>>200312 >ID oftware is planning to make another Quake game. Sounds good. >People at ID software also want to get in on this class based multiplayer action. This could also be pretty good. I mean, the first versions of Team Fortress was a Quake mod to begin with, so why not go full circle with this for a bit? >It's being made as the first Quake game in years right after making a revival of the Doom game that will stand as a point of comparison as to the nature of revivals. Well this part's looking a big dicey.
>Ghost Recon Holy shit this looks like MGSV but with actual stuff in the world from mission to mission. Looking rad af. >That backpedalling I WONDER why they kept it from being Mexico. The bad guys are Mexican, its the CIA forces, the terrain is all literally south Juarez Chihuahua... Kinda feel like they uh... didn't want to emulate a certain someone's image of the place.
Christ, its such an afterthought too. I get not wanting to shake the already really shaky relations between the two actual countries by not making it explicitly CIA FUCK YEAH KILL WETTIES but that's what it is ANYWAY?
Steep also looks very entertaining. You'd think it being a sports game there wouldn't be fuckin death left and right but hey there it was anyway.
Some apparently being mad that the Watchdogs 2 protagonist is now a black guy. Though I call bullshit on that really. More them just trying to dodge that the Las game was horrible downgraded garbage. Will Ubisoft show actual game footage or just most of that pretentious bullshit trailer.
>>200326 Just Steam being Steam. Sad that so many people still think it's a viable thing to troll over, I mean you don't see the Internet shitposting Catholics to death with anti-Papist memes and the like in this day and age.
>>200327 Kinda goes back to my thought on picking ones battles. Watchdogs 2 isn't anywhere near the best thing to fight over for anything. So far it just looks like a GTA, mashup with Getting Up that tagging social rebel game. Cept hacking instead of tagging.
>>200331 Other than that, Breath of the Wild looks very good. I'm liking the magitech direction they're taking with the Shiekah slate and the guardians.
>>200319 You could see the excitement utterly vanish when they mentioned it was just remasters and Skylanders. But if the promise of a new game from Vicarious Visions is there after the remasters sell, I'm okay with this.
In fairness to Nintendo, they never intended to have a huge presence at E3, considering they have their own major event later in the year. That the presentation included the new Pokémon was surprising, considering Nintendo had said it planned to center the presentation around the new Zelda.
>>200331 They simply have no reason to make the protagonist female. Zelda has always been a classic fairytale of a knight rescuing a princess. So the protagonist is male. Why is this such an issue? When has any female gamer had a problem with this scenario, and how is that problem not pure whining?
When the current Link design only needs a set of noticeable tits to pass for female, what does it say about Nintendo that it can’t implement a gender choice for Link? If every version of Link is a different reincarnation of the Hero of Time, why can’t just one of those reincarnations be a woman? If there is literally no reason to make the protagonist male other than a “lore” that Nintendo created and can change at any time, why do we need a “reason” for a female Link?
But let’s say “a female Link in the starring role of a proper Zelda game” is an idea that Nintendo will avoid like the plague. If Link can star in a game like Majora’s Mask (which didn’t rely on saving Zelda and only showed her in a single flashback sequence) and Zelda can be a major supporting character with actual agency and even character depth (Tetra in Wind Waker), why can’t we have a game where Zelda is the main character and Link is either the supporting character or not present at all? For fuck’s sake, the franchise is called The Legend of Zelda—so why the hell can’t the title character ever go on an adventure worthy of being turned into a legend all its own?
>>200346 >When has any female gamer had a problem with this scenario Gee whiz I could refer you to-- >and how is that problem not pure whining? ...I'm gonna give that point some undeserved legitimacy and actually respond. Its criticism towards the series. Critique. Like one you'd see towards a movie's CG or a, for example, game's writing. It's a legitimate point that really just seeks another angle with which to make the game fresh, much like critiquing Zelda's template-following has lead to this current iteration.
That said, I personally have no PROBLEM with how it is, especially the new edition. But if anyone asks me if its a thing I want, I won't lie - yeah I'd be into a female link.
Besides, they already said the story of Breath of the Wind involves its Link being one from a previous game, so yeah.
>>200348 >When the current Link design only needs a set of noticeable tits to pass for female, what does it say about Nintendo that it can’t implement a gender choice for Link?
I don't think you understand bishounen.
>If every version of Link is a different reincarnation of the Hero of Time, why can’t just one of those reincarnations be a woman?
Because the established lore wouldn't let that make sense. If subsequent heroes are meant to be reincarnations, it makes far more sense for them to be in the spitting image of the original hero. IE a male. And as I've already said, Zelda is a series emulating a classic fairytale set in medieval times where women being heroes is generally frowned upon unless they are pirates or Gerudo. Zelda obviously can't be a prince, unless they change the name to something stupid like Zeldan. And if that's the case, there's nothing wrong with Link not being able to be female.
