designers is a "feature" - regardless of what it is. Want a new animation? That's a feature. Want a new weapon type? Feature. New character archetype? Feature. Anything new that does not already exist within the game is a feature. Anything that is involved in the work necessary to create the feature is a task or subtask. A collection of features is either a theme or an epic (depending on the flavor of the collection).

    This shorthand exists for teams of developers to work efficiently together. My production staff does all the wrangling so that the designers, engineers, artists, animators, and QA can do more work and still get home to their families while their kids are still awake.

    Features all have costs. To the project. To the company. To my team members. If I have to make a call as to whether or not this product of entertainment includes a feature that leaves someone somewhere feeling a bit left out OR whether or not my development staff has to put in some weekends (a staff that includes significant numbers of women - many of whom are mothers or even grandmothers, mind you), then I'm going to want to weigh those costs against their work/life balance...and your personal feelings on the subject aren't nearly as important to me as the well-being of my team. Sorry if that offends. Actually, no I'm not.

    Building out a new female character is just as difficult as creating a new character. It means new concepts, models, rigging, storyline changes/additions, script changes, VO, and cut scene changes/additions. All of these additions now live in the game code alongside everything else, which might already be getting pretty crowded depending on what platforms you're delivering to. All of these additions make the code base larger and even more complex. All of these additions create bugs and technical debt that needs to first be found through additional QA (sorry guys, you're in this weekend because of the new character cut scenes) which then result in more work from the engineers (sorry guys, you're in next week till 10 PM mandatory because of the expected bugs from the new cut scene that QA will find over the weekend).

    Because it's a console title that has a firm ship date (release date for AC5 is October 28th), you want to be submitted at least 8 weeks in advance to first party approvals (Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo have to approve the code you want to put on their systems before they allow you to go to manufacturing - the RTM, or Release to Manufacturer is required before you can put your disk in a box). Once you have your approval, you have a scheduled and contracted run at one of the THREE approved manufacturers allowed to take your production run within the U.S. Miss your RTM date and too fucking bad - EA or Activision or Majesco or whoever has the time scheduled immediately after yours and they're not in a mood to negotiate with you for Q3/4 sales numbers. Once you DO get through your manufacture period, you have to get the units on the shelves at Target, BestBuy, Fry's, GameStop and anyone else you've contracted shelf space with. What? You think those end caps and front facing shelf spaces are just free and randomly put together by the store staffs? That's cute.

    Bottom line to the above? AC5 is already well into alpha (feature complete) and possibly already into beta (asset complete) if they want to hit that late August/early Sept submission date they have looming ahead of them.

    Best estimates I've heard from people I know at Ubi are that the additional female character was prototyped out very early but sidelined as the game itself is massive and requires an inordinate amount of work just to get the co-op working in the first place. They wanted to get back to the female character, but after costing her out, discovered it would take between 25-50 days of work to get her added in properly (that's the important word, by the way - will get back to it in a bit).

    That 25-50 days isn't something you can just throw money and people at by the way. Character pipelines don't work that way. You can't start rescripting or animating new cut-scenes before you have the new rigged model. You can't rig the model till have the model. You can't build the model till have the concept art. You can't record the VO for the cut scenes and in-game play till have the script written. You have to then find the actress who will record the voice, and another actress to record the mocap.

    All of this takes time. Time from someone already working late into the day/night and possibly on weekends. Because they're working on OTHER parts of the game. Because the game isn't done just because you saw a trailer at E3. Chances are the trailer wasn't done by ANYONE on the team and likely was outsourced out to a cinematics house.

    The game date was likely set a year or more in advance by people setting up the contracts I mentioned above, so you may as well consider that date damn near sacred. That means to get the new character in, something had to give...or rather several somethings. Because unlike many other things in life, game development really can be zero-sum. To gain X cost of features, you have to give up X. But some execs don't think that way - they want X and don't want to give up shit. So they'll grind your team into the dirt to get there (if they're not all that worried about tech debt piling up or in keeping the team together after shipping). Other execs get it - at least to a point. They might ask for lower quality on this or that or may only "suggest" that you extend your team's hours.

    However, most teams on AAA don't want to give up quality for anything. Why? Because that means lower Metacritic scores for one thing...a thing that most studio bonuses are inextricably intertwined with. Busted your ass for 2 years on a project and it's expected to bring in a 90 Metacritic so you can get your 20% IC bonus? Wait, you only got an 88% because some jackass kid who gets paid in pagecounts and free games decided you did a half-assed job on the animations for the female character compared to the male and the side-quests weren't involved enough (because your team threw those out to work on the female characters)...no bonus for you, sucker!

    This whole subject makes my stomach turn to shit. I know a LOT of people on those teams. Good people. They WANT to bring in more features - female characters definitely is part of that. They hate being called sexist. They hate upper management telling them estimates for their work that they KNOW is wrong ("only a couple of days worth of animations" might as well read "fuck you every other animator who can't do as well as I think I can as fast as I can on new tech").

    I know very few devs who are true asshats (yeah, lots of brilliant jerks, a handful of outright assholes, most are just great people who do this for love, not money - they could stop making games and go build tax software tomorrow and double their paychecks in some cases). It's personal when I see people I know and respect called liars or sexist.

    I hope the post helped you see a bit into our lives as much as it helped me to get some of this off my chest.
    Reply +8
  • VibratingDonkey 13/06/2014

    @outy
    Certainly. However, there's such a thing as picking the right battles—and I'm afraid, on the gender equality front, this is a bad battle to start. The principle reason for this is that all four co-op characters are actually Arno (the male French lead). It would really be rather silly to make Arno, the male lead, a female just to pander to the white-knights among us.
    Then why was Ubisoft working to add female characters?

