Shagger

Video games have to be empowering in some way to really work imo, but a protagonist doesn't have to be a "chosen one" or anything like that to empower the player. What matters most is how the character empowers the player through thier actions and how they're controlled, not necessarily through who they are. So I'd take either one as that isn't really what's most important and either one of those options can work.

FFVII being described as "underappreciated"? Walks outside to find the planet is turning the wrong direction and the sky is purple with green spots.

Anyone too bashful to play AC Odyssey because the main character wrestles in thier underwear will find that to be the least of thier issues. To anyone who isn't aware, AC Odyssey is set in ancient Greece, and anyone who knows anything about ancient Greece knows the only reason those people had legs was to transport their genitals to the nearest available human being. AC Odyssey stimulates that in a tasteful, but none the less accurate manner.

You can't think of another explanation as to why people want in depth and detailed character creation options other than people being, and I'm quoting, being "insecure about their own desires to do similar stuff." I would love to know what you think you look like when you read your posts. The answer is not only obvious it's also very simple. People like having a wide range of options to customise the look of a character. Without a wide variety of options, character creation just is not fun. You have to make things far more complex than they really are, and you do it to twist things to make them better suit your own perception of reality. This may come as a shock to you, but we're not stupid. Nobody buys your nonsense.

I've been playing video games for 30 years, I have never seen anyone online nor in real life compare customising the look of a video game character to dressing up a doll. Given that this is literally the first time those two things have shared a thought in my mind, I can see there are more similarities than one would initially think, but who was it in your life that made that connection? Whoever it was was either a genius or a fool, and I honestly can't tell which. Even if it is the same thing, and I could make a plausible case for either stance, like you said it's nothing to be ashamed of. Hell, a boy playing with dolls isn't anything to be ashamed of, at least not anymore. I have a 9 year old son, and it wouldn't bother me at all it he did. So seriously, who was it that said that because I genuinely find that fascinating.

How well integrated controls are is a challenge to every game. How well this is done isn't a mark on the control action, but how well integrated that action is used in the game itself. Console interfaces are more indigenously calibrated and set up, not to mention less customisable, than PC set ups, so I get what you're saying @StaceyPowers, but sometimes it's up to the gamer to get used to the controls, rather than the other way round. I do find PC set ups easier to use (for some games, but that's a whole other debate), but that's only because I have a programmable mouse and like to remove as much control away from the keyboard as possible. It takes time to sort it out, though, and it's a pin in the ass. I'm not turning this into a rant, I'm just pointing out that a control option and a control interface have to work in tandem. There can't be a problem with one, there has to be a problem with both for it to not work.

This is what I'm talking about with you. In three sentences there is no attempt to engage with what the OP is saying, nor an attempt to express why you feel they way you do. Those three sentences may well have been; There is no attempt to gauge a greater explanation from the OP (in this case @StaceyPowers) for any form of clarification or explanation. No attempt to seek context nor perspective. There was literally not one question asked at all. Not one actual challenge nor agreement to the OP's opinion(s).Just a declaration that you're right, don't question it. A forum by it's very definition is about the free expression of opinions and ideas, and as a mod I would defend your right to that to the hills, but that doesn't change the fact that engaging with forum members in this condescending, irrespective, disrespectful manner is wrong and in direct contradiction of thier right to do the same. I don't know who you think you are and think of me what you want, but you will show other members, especially thread authors, more respect than this.

If this "random silly chaos" includes bugs, anything from Bethesda. If this "random silly chaos" does not include bugs, anything from Bethesda. If this "random silly chaos" is by design... then it's not really "random silly chaos", bringing us right back to Bethesda.

Well, whilst I don't share your nor @Empire's enthusiasm, I'll be sure to let everyone know what Salisbury Steak and Nuka Cola actually tastes like. Let me also take the chance tell you all that you will eat a spider in you sleep at least once a year... Goodnight.

This a very different thing for me than the upcoming series based on The Last of Us on HBO. So long as the series follows Fallout's very distinctive style and confirms t the established lore, that's enough to make it an adequate adaptation. What it will make it a great show, and this is what will make this very different to what The Last of Us TV series, what they do with this story, the protagonist and setting. Every Fallout game has been different in this regard, so I would actually be disappointed to find this follow one of the games. This should be a story all of it's own in the Fallout universe. Now, Fallout is obviously a very choice based, open RPG experience as a game, so it would be impractical, if not impossible, to emulate that in the storytelling medium of a television series because they can't accurately emulate the role play of every viewers expectations and desires. All we can do is observe the characters story in this version of Fallout. So, for the shows sake, I hope the writers are up to the job of creating an enjoyable and compelling experience, but also hope the viewers accept thier role as an observer in this show and drop some of the entitlement that comes from being in control of a roleplay experience.

