@mrpibb79: There's nothing to talk about, though. This affects absolutely nobody unless its brought to their attention. ALl this article does is point it out to us and look silly by complaining about it and acting like nobody should care at the same time.
So basically this article can be summarized as "This is a complete non-issue in regards to games, even if it DOES become reality, which it likely wont."
Pretty much, right?
Also,
You can't control the internet any more than you can control the rising and setting of the sun.
We built a sunrise and sunset modifying machine? Because you sure as hell can control the crap out of the internet. Where in the world did you get the impression that you can't? You may have heard of this country, it's called china. Houses 20% of the planet? Easy to miss, I know.
Really, what in the world are you even talking about?
I had a fun time pretending to pronounce "s'angrandit"
Well, that green screen video ruined live action TV for me.
Like how playing RPG maker destroyed the illusion of physically entering a building in video games...
Though some of them WERE extremely pathetically obvious. Like the lady on the rock in the canyon or the guys on the snowy mountain.
@imaria: I especially love how owen chooses to do it with a "man this is dumb" mindset.
If it's so dumb and offensive, why fucking make an article about it? How in the world does this idea not cross your mind as your write this up?
Clearly the best response is to link to it, spread it around, talk about it, give it attention, right?
It doesnt matter that you downplay it and berate it in the article, you're still supporting it by giving it attention.
@spannu: Its a different picture, so I doubt that. It's just a case of "Hey, we already posted this, but whatever, I can't be bothered to know that."
Which I find a bit silly.
This was already on Speakup on Kotaku, which, if I'm not mistaken, you yourself put together.
I'm still under the impression the whole thing is a load of crap anyway, so "Its got some negatives" barely means anything.
It's mostly Milo's fault I think it's a load, though, that should be noted.
@Mhazz: You get over it.
The site is mostly white, secondary color being limey yellow-green, third color being pinky red. ANd thus so is the shirt.
@Slagathorian: yep, its also why [insert all stereotypes here]
there, now you'll never have to ask such a stupidly offensive question ever again.
I already commented but
OH MY GOD
HER POSE
IS THE FRICKIN K ON THE LOGO that is amazing
@Deaf Mute: I dont think you quite get what I'm saying.
I'm gay. As a result, I don't like ladies on my shirt as it gives off the wrong impression. But if this was a topless skinnybuffy anime dude, smae clothes and everything minus the top, sure.
I like the design and style but not the gender.
@Cookie: They're both pretty lame, but I wouldn't want to give off the impression I like girls.
Make a male version and I'll get one. I'm not a fan of wearing sexualized women on my shirt.
You could just remove her top and boobs and she'd be fine ...
@vid3oman64: And I'm sorry you're illiterate.
Nothing about what I said was incorrect or worded improperly.
@vid3oman64: If you do not want people to yell at you, do not correct them when you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
@vid3oman64: You clearly dont get what inherently m eans.
IS IT INHERENTLY GOOD OR BAD means "is it always good or bad". And then I follow with examples showing that NO, it is NOT INHERENTLY GOOD nor is it INHERENTLY BAD as it can be good, bad, nothing, anything.
Do not lecture me when you do not understand what you are reading to begin with.
@Cerabret100: Internet.
<_<
I read wikias for things I like. Hell, here's a picture of what Gil, something you never see physically in the game, looks like in FFX.
