because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for some reason not an extremely fucked up thing about our culture
who wants to fund my kickstarter for a device that will let me directly piss on the entire video game industry
Okay, but seriously, how many females are there in the front lines like that?
I think they try to go for some realism, and having a woman as a playable character in a campaign usually isn’t realistic. I mean, we only recently started allowing females in our military to that extent, so it makes sense that we still haven’t gotten any in our video games.
no, they have never tried for any realism you fucking idiot. the latest game involved 4 legged tanks & somebody hacking all the drones in america. for fucks sake.
Okay, so, wow, can’t even disagree with anybody with calling them a fucking idiot, huh?
Drones exist. They’re a form of technology, and you can bet that if there’s tech in a video games, there’s a good chance it can be messed with. And four legged tanks are being developed, not to mention that the basic idea of them has been a staple of video games for a while now. The CLAWs are based off of the BigDog robots, though obviously imagined as a massive armored tank.
Realism in video games such as FPSs are obviously not gonna be 100% or even 80%, otherwise they’d just be simulation games, and those usually aren’t as fun or popular. So of course they’re gonna take liberties with these things, because they need to make things exciting for the people who are actually playing them. Video game realism isn’t realistic; hell, realism in fictional works in general is not realistic. I can’t believe I have to explain that.
Besides, we’ve just sort of expected male PCs in our Call of Duty-type shooters. It’s war: who do you think it is who goes out and dies in wars?
ahahahahahahah look at you, you’re terrified of women
Literally the worst argument—wait no, scratch that, I can’t even call this an argument. More like a sad attempt to save face.
please look at what you just wrote, dude. come the fuck on.
Oh, I can read just fine. I’m just here trying to figure out what kind of mental gymnastics you made to get to that conclusion, because, for the life of me, I can’t make a connection between “video game realism isn’t realistic and men are the ones on the front lines” and “women are just so scary omg”.
Realism in video games such as FPSs are obviously not gonna be 100% or even 80%, otherwise they’d just be simulation games, and those usually aren’t as fun or popular. So of course they’re gonna take liberties with these things, because they need to make things exciting for the people who are actually playing them. Video game realism isn’t realistic; hell, realism in fictional works in general is not realistic. I can’t believe I have to explain that.
How does that translate to fearing women? That was trying to make the point that if you’re looking for exact realism (because of, what, robots in a modern shooter?) in video games, you’re gonna be looking for a long damn time.
I’ll concede that it wouldn’t stretch the borders of video game realism to have a woman PC in Call of Duty (never mind that there has been), but I’m also trying to make the point that it’s just a thing we’ve had forever in these games: males go out and fight and repeatedly die in war, and these games aren’t inherently sexist because they don’t have females on the front lines. Given that the series was mostly about WWII for a while, it shouldn’t be too hard to see the reason why there weren’t any then. Now that the series has gone “modern” (and futuristic, slightly, what with BO2), it would make sense to have female PCs, but it’s not this Awful Thing if they don’t automatically go to that. They’ve clearly had success with this before, of course they’re gonna stick with it.
The OP was trying to insinuate that it’s wrong that there’s a playable dog introduced before a playable woman. Except that’s wrong. It was trying to make a point and get people mad about something that wasn’t even true.
I’m typing all this and I don’t even think it’s gonna get through to you, honestly. You seem to have set in your mind that any opposing points are just wrong, wrong, wrong. You’re not interested in arguing this, you’re only interested in laughing at people who don’t automatically subscribe to your opinion.
because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for some reason not an extremely fucked up thing about our culture
who wants to fund my kickstarter for a device that will let me directly piss on the entire video game industry
Okay, but seriously, how many females are there in the front lines like that?
I think they try to go for some realism, and having a woman as a playable character in a campaign usually isn’t realistic. I mean, we only recently started allowing females in our military to that extent, so it makes sense that we still haven’t gotten any in our video games.
no, they have never tried for any realism you fucking idiot. the latest game involved 4 legged tanks & somebody hacking all the drones in america. for fucks sake.
