There're thousands of games with gender options nowadays. There's hardly a lack of opportunity if you like playing as a female character. We don't need every game to do it. I'm glad they stuck with their own creative vision instead of changing a game based on media pressure. Didn't do much good for Assassin's Creed. They got bullied into included a female character and it was the worst selling game for years. Always just make the thing you want to make. And then let people approve or disapprove via their wallets.
If people could sue for copying games, don't you think thousands of others would've done that by now? In general, the idea of software patenting is incredibly fuzzy. For the most part people are allowed to copy whatever they want in terms of ideas (as opposed to copying names, art assets etc which IS illegal)
I saw almost no comments saying those things so I'm not sure where you're getting that or why you're expecting me to defend anyone's position but my own.
As for these questions: they're clearly trying to generate controversy. They bring up the Korean war for no reason. They bring up the comparison to "gook" for no reason and then they title the article "is it offensive?" even though the answer to all of their questions was essentially 'no'. None of these is prompted by anything inherent in the game. These are just gotcha questions aimed at trying to generate a controversy. This is really no different than going up to Nintendo while they're plugging a Zelda game and saying "So, we noticed Hyrule is a monarchy. Do you think that's a sensible form of government?" and claiming it's relevant. And then you saying "well that is a valid question". No. It's not. It's only valid if you have no grasp of how fiction works.
I don't see anyone assuming that at all. This has nothing to do with free speech. This has everything to do with trying to generate controversy where none exists.
It's a valid question. It's just not valid to assume what kind of answer there is. Usually there's no social or political message behind such things at all. It was very likely a matter of making a list of which countries could be considered bad guys to some extent in real life and then just picking one at random, and letting the story follow. That's it. You're confusing an action video game with a serious philosophical treatise. You've gotta understand the level on which something's being presented to you.
garywood69's comments