Mirror's Edge 2 coming despite commercial failure of pt 1

[QUOTE="smerlus"]i just looked at that second pic of Faith and I hope that Mirror's Edge 2 is a game featuring that version of her only this time the game will be in 3rd person and the gameplay involves biking in a city full of cobblestone roadsTriangleHard

Full price for six hours, no way, it's a joke. Fallout3 and Fable2 sitting right next to it with hundreds of hours. Call of duty4 and Halo3 endless amount of gameplay online. Maybe they should have made a game before selling it.

People with guns trying to shoot you, you want to shoot back, and make it a hot chick for godsake, are the people who made this simple or somethingbad_fur_day

Full price for six hours, no way, it's a joke. Fallout3 and Fable2 sitting right next to it with hundreds of hours. Call of duty4 and Halo3 endless amount of gameplay online. Maybe they should have made a game before selling it.

People with guns trying to shoot you, you want to shoot back, and make it a hot chick for godsake, are the people who made this simple or something.

bad_fur_day

I like people who put there opinions across with no care for policital correctness. You remind me of me, you should shag my sister.

Hmm, must be the first time I've been complimented on my abbrasive attitude and not flamed. But I get overly aggitated by stupidity, you should have read it before I edited it.

And, here mirrors edge is a whopping $120 NZL. You've got to be freaking kidding, it should be a glorified xbox live download tech demo or something.

I'm afraid currency is the currency around here. (I allways wanted to say that.)

I like the concept, but if they want to make money, it's all wrong. A new innovative concept with no draws. No guns, short campaign, no multiplayer, thin storyline, lead character thats not attractive, high price, new IP, no blood, no monsters, no driving.

It's a really short expensive running and jumping simulation?

Hmm, must be the first time I've been complimented on my abbrasive attitude and not flamed. But I get overly aggitated by stupidity, you should have read it before I edited it.

And, here mirrors edge is a whopping $120 NZL. You've got to be freaking kidding, it should be a glorified xbox live download tech demo or something.

I'm afraid currency is the currency around here. (I allways wanted to say that.)

I like the concept, but if they want to make money, it's all wrong. A new innovative concept with no draws. No guns, short campaign, no multiplayer, thin storyline, lead character thats not attractive, high price, new IP, no blood, no monsters, no driving.

It's a really short expensive running and jumping simulation?

bad_fur_day

See, not everyone equates quantity with quality. I'd rather play a six hour, innovative game rather than a 60 hour boring retread of established gaming conventions. Your pedantic analysis of the game and your ridiculous assertion that it requires more gunplay indicates that you were never the intended target for this particular title in the first place. If you want guns and explosions, play every other FPS on the market or go watch a Michael Bay film. The entire crux of Mirrors Edge is the forward momentum and agility of the protagonist.

Also, calling it a "running and jumping simulation" is the equivalent of wearing a big sign that reads " I haven't actually played this game and I'm currently talking directly out of my ass." It's precious that you've played the demo and all but there's quite a bit more to the full game.

[QUOTE="bad_fur_day"]

Hmm, must be the first time I've been complimented on my abbrasive attitude and not flamed. But I get overly aggitated by stupidity, you should have read it before I edited it.

And, here mirrors edge is a whopping $120 NZL. You've got to be freaking kidding, it should be a glorified xbox live download tech demo or something.

I'm afraid currency is the currency around here. (I allways wanted to say that.)

I like the concept, but if they want to make money, it's all wrong. A new innovative concept with no draws. No guns, short campaign, no multiplayer, thin storyline, lead character thats not attractive, high price, new IP, no blood, no monsters, no driving.

It's a really short expensive running and jumping simulation?

Grammaton-Cleric

See, not everyone equates quantity with quality. I'd rather play a six hour, innovative game rather than a 60 hour boring retread of established gaming conventions. Your pedantic analysis of the game and your ridiculous assertion that it requires more gunplay indicates that you were never the intended target for this particular title in the first place. If you want guns and explosions, play every other FPS on the market or go watch a Michael Bay film. The entire crux of Mirrors Edge is the forward momentum and agility of the protagonist.

Also, calling it a "running and jumping simulation" is the equivalent of wearing a big sign that reads " I haven't actually played this game and I'm currently talking directly out of my ass." It's precious that you've played the demo and all but there's quite a bit more to the full game.

well said batman.