Okay, so, wow, can’t even disagree with anybody with calling them a fucking idiot, huh?
Drones exist. They’re a form of technology, and you can bet that if there’s tech in a video games, there’s a good chance it can be messed with. And four legged tanks are being developed, not to mention that the basic idea of them has been a staple of video games for a while now. The CLAWs are based off of the BigDog robots, though obviously imagined as a massive armored tank.
Realism in video games such as FPSs are obviously not gonna be 100% or even 80%, otherwise they’d just be simulation games, and those usually aren’t as fun or popular. So of course they’re gonna take liberties with these things, because they need to make things exciting for the people who are actually playing them. Video game realism isn’t realistic; hell, realism in fictional works in general is not realistic. I can’t believe I have to explain that.
Besides, we’ve just sort of expected male PCs in our Call of Duty-type shooters. It’s war: who do you think it is who goes out and dies in wars?
ahahahahahahah look at you, you’re terrified of women
Literally the worst argument—wait no, scratch that, I can’t even call this an argument. More like a sad attempt to save face.
please look at what you just wrote, dude. come the fuck on.
Oh, I can read just fine. I’m just here trying to figure out what kind of mental gymnastics you made to get to that conclusion, because, for the life of me, I can’t make a connection between “video game realism isn’t realistic and men are the ones on the front lines” and “women are just so scary omg”.
because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for some reason not an extremely fucked up thing about our culture
who wants to fund my kickstarter for a device that will let me directly piss on the entire video game industry
Okay, but seriously, how many females are there in the front lines like that?
I think they try to go for some realism, and having a woman as a playable character in a campaign usually isn’t realistic. I mean, we only recently started allowing females in our military to that extent, so it makes sense that we still haven’t gotten any in our video games.
no, they have never tried for any realism you fucking idiot. the latest game involved 4 legged tanks & somebody hacking all the drones in america. for fucks sake.
Okay, so, wow, can’t even disagree with anybody with calling them a fucking idiot, huh?
Drones exist. They’re a form of technology, and you can bet that if there’s tech in a video games, there’s a good chance it can be messed with. And four legged tanks are being developed, not to mention that the basic idea of them has been a staple of video games for a while now. The CLAWs are based off of the BigDog robots, though obviously imagined as a massive armored tank.
Realism in video games such as FPSs are obviously not gonna be 100% or even 80%, otherwise they’d just be simulation games, and those usually aren’t as fun or popular. So of course they’re gonna take liberties with these things, because they need to make things exciting for the people who are actually playing them. Video game realism isn’t realistic; hell, realism in fictional works in general is not realistic. I can’t believe I have to explain that.
Besides, we’ve just sort of expected male PCs in our Call of Duty-type shooters. It’s war: who do you think it is who goes out and dies in wars?
ahahahahahahah look at you, you’re terrified of women
Literally the worst argument—wait no, scratch that, I can’t even call this an argument. More like a sad attempt to save face.
because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for some reason not an extremely fucked up thing about our culture
who wants to fund my kickstarter for a device that will let me directly piss on the entire video game industry
Okay, but seriously, how many females are there in the front lines like that?
I think they try to go for some realism, and having a woman as a playable character in a campaign usually isn’t realistic. I mean, we only recently started allowing females in our military to that extent, so it makes sense that we still haven’t gotten any in our video games.
no, they have never tried for any realism you fucking idiot. the latest game involved 4 legged tanks & somebody hacking all the drones in america. for fucks sake.
Okay, so, wow, can’t even disagree with anybody with calling them a fucking idiot, huh?
Drones exist. They’re a form of technology, and you can bet that if there’s tech in a video games, there’s a good chance it can be messed with. And four legged tanks are being developed, not to mention that the basic idea of them has been a staple of video games for a while now. The CLAWs are based off of the BigDog robots, though obviously imagined as a massive armored tank.