>why can’t we have a game where Zelda is the main character and Link is either the supporting character or not present at all?
That's not the issue here. The argument is that Link should be female, not that Zelda should be playable. That's changing the subject entirely.
>>200353 >If subsequent heroes are meant to be reincarnations, it makes far more sense for them to be in the spitting image of the original hero. IE a male. Except the Links in all the games aren't spitting images of each other. Some are blond, some are brown-haired, some are stubby-nosed, some are pointy-nosed, some are short, some are tall, even their trademark costumes are different (radically so in the newest iteration). They're similar, to be sure, but in Hindu and Buddhist mythology reincarnations aren't limited to one species, let alone sex.
They're already throwing out the rulebook for so many Zelda tropes in this latest game, why stick doggedly to the one facet that a: would be piss-easy to turn into a variable, b: has no functional consequence on the game itself, and c: generate a tremendous amount of goodwill at a stroke by being flexible about it?
>>200353 >That's not the issue here. The argument is that Link should be female, not that Zelda should be playable. That's changing the subject entirely. No, no it isn't. Try actually reading the article instead of talking entirely out your ass for once.
>>200353 All of your points are sort of irrelevant considering this story is fictional and entirely up to the people making it. If they just said "we feel like link works better as a man, " that'd be fine, but these "in- universe" explanations are retarded.
>>200354 >c: generate a tremendous amount of goodwill at a stroke by being flexible about it?
This is the part I'm confused about. I don't see how Zelda will somehow become a shining beacon for feminists everywhere by having a female Link. I don't see why it's necessary for this particular series to do so anyway. I've heard the argument that it would be fresh and new, but no it wouldn't. When people talk about Zelda being stale, they're not talking about the main character's gender.
I feel like the same people bitching about no female Link are the same people bitching about Final Fantasy 15 having an all-male playable cast.
>>200357 >If they just said "we feel like link works better as a man, " that'd be fine
I do. The point still stands: it would be easy, from a design standpoint, to make Link look like a girl without changing the overall aesthetic of Link’s design. Linkle proves it’s possible.
>the established lore wouldn't let that make sense
Please keep in mind that Nintendo wrote that lore. It could change that lore at any time. What would it really affect if the Hero of Time was a woman, even just once?
>Zelda is a series emulating a classic fairytale set in medieval times where women being heroes is generally frowned upon unless they are pirates or Gerudo.
Again: Nintendo writes the lore, Nintendo can change that sexist bullshit in a flat minute.
>Zelda obviously can't be a prince, unless they change the name to something stupid like Zeldan. And if that's the case, there's nothing wrong with Link not being able to be female.
Why can’t both Link and Zelda be wom—oooooooooooooooooh, right. The gay thing.
>The argument is that Link should be female, not that Zelda should be playable. That's changing the subject entirely.
No, the argument is about why the Legend of Zelda game can’t have a playable female protagonist. If Nintendo won’t see fit to give us a female Link, why can’t we then have a Zelda game where she’s the one going on an adventure and doing grand things and such?
>They're already throwing out the rulebook for so many Zelda tropes in this latest game, why stick doggedly to the one facet that a: would be piss-easy to turn into a variable, b: has no functional consequence on the game itself, and c: generate a tremendous amount of goodwill at a stroke by being flexible about it?
>this all sounds like whining just because they didn't do it this time
That’s because this time, Nintendo would’ve known that people were asking for a female Link (both from generalized fan requests and from the fact that Linkle was put into Hyrule Warriors almost completely due to fan response). Designing a game around a character that could be either a man or a woman wouldn’t be a trivial challenge, but it also wouldn’t be some grand task that would delay the new game for three years or whatever. Nintendo could’ve earned itself goodwill and flipped the script on yet another Zelda trope (or three) by offering the choice to play as a female Link. But it didn’t, and that was okay…until Eiji Aonuma offered up the dumbest fucking explanations as to why we won’t have that choice (and why we might never see a Zelda game with Zelda as the main playable protagonist). If Nintendo would’ve put Aonuma on a leash or coached him on giving a less stupid-sounding answer, there probably wouldn’t be an uproar over this issue—but it didn’t, so now we’re here.
And just so I’m clear: A Zelda game with a female Link should be designed from the ground up with Link’s gender in mind. But since none of the games really emphasize the necessity of Link’s gender (beyond the “lore” that Nintendo could change if it really wants to), having a Zelda game that at least allows for a choice in Link’s gender—even if flipping that switch has no meaningful effect on the gameplay and the story—would be a nice gesture.
>>200368 Its not really a credit system, anon. Besides, i think the reason why I'm not really surprised they're sexist in the first place is just due to the fact that they're a japanese company with conservative gender politics. Its expected, honestly.
