Does it seem like the VGAs are a casualty of the Culture Wars to anyone else?

  • OP OP Osiris397
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 2,028
  • Replies Replies 56
  • Likes Likes 1
If anyone locked you out of PM's, it wasn't me. I literally can't do that. I offer to prove that, and you say no? That's because you know you are lying. Even if DC did bar your access to PM's (He is literally the only person who could have done so), he would not owe you an apology for that. I mean, just look at you! It's been years and you're still the same bitter, angry little boy who got mad because nobody bought into your sad little conspiracy theories. Too bad.

So either quit complaining or ask for the proof because your claims count for nothing if you can't prove them.
Poor baby, you enjoy your projection. I'm not lying. I guarantee you, one of these days people are gonna leave VGR in droves because of the way you guys behave. DC is gonna figure it out. And once he loses so much money, he's gonna get mad at you and the other mods.

Thing is, there's no ads on forums, but branding is soooo important to businesses. VGR is a business. They live and die on word of mouth. Just like what you're doing to me in this very thread.

I don't need to convince anyone. They can go to your board and find out for themselves. They will see what I see. That's why I invited Osiris over there. Joyfreak is very lax, chill from top to bottom.
 
No Shagger was not right

He abused his privileges and resorted to character defamation
There was no effort to engage Carlos other than to ridicule

As for the criticism of Joyfreak, it is completely uncalled for, I wonder where his main profile is….

I disagree with this. I asked a simple question and had this individual hijack my thread with brainwashed, politically laced toxicity.
 
I disagree with this. I asked a simple question and had this individual hijack my thread with brainwashed, politically laced toxicity.

Correct.

And you know what, I owe you a appology @Osiris397. I know I'm dealing with a butthurt, toxic man-child who is upset with me because he got himself banned from another forum that I moderate. And now you're dealing with @Dakota who is siding with that toxic man-child out of pure spite against me. None of that has anything to do with you nor your thread and I apologise for my part in it.
 
Correct.

And you know what, I owe you a appology @Osiris397. I know I'm dealing with a butthurt, toxic man-child who is upset with me because he got himself banned from another forum that I moderate. And now you're dealing with @Dakota who is siding with that toxic man-child out of pure spite against me. None of that has anything to do with you nor your thread and I apologise for my part in it.
No actually my decision was based on what was presented

And no I don’t spite
 
@Dakota and I don't even communicate. I don't know him. At least not on this board. I know of a Dakota, but I doubt that's the Dakota I know from another time. What's funny is we used to argue on this board, and...

Like... I don't know him.

Osiris and Shagger are leftists. Nothing i say will ever change their views. I never meant for this thread to be political. But that's what the thread/subject is about. TGA is ruled by panelists that are media "professionals" (i use that loosely, because they're activists) that have a left-leaning slant. You can not believe it, that doesn't change the fact.

So, again if you don't like it here, go follow Shagger to VGR. That's Shagger's safe space, where he uses his mod powers. He wanted me banned, I got banned..

He got what he wanted.

End of story.
 
Regardless of who started what argument, you can just add each other to an ignore list. That way all the posts a user submits become invisible.

I mean, you're not forced to get the last word in. I've argued with folk on many a forum. But it's relatively pointless to retaliate when somebody disagrees with your viewpoint. It's usually childish, arrogant sorts anyway. People with nothing better to do with their time.
 
Regardless of who started what argument, you can just add each other to an ignore list. That way all the posts a user submits become invisible.

I mean, you're not forced to get the last word in. I've argued with folk on many a forum. But it's relatively pointless to retaliate when somebody disagrees with your viewpoint. It's usually childish, arrogant sorts anyway. People with nothing better to do with their time.
Bro, what is it that you want from me? You been butting your head into this argument for some reason. What you want? You want an argument?

I don't want this. I was really trying to help the thread, I was really trying to bring clarity, to bring helpful commentary, and all of a sudden he wants arguments.

So, what do you want?
 
Correct.

And you know what, I owe you a appology @Osiris397. I know I'm dealing with a butthurt, toxic man-child who is upset with me because he got himself banned from another forum that I moderate. And now you're dealing with @Dakota who is siding with that toxic man-child out of pure spite against me. None of that has anything to do with you nor your thread and I apologise for my part in it.
No apology necessary it's not like you started the fire either. Thanks though I appreciate your candor and willingness to have a rational discussion.
 