[QUOTE="bad_fur_day"]Full price for six hours, no way, it's a joke. Fallout3 and Fable2 sitting right next to it with hundreds of hours. Call of duty4 and Halo3 endless amount of gameplay online. Maybe they should have made a game before selling it.

People with guns trying to shoot you, you want to shoot back, and make it a hot chick for godsake, are the people who made this simple or somethingfoxhound_fox

I completely agree with your overall point, but I feel you SEVERELY underrated CoD4. I thought the campaign was absolutely fantastic, and probably the single most intense FPS I've ever played. Also, the story's surprisingly engaging and well constructed for that type of game. I'm not much of a multiplayer person either, but CoD4 is still one of my favourite FPSs of all time. It may be short, but it's completely free of padding. Every single sequence is fresh and exciting. Putting it in the same league as Gears (which is itself a good game) is completely misguided, and makes me think that you're exagerating the amount of time you spent with CoD4 SP.

I completely agree with your overall point, but I feel you SEVERELY underrated CoD4. I thought the campaign was absolutely fantastic, and probably the single most intense FPS I've ever played. Also, the story's surprisingly engaging and well constructed for that type of game. I'm not much of a multiplayer person either, but CoD4 is still one of my favourite FPSs of all time. It may be short, but it's completely free of padding. Every single sequence is fresh and exciting. Putting it in the same league as Gears (which is itself a good game) is completely misguided, and makes me think that you're exagerating the amount of time you spent with CoD4 SP.streak000

Mirrors Edge was horrible. It was supposed to be released in 09. But EA is a corporate travesty and releases this game early. Results are a short game, no variety, no depth, no real online play and SHOCKER a total flop in sales. Screw EA. PrimordialMeme

[QUOTE="PrimordialMeme"]Mirrors Edge was horrible. It was supposed to be released in 09. But EA is a corporate travesty and releases this game early. Results are a short game, no variety, no depth, no real online play and SHOCKER a total flop in sales. Screw EA. Skylock00

It hasn't been blogged about but if you followed the game closely as I did then you know. I was following the game since it was first talked about, the concept really interested me. All the retailers and review sites like IGN release date section had it for an 09 release. Then when out of nowhere they announced it would be released in the fall of 08 I was very suspicious, being that its EA here.

My assumption came to life when the game was really empty and not nearly as fleshed out as I expected. A really unpolished piece of work that EA suspected they could half ass and make into some blockbuster franchise on the cheap. It shows how they are just holiday whores that want to spend nothing to develop a game and then just start pumping out yearly updates aka "sequels" if it does remotely well. I hate where the industry is going, and EA is the walmart of games. Evil evil company. Keep your 60 dollars and tell EA to kiss off.

[QUOTE="Skylock00"][QUOTE="PrimordialMeme"]Mirrors Edge was horrible. It was supposed to be released in 09. But EA is a corporate travesty and releases this game early. Results are a short game, no variety, no depth, no real online play and SHOCKER a total flop in sales. Screw EA. PrimordialMeme

It hasn't been blogged about but if you followed the game closely as I did then you know. I was following the game since it was first talked about, the concept really interested me. All the retailers and review sites like IGN release date section had it for an 09 release. Then when out of nowhere they announced it would be released in the fall of 08 I was very suspicious, being that its EA here.

My assumption came to life when the game was really empty and not nearly as fleshed out as I expected. A really unpolished piece of work that EA suspected they could half ass and make into some blockbuster franchise on the cheap. It shows how they are just holiday whores that want to spend nothing to develop a game and then just start pumping out yearly updates aka "sequels" if it does remotely well. I hate where the industry is going, and EA is the walmart of games. Evil evil company. Keep your 60 dollars and tell EA to kiss off.

[QUOTE="Skylock00"][QUOTE="PrimordialMeme"]Mirrors Edge was horrible. It was supposed to be released in 09. But EA is a corporate travesty and releases this game early. Results are a short game, no variety, no depth, no real online play and SHOCKER a total flop in sales. Screw EA. PrimordialMeme

It hasn't been blogged about but if you followed the game closely as I did then you know. I was following the game since it was first talked about, the concept really interested me. All the retailers and review sites like IGN release date section had it for an 09 release. Then when out of nowhere they announced it would be released in the fall of 08 I was very suspicious, being that its EA here.