Realism in video games such as FPSs are obviously not gonna be 100% or even 80%, otherwise they’d just be simulation games, and those usually aren’t as fun or popular. So of course they’re gonna take liberties with these things, because they need to make things exciting for the people who are actually playing them. Video game realism isn’t realistic; hell, realism in fictional works in general is not realistic. I can’t believe I have to explain that.
Besides, we’ve just sort of expected male PCs in our Call of Duty-type shooters. It’s war: who do you think it is who goes out and dies in wars?
because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for some reason not an extremely fucked up thing about our culture
who wants to fund my kickstarter for a device that will let me directly piss on the entire video game industry
Okay, but seriously, how many females are there in the front lines like that?
I think they try to go for some realism, and having a woman as a playable character in a campaign usually isn’t realistic. I mean, we only recently started allowing females in our military to that extent, so it makes sense that we still haven’t gotten any in our video games.
(via timeofdaffodils)
[video]
ugh what a fuckin bitch
(via the-moon-arcana)
[video]
In health class we were given sheets of paper and told to write a message we would want someone of the opposite sex to know
She read some examples
The girls were like: “Hey can you please not treat me like shit”
The boys were like: “Spray tans look ugly I hate when girls wear too much makeup and don’t lead me on.”
wait, the boys hate it when they don’t get led on???
(via timeofdaffodils)
partybarackisinthehousetonight:
wow. it’s hard to believe that the number on the back of every sports jersey is the amount of people each player has murdered
(via cyborgic)
“I really do wish the writers wouldn’t juxtapose Klaine and Finchel like this. They’re not the same. Rachel and Finn are classic teenage sweethearts who barely have anything in common when they’re attending the same high school, and certainly don’t have anything in common six months out of high school, and yeah, that’s a hard reality, but it’s real life. Kurt and Blaine, on the other hand, are the real damn deal, and ten years from now, they should be telling their daughter the story of Prince Warbler and his Teenage Dream while walking their Bichon Frise through Central Park and eating ice cream.”—
Heather Hogan on the difference between Klaine and Finchel (x)
THIS
(via substantialityou)
I don’t see it.
I’m gonna say that it’s not that I believe Finn and Rachel are a superior couple, just that they’re more believable. Kurt and Blaine have an even more shallow love than Rachel and Finn do. They don’t seem to show why they love each other so much, outside of being gay, and their whole story was a one-sided attraction that took just one song to suddenly become mutual.
And I get that they were so good to each other when they were together, for the most part, but I am just so ready for the two to be allowed to move on. Actually, I find them more interesting now that they aren’t all about each other. Rachel and Finn had that; they were characters that were interesting when separate from each other, and the scenes they had together were a hell of a lot more interesting than Kurt/Blaine scenes, which basically fall into “we’re so very sweet” and “one of us is crying”. It got to the point where I kinda resented Blaine even being in the show until season 4, since it seemed he was there just to be “Kurt’s boyfriend”.
A lot of this could do with the fact that Finn and Rachel are basically the main “couple” of the show (or were, I’m not sure at all what is going on in the show’s hierarchies anymore) and that Kurt and Blaine don’t get as much attention onscreen, but I think the show could have done more with the time they did give them, besides showing how cute they are together. I mean, they basically have to make very-obviously-fabricated problems for them to get them to really argue (once) and also break up.
(Source: butterscotchcreys)
“i’m sorry, but that’s just the way it is” —
people who benefit from the way it is and do not want to change it any time soon and aren’t sorry at all (via sailorfemme)
Or fatalists.
(Source: floozys, via tsundyne)
2nd most profane and 3rd most courteous.
In Maryland, we will ask you to please fuck off, and thank you when you do.
I guess in CA, we’re very polite about what a fuckin’ asshole you are?
(Source: nevver, via dont-argue-with-your-serperior)
If you’re upset about Tumblr being sold to Yahoo that’s okay because your feelings literally do not matter and Tumblr doesn’t care about you and I love that a lot. That’s honestly really beautiful
(via special-snowflake-hall-of-fame)
z1c:
being 20+ on tumblr
(via socialjusticefails)