Thanks @Osiris397. Now I'm done with that nonsense, I'll try and get back to our discussion.

That's fair and frankly had I not wanted to get it Day 1 I would probably would wait since the biased reviews will affect sales which will mean the price of the game will be dropping precipitously and relatively soon.

I'll probably wait for sale or try the game on gampass or something further down the road, but I'm not paying full price for it.

Going back to the opening post.

Journalists look at games differently than fans. It's more clinical and impersonal, not like fans who typically get more emotionally invested. Neither side is wrong, it's just subtle differences in approach.

So trying to tow the line between understanding the perspectives of both is a task I envy nobody. Especially when it's TGW, who need to maintain the professional relationship with journalists and the respect of fans. In the end, no decision they make is going to please everyone, so that's not the goal. The goal is make decisions that everyone can at least respect even if they disagree.

So whilst I don't think TGW/Geoff Keely (Whomever you think is most responsible for the decisions) taking the feedback from both fans and journalists is a terrible thing, it's difficult to offer the aforementioned respect to thier decisions if I feel they are doing it for the wrong reasons.

Rejecting Dragonage: The Vielguard because of the objections of homophobic twits (and I'm not suggesting that's why, I'm just speculating), that's the wrong reason. A few years ago, a lot of people believed Hogwarts Legacy was dropped for nominations because of the backlash aimed at J.K Rowling for her transphobic comments and beliefs (again, I'm speculating, I'm not saying that's why Hogwarts Legacy was dropped for nominations), and to me, that's the same thing. What "side" of the social/political spectrum the backlash comes from is irrelevant. In my opinion, games should not be rejected because of an individual's political bias. Review the content of the game, not how that content gets reflected in an individual.

Now, If a game or game developer is openly and deliberately offensive, prejudiced, using thier product to spread hatred or misinformation or something, that's another matter and that should be called out, but that's a whole other topic.

Like I said, there is a difference between not agreeing with a decision and not respecting it. Personally, I both disagree and disrespect the decision they made with Hogwarts Legacy because:

  1. It was legitimately a very good game I enjoyed playing very much.
  2. Even though I find J.K Rowling and her views vile, the game and it's developer Avalanche Studious were not so infected. The game even had a trans' character in it that I believe was voiced by an actual trans' actor.

Now, like I've said, I haven't played Dragonage The Vielguard, but I am ready to agree with the decision to not nominate the game because, based of what I've seen and heard from trusted sources, I just don't think it's a very good game. However, if it turns out TGA rejected it because of the social/political implications, I would respect that desicion no more than I did Hogwarts Legacy. That would be just as wrong.
 
Last edited:
The Game Awards is this Friday. I'm kind of disappointed that SH2 isn't one of the nominees. I feel like Bloober Team did an impressive job.

In terms of gaming in general, yeah. Nothing has me reaching for the moon at the moment. I haven't had anything to play since SH2, and it was a drag even before that came out.
 
Thanks @Osiris397. Now I'm done with that nonsense, I'll try and get back to our discussion.
The fact of the blatant Hogwarts snub happening makes it more plausible, to me, that Dragonage the Veilguard probably got snubbed for illegitimate reasons as well. Hogwarts looks and plays well, it reviewed well, and very, very sold well. By all metrics it was the most most influential and appreciated game that year and yet it was still snubbed for GOTY.

I totally hear you on your reticence when it comes to Dragon Age, especially where deviations from the original blueprints are out in front in the reviews and gameplay. But the game improves the further on you go in the game. Whether EA/Bioware would improve it further so that more choices can have more impact on the developing narrative I don’t know, but they would have to make a sequel for anyone to find out. Whether some people that just want to be assholes with their dialogue get that would also have to come in a sequel. As to the lack of desaturated environments, those are in there, but I think most reviewers elected to show off the more colorful areas. Whether you’re able to switch off to another character class within your party without having to re-roll a lead character and start over would be also be held out till a sequel. All of these criticisms are in the public and would serve to improve a sequel while keeping the state of the art improvement in look and feel of the franchise that has been established with this game.

To me this was just a new generation game to establish a modern identity for the DragonAge franchise with some new mechanics and some old mechanics. I personally welcome the change to a more direct active melee combat. I also believe they made the decision to dumb down the character models to accommodate the Xbox Series S and I suspect that won’t be a consideration one way or another in the next generation if there’s another DragonAge.