My assumption came to life when the game was really empty and not nearly as fleshed out as I expected. A really unpolished piece of work that EA suspected they could half ass and make into some blockbuster franchise on the cheap. It shows how they are just holiday whores that want to spend nothing to develop a game and then just start pumping out yearly updates aka "sequels" if it does remotely well. I hate where the industry is going, and EA is the walmart of games. Evil evil company. Keep your 60 dollars and tell EA to kiss off.

Sorry but no. The game was so empty, so repetitive it was boring. 5 hours of nothing much, but the game had so much potential. I knew as soon as they bumped up the release date to make the holidays it was gonna be weak.PrimordialMeme

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"] I also find the Mirrors Edge thing a little hard to believe without some proof. It seemed like a well fleshed out game to me.PrimordialMeme

Sounds like you already decided the game was a failure before you even played it.

And again, if you have some proof to offer up that supports your theory, please share. I'm not aware of any 2009 release date but regardless, as others have pointed out, ME is actually pretty damn polished whether or not your assertion is correct.

It's unfortunate that people like you can't merely just say the game didn't appeal to you and move on but rather feel the need to manufacture complaints in some feeble attempt to diminish the game for others. ME is one of the few truely innovative titles of 2008 and if you can't roll with that go play a FPS with lots of explosions and pretty lights. Leave the "empty" games for those of us who crave something different.

I'm going to do everything exactly the opposite of what you said there. Because I don't like your opinion at all. ^.^ Pay full price for half a game if you like, go nuts.bad_fur_day

It's a half game because...you say so?

Again, my criteria for judging quality is completely different from yours. You'd rather have something bland and boring if the experience lasts longer while I'm content with a shorter game that offers a divergent experience. I'm not stating that my way is superior but what I am telling you is your way doesn't work for those of us who crave innovation and feel it deserves to be rewarded, even when it comes with some flaws.

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"][QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

I thought she was pretty cute. Yeah so she wasnt **** in your pants hot, why should every female character in gaming be a Lara Croft?

CarnageHeart

The developers wanted to make a stylish and stylized character who fit with the game they were designing, they're weren't trying to say anything about how Asian woman do or should look. 'Faith will be as beautiful as an Asian woman can be!' was not a phrase uttered during any of the many interviews I read.

Also, as a great admirer of Asian woman (and black woman, and Latin woman and white woman....) I don't see any conflict between slanted eyes and beauty.

I can understand what TriangleHard is saying. And the in-game model of Faith isn't too bad, still a stereotype, but that original concept of her done by the character designer does come off as a very stereotypical, Asian woman. Even that game cover, which I think in my opinion, can turn some people off from buying the game because the cover just doesn't catch interest.

Like this design here. It's just so stereotypical: the waaaay too slanted eyes, the haircut, the high cheeks, the perky lips...not a good design.

Great news, I loved Mirror's Edge. But how sad is it that EA finally starts to make quality non sports games and they get some of their worst sales in return. Its a mircale that ME2 doesn't star Harry Potter. dvader654

Sorry but no. The game was so empty, so repetitive it was boring. 5 hours of nothing much, but the game had so much potential. I knew as soon as they bumped up the release date to make the holidays it was gonna be weak.PrimordialMeme

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"] No every female character in gaming should be like Tifa.... Well seriously, the thing I hated about Faith's design (part of it is because I'm Asian) was that it was too stereotypical Asian girl. Like all Asian needs to have chinky eyes and Asian girls can't be more traditionally Beautiful. As an Asian dude, I found it offensive. I'm not angry about it or anything because I can tell it wasn't their intention, but I can't really see it fondly.ASK_Story

The developers wanted to make a stylish and stylized character who fit with the game they were designing, they're weren't trying to say anything about how Asian woman do or should look. 'Faith will be as beautiful as an Asian woman can be!' was not a phrase uttered during any of the many interviews I read.

Also, as a great admirer of Asian woman (and black woman, and Latin woman and white woman....) I don't see any conflict between slanted eyes and beauty.

I can understand what TriangleHard is saying. And the in-game model of Faith isn't too bad, still a stereotype, but that original concept of her done by the character designer does come off as a very stereotypical, Asian woman. Even that game cover, which I think in my opinion, can turn some people off from buying the game because the cover just doesn't catch interest.