I'm shallow and vulgar when you base the value of a character on how attractive you find them? At what point did I say more attractive means less clothing? Seriously? Exactly, you're making baseless implications. Not to mention it's you who brought that into the conversation. So where did the connection between attraction and the nude form in the conversation actually come from? Exactly, it came from YOU! I'm the meantime, I can see exactly what it was you were trying to imply about me and, on an equally personal note, how dare you imply that about me. But it seems you want to talk candidly, if not honestly, so lets do that. Except I AM going to tell the truth, whether you want to hear it or not. You're not as smart as I thought since you can't even see yourself for what you are. Your conduct in that review, on this forum (especially in this thread) added the hugely inappropriate and misguided views you've had on the issue of race have shown you for what you rally are. A hypocritical, shallow, vain, racist, misogynistic, deluded, arrogant little narcissist. Stand by your statements if you want, just be aware they won't change how others perceive you and that others have a right to make thier own judgment, including me. And before you employ you're usual tactic by calling out an "abuse of my power" as mod (something you very well know I've never been guilty of), my position, role and duty on VGR have nothing to do with this. However, it has brought me to a point where I've had to show you far more patience you will admit to, no matter what evidence I'd provide. I've given you chance after chance to show the same patience and willingness to learn, only for you insult me and others on this forum instead. Your conduct over the last week or so has pushed me to the point where I've officially stopped caring. The only reason I'm not going to hide your posts from me is because, as a mod, that's a luxury I can't permit myself to use. However, if you will take one last piece of advice, think about YOUR role here. Because if you think your going to convince anyone to follow your warped philosophy on what gaming is supposed to be, you are wasting your time. Even if you have believed nothing else I've said, believe that. I have enjoyed a few of your reviews and from day one I've admired you intelligence (NOT envied it, don't get mixed up), but your arrogance, inability to consider the thoughts of others and deluded perception of yourself have overshadowed much of the positive contribution you have made here. I'm done with you.

A strangely prudish statement form somebody who thinks female characters in video games that don't meet your "aesthetic" standards can only be the work of a social/political agenda opposed to your own. From your review of Terminator: Resistance

... what's the alternative, then? Does the character need to be fully nude or in full clothing/armour? If so, why is that better? I'm really confused...

@Heatman I admire your enthusiasm, and I appreciate that you're taking forum educate seriously enough to look for previously existing topics as fastidiously as you do, but this is a topic about rumours for upcoming games on Xbox Gamepass that is 9 months old. December 2020 has long since passed, thus so has the relevancy of this topic. There is no point to awakening dead threads that no longer have any purpose. I'd suggest that the Xbox Live Gold: Games With Gold Update Thread may be a more appropriate and sustainable place to discuss these rumours anyway. Locking this thread.

I was really exited to see the game Deep Down from Capcom announced with the PS4. It looked great and it was coming from a Capcom that was starting to get thier act together after something of a rough patch. The PS4 launched, Capcom had some serious financial woes at least partially brought on by the mistakes they made and a lack of consumer confidence then the game just faded out of existence. 8 years later, and I'm still pissed.

That's why I actually consider the formation of the ratings system to be one of the best things to ever happen to gaming. Granted, they system is not perfect, but it is something that we should be thankful for existing.

Well, VGR wouldn't make a page on Gather anyway for the same reason we don't have a Discord server, and that has been discussed before. For that reason, I'm locking this thread.

Now, The Elder Scrolls one I can almost understand, but why would anyone want to eat food based of food from the Fallout universe?

The censorship and banning of games that happened in the early 90's and earlier looks unnecessarily harsh and strict today, but back then video games weren't rated. Organizations like PEGI and the ESRB didn't exist 'till the mid 90's, so you have to say uproar against violence in video games like Carmageddon and Mortal Kombat was justified. Back then, video games were regarded as toys, not as an entertainment media like they are now.

Sorry, but I'm more on Epic's side here. This is exactly the same thing with Battle Royal, Team Deathmatch and Capture the Flag gameplay concepts, you can't really own the concept. This "imposters" style gameplay concept is also nothing more than that, a concept. Among Us may have made it popular like how PUBG made battle royal popular, but they can't claim to own a concept that has been in in existence, in one form or another, far longer than Among Us has. For example, people have been putting on "Who Done it?" roleplay parities for centuries. So I'm sorry, but I just don't think Innersloth really have a defence here. I'm quite ready to believe the Epic would never have created this new game mode without being inspired by the success of Among Us, just like how Fortnight likely wouldn't have excised without PUGB, but in the end I don't there is anything Innersloth can do about this.

The first thing, this topic doesn't really belong in "General Gaming" as it has nothing to do with gaming, so moving to "General Chat". Second, I'll reiterate that as long as it's within the rules, people are free to what they want and as often as they want. I'm more in favour of the "quality over quantity" approach when it comes to posting on forums myself, but that doesn't mean that people have to limit themselves. I'd advise, and even have advised, others to not post spuriously and give thier posts some thought, but that in no way limits anyone on how often the make new topics and reply to current ones. The only things I'll ask of people outside of posting within the Forum Rules and Guidelines are; Make sure a topic doesn't already exist before posting it again. There is a search function on the forum to help with that. Post a topic in the appropriate sub-forum. Read a thread before posting a response to better gauge where the conversation is at. As aforementioned, put a little thought into the post, give it relevancy and purpose. Don't post just for the sake of posting and/or to get a number on the tally. If you really want to up you post your post count quickly (a fair goal, especially for new members), the Forum games and Fun-posting can be an easy way to do so without "drowning" other area's of the forum, even though I personally don't see it as "drowning" if the post is relevant, but I digress. And to anyone else concerned about topics getting bumped down, remember there's always the option to follow topics.

What I have seen of Bioware (Mass Effect, Dragonage), they seem to handle this idea pretty well. It's never a clear definitive of good and bad or right and wrong, it's always a more complex moral controversy. It's up to the player to weigh everything up and make a decision or compromise based upon what all parties have said there's not really a perfect answer or outcome to please everyone, much like in real life.

Can we possibly have some examples of what your on about?

I don't care that the game sucks, Final Fantasy XIII has some of the most unique and memorable enemy designs I've seen in a game.

I wont post any images for reasons explained in this thread, but I'll agree with @StaceyPowers, the clickers in TLOU have got to be some of the most creepy things to ever be bitrthed out of the imagination of a human being. The worst thing about the infected in the TLOU is that it's not something made up like the "zombie virus" of whatever most of such things in fiction are based on. The infected in TLOU are based on a real world infection called Cordyceps and puts an extra creepy, realistic spin on the traditional "zombie".