Messages

We've talked about this for years and years and we've been through at least 5 titles which were hyped to revitalize the genre as well.

Frankly. if nobody bothers creating a game worth playing, then maybe the commercial end of the genre deserves to die. I wouldn't miss, or have missed, the last five or six years of commercial adventures.

I feel the same way. Why try to keep this corpse alive? I'd still be interested in playing a wonderfully written and aesthetically pleasing oldschool adventure game, even if it was a puzzlefest like old games, but there hasn't been any of those for a decade or so. What we have is throwback adventure games, made by people who are adventure game fans, but lack vision, aesthetic coherency and the ability to write.

So, because I'm not expecting of the video game industry to produce good writers, at least I'm expecting it to produce good gameplay-creators. Thusly the whole shift towards examining how the adventure game can become fun to play again, not only interesting inspite of the gameplay because it is well-written.

Man, I didn't like the first Sam and Max so I had no incentive to try this, but if people are torn on it I wonder if I'd like it. Probably not.

Quite possibly. But isn't that my "apologetic" point just repackaged?

Your apologetic point is based on irrelevant assumptions (my intentions or anyone's intentions in discussing Sam and Max) whereas the issue at hand is not that.

"Easy" doesn't have mean "sub-standard". And that's mostly what licensed games, usually meant "for kids", are.

That, is a point, however. You say that S&M is both easy and sub-standard. Others see it only as being easy. It's a personal call, then? It's just not 'substandard because it is easy'.

Does it also mean I can't enjoy a game that isn't for my demographic?

It means that if you do, it's a happy accident, awesome. If you don't, not the developer's fault.

Glad if this was resolved.

How about, yes. new Telltale Sam and Max might not be ment for you. Maybe they are going for more causal gamers or something, and they don't really care if the hardcore adventure gamers drop them.

man, Limpingfish, that's low.

That you say fascists or extreme leftists are nuts is not something I endorse, sorry. I think Marx could have been the biggest asshole ever and that has no bearing on his political writing and ideology and I don't see under what sort of mindset you can say otherwise. He wasn't insane, he could be the most party-loving person ever. I don't really care about his life on that level. Then again, I haven't read any of the core red books in their entirety, so I can't say anything about Marxism either.

I don't feel that way, empowered comrade of fervent 15 years of age. I feel war and such occurs because it occurs, it has to occur and there's a predetermined path towards it and everything else. The way the world works I think is holistic, everything interfaces with everything else. There is no masterplan, there are no people that change the world any more than the world is ready to change and uses these people. It's pointless to manufacture leaders as much as it is to manufacture hope. They occur when they have to occur and do what they do and things go in their spirally way towards the future. Headless monster operating under the illusion of a comfortable masterplan. In the Marxism you're supposed to be studying now, in your red phase, that's part of what is called Historical Materialism.

Forgot this one.

I do agree that not everything in front of the camera is peachy, but what I'm saying is I think it's not to the extent that is being purported in this thread. That's why I stated that it's more of a myth that porn is driven mostly by drug use. Hence why I had an issue with 2ma2's claim that "the most common factor is drug abuse". I mean, if someone makes a big claim like that you'd think "Okay, where's this statement come from? What makes it true?"

Yes, I agree that it's one of these things that seem rational but might not hold up to factual scrutiny. I don't really point the finger at drug dependency for the growth of sexual exploitation both on-camera and off-camera, I point the finger at uh, human nature I guess. Sexual commerce will never go out of style because there's always going to be demand. On these things as far as state law goes I tend to side with transparency and legality so in the same way I think people should be free to take whatever drugs they want, they can sell their body in whatever way they want, just as long as the processes are clear, regulated, open to public scrutiny and critique, and nobody forces me to like it.

Huge subject I'm opening now, but for many years I've knee-jerked morally to the concept of a state allowing drug use and regulating the profits from such commerce, but in the end I don't have any convincing argument against any of that. I don't see any distinction between cigarettes and heroin besides the utilitarian one -one is more dangerous- so right, it should be monitored closer, but I can't strike the moral hammer down on someone that wants to take heroin or whatever. I think that the pathology of these practises will only be lessened not by being made illegal but by economical and cultural prosperity.

From that point of view, as saddening as the porn industry of america is, it's probably the model that othe european countries and such should probably move towards. Cleaner and safer, organized and regulated rather than underground and god-knows-what.

I'd suggest picking your battles smartly.

There's lots of reasons Norway, Sweden and such have arrived at such happy states of life, and it has to do with a lot of factors that do not apply to other parts of the world. You can't apply the same sort of political system in Turkey and expect it to prosper in the same way. All this stuff is a lot beyond my ability to coherently discuss, so I'm sorta forced to information-snipe people when they write things. I can't offer a coherent point of view of my own, as I don't really have concrete political beliefs anymore.

I used to be democratic-socialist, very red in economical matters, very libertarian in social matters, but I... I guess I grew tired of having political opinions, when I realized they were just opinions, like party-tricks. I've read a few books and I've spoken to a few people, so what. human relations are infinitely complex and any simplification is just dumb. I defined myself with dumb stuff that carried no real weight in life. I abandoned morality labeling at the same time I abandoned named political belief. My upbringing and social programming will forever remain strongly liberty and equality based, but that doesn't say much, 99% of you people in here are just like me.

I say we give the sam and max business a miss and go straight for the cigars and hookers.

As a bleeding heart liberal, the political mess in my country breaks my heart.

This display of causality is startling.

But are we working for something better, or solidifying the status quo?

I'm not saying it's a good thing, but it's better than anything else.

It's not better of what we have to think up for the future. Unless you think massive economical inequality which breeds extreme suffering,  loss of life and war, is the best we can do, ever.

But there's territorial wars, and there's wars manufactured and clearly run for the benefit of capitalist economy. I'm not exactly brining ground-breaking controversal news to the table here.

whereas Capitalism can function in both situations because there's always profit to be made.

I'll let Las hit you with a pile of numbers. Capitalism cannot operate without some war happening, somewhere that is to its benefit. I was objecting on the 'both' part of your statement.

Please read what I said again. Then apply those critical thinking skills on whatever else material about politics you might be perusing at this time period, it will benefit you.

Capitalism functions great in a state of peace by fuelling and being fuelled by the regurgitated atrocity of manufactured war elsewhere. Please check facts, write back, thanks.

A lot of people become communists because they hate what their country has become. Others became communists because they loved their country.