Like this design here. It's just so stereotypical: the waaaay too slanted eyes, the haircut, the high cheeks, the perky lips...not a good design.

So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

CarnageHeart

Personally I think that Asian women are among the most beautiful, and that's coming from someone who is of Italian descent.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

BladesOfAthena

Personally I think that Asian women are among the most beautiful, and that's coming from someone who is of Italian descent.

So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.CarnageHeart

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.TriangleHard

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

you say most asian women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.joesh89

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

you say most asian women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

[QUOTE="joesh89"][QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

TriangleHard

you say most asian women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

its a game or did you forget that

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.TriangleHard

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

Welcome to the land of cultural illiteracy. Unfortunately, I don't look like an extra from the Godfather so it's near impossible for me to convince other people I'm Italian unless I bring my Tommy gun or jump out of a moving car shouting "you'll never catch me alive, copper, myeh!" If people think they can learn about the world watching TV, let them...it just makes the idiots easier to identify.

As for Faith, stop looking at individuals in a pop-culture setting as spokepersons. They're not..they're not images, they're not cultural representatives, they're just single persons...they are themselves. Faith is not the majority of east Asia, she is Faith and this is what Faith looks like. She is not representative of anything besides her own fictitious, virtual self. Why does she need to be? All you would accomplish by altering Faith's look to something more typical of Asians is a change in stereotype. Ethnic diversity is too large a spectrum to be spanned within a single individual. You could make Faith "traditionally beautiful" or "Hollywood Asian" and you still won't have captured the sum of Asian characteristics. Both ways involve stereotyping, it's just that maybe one way of stereotyping is more flattering to you.... neither way will capture the sum of "Asian" characteristics, neither way will be "accurate." I doubt the character designer gave it any more thought than "i like this look," so why should anyone else?

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"][QUOTE="joesh89"]

you say most asian women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

tony2077ca

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

its a game or did you forget that

and what does that have to do with anything?

People get offended because someone expressed something offensive.

And that expression can be in form of words, pictures, painting, movies, novel, and even games.

So what does it being a game have to do anything with carrying possibly offensive material?

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

joesh89

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

[QUOTE="tony2077ca"][QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

TriangleHard

its a game or did you forget that

and what does that have to do with anything?

People get offended because someone expressed something offensive.

And that expression can be in form of words, pictures, painting, movies, novel, and even games.

So what does it being a game have to do anything with carrying possibly offensive material?

why is it offensive and wheres the stereotype

[QUOTE="joesh89"][QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

women dont look like that. so what, she should look more like you believe the majority of asians look ?

Ish_basic

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

[QUOTE="Ish_basic"][QUOTE="joesh89"]

The point is, the design is not based on beauty nor it is based on realism.

The design is based on stereotype. That's where the problem comes in and that's what makes it offensive.

Is it THAT hard for you to understand?

TriangleHard

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

do you know any who are offended by the design beside you

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"][QUOTE="Ish_basic"]

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

tony2077ca

do you know any who are offended by the design beside you

It showed good number of them were not very fond of the design just like me.

[QUOTE="tony2077ca"][QUOTE="TriangleHard"] Ok among the others it seems like you are reasonable enough to read, but you haven't read my entire posts. I mentioned in one of my earlier post that I'm not fond of Faith's design because it was stereotype of Asian women. I don't blame anyone or upset at it because it was probably not intentional, but as an Asian man I do not like the design. Simple comment right? But of course it leads to comments like do they have to look like white women or whatever. the POINT was that I'm not fond of the design BECAUSE it was stereotypical, and to many Asian it might be tad offensive. Very simple point. And that means it has limited worldwide appeal, which means it is BAD design in terms of mass appeal and trying to sell more games.TriangleHard

do you know any who are offended by the design beside you

It showed good number of them were not very fond of the design just like me.

hmm how many

[QUOTE="Ish_basic"]

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

TriangleHard

okay, and I read your posts. But what I'm saying is that if you insist on seeing Faith as representative of Asian physical characteristics, than she will appear stereotypical no matter how you design her. You can't possibly include every little genetic tweak on a single character, so inevitably some asian characteristics will be left out and others will be emphasized. Someone is going to have a problem with it. Someone always does. For example, if you took the slant out of the eyes, I guarantee you someone wwould scream about trying to "Americanize" her. The problem isn't the design, but rather our insistence on seeing individuals in a pop-culture setting as icons representative of a race instead of seeing them as individuals who happen to belong to a race.