While I can appreciate your take on reviewers I don’t know that I agree with your take on games media reviewer vs. games consumer reviewer in 2024. There’s zero journalistic integrity in games media today as far as I’m concerned. Reviewers review what want to review only, they review games based on personal reasons and those may not even always be to give a game a fair shake. Basically it’s more entertainment than information/education at this point. Everybody wants their 15-minutes with a “spicy take” on whichever game. There’s no more category scored and averaged reviews that force reviewers to be honest in their overall game reviews. It’s impossible to rate a game’s graphics, gameplay, art direction, narrative development, sound etc. highly and then write an editorial about the game describing it as trash without looking like a clown.

There are some things I know: anything that’s not growing and changing is dead. It’s been 10 years since the last DragonAge game so I expected changes and because of this reception it’s likely to be the last DragonAge game we see in our lifetimes. It was 23 years since the last Baldur’s Gate and BG3 I suspect that’s the last BG we will see in our lifetimes.

My point is that we don’t get these Western RPGs with AAA budgets very often and as such the dev groups often disband or get disbanded sometimes more than once between games, so a little bit of grace would go a long way with the goal of seeing the dev team maintain what they have learned, mature and improve the franchise in 5 years with a new game IF this one sold well enough to merit that. Even though BG4 is in production BG3 didn’t sell well enough to guarantee that that won’t get tossed to a development hell in favor of some potentially more lucrative live service or other concept.

Even though historically JRPGs have not been my cup of tea I might have to take a second look or see if there’s some changes or some subcategory/ franchise that I like as those games seem to sell well enough for those publishers to churn those games out regularly.
 
The Game Awards is this Friday. I'm kind of disappointed that SH2 isn't one of the nominees. I feel like Bloober Team did an impressive job....
I definitely think Bloober Team did a great job and should be recognized. I mean the hype train for Silent Hill 2 was a 4 year "Are they or Aren't they" ride, so the fact they the game exceeded most players expectations, when most people thought it was going to come out flat before knowing Bloober Team was involved and then just publicly eviscerating Konami and Bloober Team before the game even came out only to have to dine on Crow later increases the need to have credit given where credit is due publicly.

Even having stated all that I don’t think remakes should be in the GOTY mix. The industry has been around long enough to have enough archived popular franchises that will supply remake schedlues for the next 15-120 years. Remakes make a lot of sense for publishers and players. I think there should permanently be an "Iconic Games Remade" GOTY category just to compare all those remakes to their originals to see what remade game has improved the most from the original.
 
I was gutted when they didn't announce RE9. I've been rather dismissive of Capcom over the last few years, because some titles they made let me down, with others having similar thoughts. But I did like the sound of the rumours about RE9. An island. Lots of returning protagonists. The BSAA being involved. Etc, etc. But I guess like Dusk Golem said, the game may have received a delay over some internal issue. So it will just be revealed when the time is right.
 
I was gutted when they didn't announce RE9....
It wasn't a good feeling on RE9, for me also knowing that it will very likely be coming with PSVR2 support and after all the rumors. I'm also an Onimusha fan, so it wasn't all bad. I've been waiting for that game to get modernized forever. It doesn't look as up to date as say Monster Hunter or the contemporary RE series or what Bluepoint might have done, but it's looking so much better than trying to play the original in 2024.
 
I do feel as if Resident Evil has been milked.

Personally, I prefer the mood of the earlier games. It's when RE4 came out, it all ended up very MCU-esque. LOL.

I think this virus being able to slow down the age of the characters is in itself a cash grab. It's because Capcom fears if they should naturally get old and retire or die, nobody will like RE much anymore. So this is like their big insurance policy to make sure they can get all the creamy milk they can for years to come.
 
I think this virus being able to slow down the age of the characters is in itself a cash grab.

I don't know I appreciate the franchise being rejuvenated in a respectful way and avoiding the undead defense force RE shenanigans again. With the size that games are, the level of quality demanded and the curiosity of devs to try new mechanics I think it's technically and creatively helpful to have some aspects of the game predetermined.
 
There's actually an upcoming George Romero documentary on RE, due out next year, about what it could have been like if he had directed a film on the franchise.

Pablo Kuntz is the narrator. And he originally voiced Albert Wesker in RE (1996).
 

Latest content

Back
Top