CM writes: “This is why they hate us,” I thought. And I’ve been facepalming ever since.
If there’s anything that I feel does not contribute to the geek girl community, it’s pin-ups and the whole “Hey! Look at me! I’m dressed like a geek and have bewbs!” type. Felicia Day, however, is not that type. And neither am I.
Dragon Age 2 set the precedent that the series would always carry our choices over, but was it worth it?
If the choices won't matter, why bother? Bioware works so hard at giving meaningful choices but rarely if ever carrying out the impact of such choices to the end.
A character's voice is a crucial part of their personality. Here are the best voice-acting performances in video games.
Christopher Judge as Kratos, Kevin Conroy as Batman, Sam Witwer Deacon St John, Jennifer Hale as female Commander Shepard, George Newbern as Sephiroth, John DiMaggio as Marcus Fenix,
Lots of good options. Batman and Joker are both great in the Arkham Games, Geralt if fantastic in the Witcher 3, so is Ciri, Fem-Shep in Mass Effect Trilogy, Nathan Drake.
That website is ass with its ads. At least don't take up the entire screen so I can read what you've wrote dip shits.
Immersed Gamer writes: "In order to replace the oppressive BioWare Points system, EA is making a large portion of the Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC catalogs free for PC users.
For those of you blissfully unaware, EA and BioWare employed a payment system called BioWare Points on PC to pay for DLCs for titles like Mass Effect and Dragon Age. While PC gamers have been struggling with BioWare point’s unfair conversion rates and extremely scarce and cost-detrimental sales.
Console players have been allowed to purchase content in pieces through the appropriate Sony and Microsoft shops. For real money, and not BioWare monopoly bucks. In turn, console players missed out on some DLC content, such as Mass Effect 2 pre-order bonuses that have been repackaged into a DLC pack."
Great response to Ubisoft and their disgusting behavior. Ubisoft decide to take away DLC from people who paid for it, while EA give it for free to everyone when they realize their system sucks. Who would have thought that EA of all companies would be showing Ubisoft how it should be done (even if this is EA fixing their own mistakes as well).
What goes around comes around and I promise you, Ubisoft will see their actions blow back on them when their diminishing sales numbers and stock taking a hit downward. That's the only way a company learns when they decide to be reactive instead of proactive.
"If Day, who has MILLIONS of followers online, hasn’t contributed to the gaming industry with her creative work on Dragon Age: Redemption, The Guild, and being an inspiration to women everywhere to talk more openly about their gaming obsessions, I guess gaming journalists haven’t contributed to the gaming industry either, huh?"
Way to try too hard to make Felicia Day look like someone important and really relevant to the industry. Here is the cold hard truth; at the end, she is no different than those "girls" you see on YouTube and some crappy men magazines that pose half naked while holding controllers and talk about videogames like they actually play them addictively instead of 5 minutes each month. Only difference of Felicia Day is that she doesn't try hard to show any skin or to look sexy. But in the end, she belongs to the same, unnecessary crowd that no one that matters cares about. Sure she has "millions" of followers on Twitter. Sure she starred in the below mediocre Dragon Age: Redemption and created and starred in The Guild and had a couple of voice overs in some video games. So what? Did she have any huge and extremely important contribution to the scene as a female gamer? Absolutely not. There are some female developers who had thousands of times more impact on the industry than she ever will have. If you are against the over sexualization of female gamers and geeks, then it is completely fine to write an article about it. But just stop using Felicia Day as a strong argument like she has nothing in common with those oversexualized women that claim to be gamers when in fact, they are just shallow, untalented people that try way too hard to get somewhere just because they are women and claim to play video games.
^^^
So much hate in that post...lol.
She didn't just star in the mediocre Dragon Age: REdemption, she pitched the idea to Bioware and they expanded upon that idea. So something SHE created was endorsed by a major developer and turned into a web series and DLC for AN ACTUAL VIDEO GAME *gasp*. You're trying to tell me that THAT is the same as dressing up like a character you've never played? GTFO...
She also created the Guild, which was inspired by her Warcraft addiction.
Now Blacktric, I have to ask. What makes you the authority on who's important and who's not? What have you done in this industry? Wrote few posts here and there? Maybe a blog or two? I'm sure that's better than starring in film about games and in a video game.
E E (Doc) Smith Science Fiction "lensman" has it quite throughout the book! but yet is seen as one of the best SCI-FI BOOK series in history.
its the context of the sexism. that is seen as the problem.
Mainly I have been married for over 20 year's now. My wife look's just as young and cute since the day i married her.
Though men are asked many questions about How they look at women.
here is a caption of this review of Lensman
" In a bit of sexism that firmly attaches the story to the 1920s, women aren't psychologically able to wear a Lens, but that's okay, because any Lens worthy woman will apparently have such highly developed "women's intuition" that they won't need one."
and
Although the perfection of the Lensmen is annoying at times, and the sexist attitudes of the 1920s crop up here and there (such as the amazingly easy dispatch of a a pair of supposedly dangerous female mercenaries)
http://dreamingaboutotherwo...
Smith wrote his book's
* Triplanetary [1948]
* First Lensman [1950]
* Galactic Patrol [1950]
* Gray Lensman [1951]
* Second Stage Lensman [1953]
* Children of the Lens [1954]
* The Vortex Blaster [1960]
a.k.a. Masters of the Vortex
It like i said is pretty much the foundation of science fiction space opera today.
The point is that this can be see as both + / - depends on who you ask.
1)women aren't psychologically able to wear a Lens..
point is why not?
is there thing's in the world women can do that men cannot?
child birth being one of them...would that be sexist?
and this is what would be that makes it sexist:
"but that's okay, because any Lens worthy woman will apparently have such highly developed "women's intuition" that they won't need one"
On the same token:
http://www.answerbag.com/q_...
many point's of debate, what is known is that some women may see it as a attack on their being because of their being a women. not based on who they are as a human being.
Example:
if a guy will not go into a boxing ring to fight someone does that make him weak, chicken? etc.
A) it could be many thing's he is scared of the situation, he does not like pain..wants to avoid the fight..or he does not see a point in fighting anyway.
b) some could see people that box as people who really like to take punishment or likes to deliver punishment on lesser people. or it can be seen as it's just a way to make a living..somewhat brutal way to make a living.
I think the point is context of how each individual person they themselves see's it.
The author is WAY too attached to labels.
It's also very convenient to end the debate by deferring to someone else and saying "that's all I have to say about it". The only two possibilities are they aren't willing to continue on for whatever reason (scared or can't) but still want to feel like they have the upper hand, or simply because they don't really want to get anything done/make any progress on the issue.