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"][QUOTE="Ish_basic"]

he's suggesting you'd merely be trading one stereotype for another. The notion that the design is not based on beauty or realism is completely subjective.

Ish_basic

okay, and I read your posts. But what I'm saying is that if you insist on seeing Faith as representative of Asian physical characteristics, than she will appear stereotypical no matter how you design her. You can't possibly include every little genetic tweak on a single character, so inevitably some asian characteristics will be left out and others will be emphasized. Someone is going to have a problem with it. Someone always does. For example, if you took the slant out of the eyes, I guarantee you someone wwould scream about trying to "Americanize" her. The problem isn't the design, but rather our insistence on seeing individuals in a pop-culture setting as icons representative of a race instead of seeing them as individuals who happen to belong to a race.

[QUOTE="Ish_basic"][QUOTE="TriangleHard"] Ok among the others it seems like you are reasonable enough to read, but you haven't read my entire posts. I mentioned in one of my earlier post that I'm not fond of Faith's design because it was stereotype of Asian women. I don't blame anyone or upset at it because it was probably not intentional, but as an Asian man I do not like the design. Simple comment right? But of course it leads to comments like do they have to look like white women or whatever. the POINT was that I'm not fond of the design BECAUSE it was stereotypical, and to many Asian it might be tad offensive. Very simple point. And that means it has limited worldwide appeal, which means it is BAD design in terms of mass appeal and trying to sell more games.TriangleHard

okay, and I read your posts. But what I'm saying is that if you insist on seeing Faith as representative of Asian physical characteristics, than she will appear stereotypical no matter how you design her. You can't possibly include every little genetic tweak on a single character, so inevitably some asian characteristics will be left out and others will be emphasized. Someone is going to have a problem with it. Someone always does. For example, if you took the slant out of the eyes, I guarantee you someone wwould scream about trying to "Americanize" her. The problem isn't the design, but rather our insistence on seeing individuals in a pop-culture setting as icons representative of a race instead of seeing them as individuals who happen to belong to a race.

i don't think it was a bad design choice

I read this from PC Zone magazine was back, and it stands true if you think about Prince of Persia and Tomb Raider. "When a game wants to change it's franchize, they bring in: Boobs, big monsters, Rock music and slow motion depravity".

This means gone will be the pop music ambiance, in comes Slipknot. Gone is faiths black t-shirt and white lunes, in comes hot pants and a crop top with nipples poking through.

TristanShand

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.TriangleHard

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

So your now claiming that your clearly passionate hatred of slanted eyes is because not all Asians have them? *Shakes head* My theory about your motives stands.

[QUOTE="TriangleHard"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]So you guys are saying that Asian woman should be modelled after white woman? I've seen the 'closer to white makes one more beautiful' school of thought in the black community and in the Hispanic community, but I didn't know it existed in the Asian community as well. We all watch some of the same Hollywood movies and suchlike, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.CarnageHeart

WRONG. The point is that most Asian women does NOT look like that.

The reason why that kind of look is well known more in western world is because it is exotic for them and it is unique extreme trait mostly found in Asians. That's why when Americans use Asian women in movies and porn they use the ones that looks like that and that's what got Westerners used to that look and think that is the norm, WHEN IT IS NOT.

That's like saying all white people have blond hair and blue eyes, and all Americans are fat.

So your now claiming that your clearly passionate hatred of slanted eyes is because not all Asians have them? *Shakes head* My theory about your motives stands.

I have to say it doesn't sound good...Even if most Asian women look a certain way, I thought beauty was in being and looking unique. I kind of see the case you're making, as a black guy or at least partially black guy, I would be pissed if a game was released that features a character that was suppose to be African American but he looked like one of those old baboon like caricatures from the plantation era. Cole Train, however, even though he is very stereotypical doesn't bother me whatsoever. In fact, I love Cole Train, I see a lot of good stereotypes in him. I think the problem is that most people think that all stereotypes are bad, when in fact stereotyping is psychologically inavoidable. We can only hope that good stereotypes are enforced rather than bad ones, Faith is a beautiful render.