And the game wasn't even played, that an impressive review.
Am I wrong?
Depends on the definitions of term "different". As for you every game where you press buttons and things happens in game are the same, then yes Bayonetta 2 is exactly like every other action game ever.
Well you're correct in that its certainly a 3rd person action game. I guess if you dislike all 3rd person action games it's not going to appeal to you. But if you do like them this one is exceptionally good in its ease of access, but still maintains a level of depth, with tight controls, and overall polish. It sounds like its the Meat Boy of action games in a way. At least that's the impressions I've gotten. The game isn't out yet so I can't weigh in more than that.
Ok...but if even if that were the case, why do they actually care?
Because in this day and age, saying "Get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich" out loud makes people stop listening to you, but heavily implying it without saying anything directly is fine.
At this point no, the reason the hashtag is still going strong is the SJW influence on taking over causes to move it for their own need. Most of the arguments is threats about feminism in the "adolescent" gaming community.
This was the impossibly stupid beginning of an impossibly stupid and literally unbelievable sequence of events
There is a reason why, in all the Gamergate rhetoric, you hear the echoes of every other social war staged in the last 30 years: overly politically correct, social-justice warriors, the media elite, gamers are not a monolith. There is also a reason why so much of the rhetoric amounts to a vigorous argument that Being a gamer doesn't mean you're sexist, racist, and stupid—a claim no one is making. Co-opting the language and posture of grievance is how members of a privileged class express their belief that the way they live shouldn't have to change, that their opponents are hypocrites and perhaps even the real oppressors. This is how you get St. Louisans sincerely explaining that Ferguson protestors are the real racists, and how you end up with an organized group of precisely the same video game enthusiasts to whom an entire industry is catering honestly believing that they're an oppressed minority.
If the goal of Gamergate is to wipe out corruption in games journalism—if the movement isn't merely a bunch of loosely shaped sublimated qualms about feminism and minorities—it's doing a shit job of identifying the actual, honest-to-god problems in games writing. It's not as if those problems are hard to see. As a rule, games journalism is inherently compromised. From the top down, publishers ranging from AAA behemoths like Electronic Arts to the IndieCade crowd do in fact enjoy symbiotic relationships with gaming media outlets, and if it came down to nothing more than sex and petty corruption, that would be nice, because the problem would certainly be a lot more easily solved.
Luckily, they seem largely incapable of making an appearance at conventions.
I will definitely say that I'm putting any ConnectiCon submissions that are even tangentially related to game journalism, game gender issues, "Gamergate," or the like through the finest of fine-toothed combs to make sure it isn't one of these shitlords. If anything sneaks in at-con, that shit will be shut down so fast Keith Apicary would be impressed.
I have concerns of this shit hitting PAX AUS and PAX South. I'm so sick and tired of this. I'm still baffled by the supporters that seems like decent people, especially women-folk.
If GG cared so much about journalism in games and being fair, why don't they demand the same from normal news media? I think we all agree we want fair/un-biased opinions in news media. Like an awesome person on twitter said, it shouldn't be called Gamer Gate. It should be called Game Ethics. The fact that people are sticking to a shit stained name is not helping some of the good-intentions of people who don't realize how bad it looks.
Can't remember if the Anita gun threat was posted in this thread or not. But I hadn't considered this before but I talked to a prof I had when I went to USU for my freshman year. He had said that UT law allows people to conceal firearms so they couldn't lawfully stop someone from entering with a concealed firearm if they have a permit to do so. Probably a good idea to not continue with the talk however unfortunate it is that she had to give in to the pressure.
Comments
Just another 3rd person action game, no different than any other.
Meaning: any critique of any game is "politicization."
There are only two classes of gamergate proponents.
1. The dim. Not super aware, unable to carry on complex arguments, convinced by the second group.
2. The wizards.
Terror threat against feminist Anita Sarkeesian at USU
I'm really curious if I'll catch any of them trying to get panels at any gaming cons.
I will definitely say that I'm putting any ConnectiCon submissions that are even tangentially related to game journalism, game gender issues, "Gamergate," or the like through the finest of fine-toothed combs to make sure it isn't one of these shitlords. If anything sneaks in at-con, that shit will be shut down so fast Keith Apicary would be impressed.
If GG cared so much about journalism in games and being fair, why don't they demand the same from normal news media? I think we all agree we want fair/un-biased opinions in news media. Like an awesome person on twitter said, it shouldn't be called Gamer Gate. It should be called Game Ethics. The fact that people are sticking to a shit stained name is not helping some of the good-intentions of people who don't realize how bad it looks.
I see that HuffPo is having a live stream of the GG discussion with Pro-GG females. http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/gamergate-and-women-in-video-game-culture/543c686878c90a71ff000157