    In the game's co-op mode, players will have custom gear but always view themselves as Arno, Unity's star. Friends are displayed as different characters with the faces of other assassins.

    "Because of that, the common denominator was Arno," Amancio said. "It's not like we could cut our main character, so the only logical option, the only option we had, was to cut the female avatar."
    http://www.polygon.com/e3-2014/2014/6/10/5798592/assassins-creed-unity-female-assassins
    That part doesn't make sense and still hasn't been explained. How can you plan female characters while also planning for seamlessly integrated co-op in a game where the single lead is a male? Were they looking to have the option for players to choose how their "Arno" was represented in others' games?

    Either way, it's the reason given for why this feature was cut that got people questioning proceedings. Then things escalated from there and now the vague specifics of Unity is kind of not what it's about any longer. Because of that, I reckon it's been a mighty decent battle.

    For the love of god, please stop using the term white knight, it is rivaled only by SJW as the dumbest disparaging term in all of history.

    On the whole it's also clear that female leads (not including Lara) aren't terribly viable from a financial standpoint. There was an article about a year ago on here in which a developer (I believe it's the 'Remember Me' developer) told EG that they took a huge risk by opting for a female lead. Such a large risk, in fact, that they were knocked back by several publishers
    I believe that's more a case of self-fulfilling prophecies and false equivalences. Some games that have sold poorly have had female leads, therefore they sell poorly because they have female leads, therefore they don't get a lot of faith or marketing budget, therefore they actually sell poorly.
    http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them
    Reply -1
  • "I understand the issue, but it's not relevant in Assassin's Creed Unity"

  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    @gandhimasterfly
    Well, we care about videogames. Someone has to.
    And it touches on larger societal/equality issues.

    It's not the end of the videogame world if ultimately there's only dudes in the co-op, but stimulating discussions about inclusivity seems healthy. To me this isn't as much an attack on Ubisoft (Ubi's done good with things like Liberation and Freedom Cry, both written by a woman to boot) as it is trying to message the industry at large. Diversity is awesome indeed. *genderneutralfist*
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    @gandhimasterfly
    Targeting demographics is about marketability, not binary morals.
    Wanting more diversity in games doesn't mean opposing male leads or forcing publishers to do as you say. It simply means wanting more diversity in games.

    I don't know the importance of this specific case, but the general issue and dialog surrounding it is obviously not completely unimportant judging by the strong reactions that keep appearing en masse whenever the topic pops up.
    Reply +2
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    @apoc_reg
    I'm no historian, but I'm pretty sure there was more than one ethnicity in late 1700's Paris.

    I'm also pretty sure there were no assassins parkouring over buildings.

    Or magical metallic apples that let you project clones of yourself and whatever the fuck.

    The Ascension of the Jackdaw is real though.
    Reply 0
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    @Nynja

    The petition in question looks like respectful criticism to me. It's leaving concise feedback with the hope that it will be listened to. I don't think anyone's saying a game must have this or that, but rather questioning why it doesn't.

    Regardless, Ubisoft is free to not consider feedback. They are making games for an audience though, so sometimes it's prudent to listen.

    I understand wanting to protect creative freedom. I feel like a push for more diversity is helpful in that regard. We're still in the era of "dude with gun on cover sells more". Homogenization is boring. I want developers to be more able to explore all kinds of subjects and perspectives.
    Reply +1
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    When discussing controversial topics, all this voting system does is stifle and censor. Guess I'll just change the threshold to -10. Reply +2
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    @Nynja
    Criticism is also about expression.

    Making a game about it would be one way of expressing your criticism. Typing words on a keyboard is another.
    Reply -2
  • VibratingDonkey 12/06/2014

    Well I guess that explains why there's no option to play as a female character in co-op. There's no option to play as anyone but Arno. Other players just appear as different characters in your game, a la your bros in Brotherhood (I think there may have been female bros in that game?). So that alleviates the situation I suppose.

    But then I don't understand how it would be important that other players appear as male. That seems to be purely workload related and something they didn't prioritize.

    They're one drop in the ocean, they're one part of it. If we're creating all these different suits that can interchange, that's a lot. It's not only that, but it's nothing to do with production. Again, we're telling the story of Arno - it's that character's story. The reason we're just changing the face and keeping the bodies is we want people to show off the gear that they pick up in the game through exploration. That's why we kept that.
    I think he'd have to elaborate on this for me to understand what the issue is here exactly. Interchangeable suits is a matter of reworking them, but gear is supposed to be logically impossible or something?
    Reply -1
  • Microsoft launches Xbox Feedback website, asks for your ideas

  • VibratingDonkey 10/06/2014

    My suggestion is: Launch the Xbox One.
    Or you know, tell us anything at all about your plans. Aside from ntkrnl saying they were looking at late April for launch, there's been zero communication since the thing got delayed like eight months ago. If they don't start talking during the next couple of days then that's just bizarre. Something must've gone wrong somehow.

    With stock trickling over from nearby countries where it's launched, availability isn't really a problem. But it's sold with caveats like:
    This is a European version. We can not guarantee full functionality prior to the official Nordic launch.
    So there might be regional compatibility issues. Warranties/replacements might get weird. I have no idea how you can expect voice recognition to work or if the eventual language update is able to be applied to these consoles. I assume regional support is barely existent. Etc.

    Also, one could always hope for a decent launch bundle.
    Reply 0