>>200374 >You and I both know how blatantly racist that is. Not only is that not racism, even if it were it's funny how the only time your kind cares about racism is when it lets you be sexist, and vice versa.
>>200380 I hope you both realize that the only newcomers to your site are the ones that see how liberal and douchey your little community is.
Maybe if you stopped treating yourselves as a hugbox, you'd get more people coming here. Who have differing opinions than you that are, like it or not, perfectly legitimate and not black and white like you think.
Jesus christ. Poorly disguised /pol/ kun(s) who complaints about people being whiny and easily offended, but at the same time can't stop crying about those whiny SJWs the Liberal Boogeyman and their sinister political agendas, versus actually oversensitive person/people seeing racism in everything and is convinced people less offended than them are Nerds(tm) or suffer some sort of moral deficit. This kinda matchup never ends well. Shut up.
>>200391 It was a forty five word post that said very little other than that I find it exhausting when nerds try to argue that we're supposed to respect "the rules" of fictitious universes when we react to things created by real-life people.
Have you considered the possibility that you just see boogeymen where you want to see them, and rant against them because you have unresolved anger issues and no constructive outlet for that anger?
>>200393 Not them and I generally agree with you against the other guy who's acting like a bitch baby but immediately jumping to the bigot and samefag labels, and stuff like >>If they just said "we feel like link works better as a man, " that'd be fine >No it wouldn't. You'd question that too. Doesn't really help your case eithr. You're taking too hard of a stance here.
>>200394 I didn't call him a bigot or a samefag. I said he's lashing out mindlessly about "liberals" and choosing to see points that aren't being made for the purposes of getting himself angrier. That's a personal problem he needs to deal with.
>>200399 >>200403 I don't know much about either title, but I heard someone interpreting it this way: the trailer touched on a bunch of things that were known to be elements of The Silent Hills before it was canned, and existed primarily not to introduce the story of this game as much as it did just to say "I'm still making the Silent Hills, we just have to call it something different."
>>200410 It's the last segment of the day 2 live show, with Patrick, Mary, Danny, etc. Check the archive when it's up (also check basically every segment, with the sole exception of Phil Spencer tonight all of this year's segments have been great).
>>200320 >Sony “won” E3. Everyone else can pack it up and go home.
pffffftttttttt looks like Stone was a little early on his call there. It is nice to see that at the end of the day, the orchestras, bullshot trailers, and cryptic movies for games that /don't even have an engine yet/, a humble presentation of excellent and fun gameplay from a reputable franchise can still shine through.
Link's latest adventure might be the game of E3, but Sony still had the best presentation and some of the bigger surprises (Last Guardian’s release date, Resident Evil 7, the new Spider-Man game) of E3.
This was never Nintendo’s E3 to “win”, considering their presentation wasn’t the typical E3 presser and it only featured two games. Besides, the real magic for Nintendo comes later this year, when it does its own big event and drops info on the NX and such.
>>200437 If you look at any thread where a PC exclusive (or upgraded from console) game is mentioned you'll see console users complaining about spending $1000+ every year to keep a PC up to date. Microsoft was likely counting on those people to spend large chunks of money that they won't have to share with anyone. Which would net you the greater profit: cost of the console and games and online subscription, or just the games?
>>200438 Ah capitalizing on the idiots that either upgrade each year because they are speed freaks and tech nuts or don't know they don't have to. Its like I read articles of people that have 700 series Nvidia cards or old Sandy Bridge Intel Processors and they don't feel the need to upgrade since most games out there even maxed can be handled by that level of Tech.
Speaking of PC gaming, is the talk show format really working for the PC Gamer Show? I appreciate the commitment to information above marketing hype, but it makes for a dull "conference." I thought it was less boring than last year's show, at least.
Okay overall sounds like a neat idea. Sounds like the Freelancer game in which they had Arks for all their nations and they settled a new Galaxy.
Now all the races settle in this new Andromeda maybe as an idea to backup all their races encase a Reaper got left behind or something. Or if its Really like Freelancer than the Ark project took shape and was commissioned before the end of Mass Effect 3.
So nobody knows if they actually won that great war so many MILLIONS of years ago.
As Far as anyone knows they are the last of their species from the Milky Way galaxy.
It really sounds like these new devs listened and fixed the problems.
I'll wait and see but all that info gives me a bit of hope that Mass Effect could be great again.
>>200488 ...Minimechs are a thing in it? Or is the Zero suit there a bonus unlockable like the working Buster Gun was in the first Dead Rising. I'm having trouble telling exactly how big it is, seems like its FO4 power-armor size.
>>200495 Looks to be after 3 with Frank in his early 50s. And I could see this adding her since they both have a stake in figuring out the origins of this outbreak now occurring twice in the same place. Maybe even leading to a more permanent cure.
Which sets up Frank going hero and giving it to her while he wades into the Horde for the last hurrah.