Animated Me

13 January 2012

and part 2


 (Pages: 1, 2)
36)   13 January 2012 11:59 am
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
j-e-f-f-e-r-s:Catherine is single in the game. She therefore has no partner to cheat on. She therefore is not engaging in infidelity. I don't know how I can make this any simpler.
She still took part in the same action Vincent did. She is just as guilty as him. Gender equality.
People have one night stands. People have casual sex.
People also kill each other over money. That doesn't make it right or rational.
Nope. When you call a woman engaging in casual sex a whore, then you're sexist. This is the 21st century. The Puritans don't run things anymore. Women are allowed to have sex, and not be judged negatively for it.
Actually that's the definition of the word "whore". Also, genius, sexism would be thinking little of someone based on gender or holding one gender to a higher standard than the other. I told you that I hold men to the same standard as women and think little of Catherine based on her actions, so I am not sexist. I just don't like it when people are promiscuous with sexual intercourse.
Then again, that was never my point. I played this game, knowing that would happen. The problem is how slap-dash it was handled. I was willing to look past my own personal morals for the sake of a good story. The problem is that the writing is flimsy.
Have you ever had casual sex? Those are all the reasons you need, if you're unhappy in your current relationship. People don't tend to choose sexual partners based on how many hobbies they share.
No, because I have a little thing called "self control". If all I wanted was sex, I could get it easily. I choose not to because I want the sex I have to be meaningful. Anyway, why are you making this about me? What did Vincent have to say about casual sex?
"I can't do the casual sex thing." That's what he said about it. He doesn't like the idea. That's his default view on the matter. He and all his friends are shocked to find out that he cheated on Katherine and he feels terrible about it. He has default morals that make the actual act of cheating out of place.
Catherine is initially presented as a one night stand. She appears from out of nowhere, and in one night manages to get Vincent to cheat on his girlfriend. This sort of thing happens all the time. If Vincent had spent weeks getting to know Catherine before banging her, that wouldn't be a one night stand, it would be a prolonged affair, a very different set of affairs to that the game presents and tackles.
Getting rid of the one night stand certainly would have made for an easier write, but they could have made it work. The problem is that its made clear that Vincent wouldn't just have a one night stand on a whim. It would have to be one amazing girl he met and he'd have to be in a very vulnerable position. Rather than go straight to the dream after Catherine sat down, they should have had them talk for a while and establish that Vincent liked her. Then it would at least make sense for him to sleep with her. It would also mislead players that didn't have the plot spoiled into thinking that it would just be a normal "Betty/Veronica" choice going on, only to have the one night stand complicate things. That would have been good writing.
Wow. Those are some very....conservative views.
She still took part in the same action Vincent did. She is just as guilty as him. Gender equality.
Except for the fact that Catherine had no knowledge of whether the man she was hitting was single or not. It was Vincent's job to bring that little tidbit up. He chose not to. The cheating is on him.
report
37)   13 January 2012 12:03 pm
38)   13 January 2012 12:06 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
j-e-f-f-e-r-s:I have spent this entire thread trying to argue with you that in a modern, progressive society, gender equality means women have just as much right to sleep around as men. A right that the majority of young adults now fully make use of in the western world.
I believe his point was that no one has that right. You can stupidly label that as sexism so you can transmit all the STDs you want, that isn't going to make you in the right.
Because protection isn't a thing. And we should all wait till we are married to start living.
report
39)   13 January 2012 12:11 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 372
Joined: 1 May 2008
OP: I think your subjective preferences about women are making the game "too easy" for you here. I know people who played the game and said, "Holy cow, I would never date Katherine, ever. She's smothering, boring, possessive, and she generally wants to ruin my fun. On top of that, she's pregnant, and I sure as hell don't want a kid, let alone one I didn't expect to have." For them, it was obvious that Catherine was the right answer, because they didn't want what Katherine was offering. Is that immoral? Well, that's your conclusion to draw, but everyone draws a slightly different one.
The game isn't about moral choice or even cheating. The cheating is the framework -- the game itself is about what you want out of your relationships as a whole. It's about stability and long-term bonding vs. "sowing wild oats" and really fun flings. It's about what you need (arguably) vs. what you want, about sacrificing for the former vs. running with your impulses so you can have the latter. There are people who subscribe to either side. Many people may be in the middle. You happen to swing really hard towards the Blue end of the meter, but that doesn't mean everyone else who plays the game sees it that way. You have your married men and your lifelong bachelors and everyone in between.
I thought it had one of the most nuanced moral choice systems there, because it doesn't make you rail the meter hard in either direction to get a different ending. There are 8 endings, which is neat.
If getting to know someone before you have sex is conservative, you have not at all lived in real conservative society. Also, you don't have to have sex to really "be living." Just figured I'd throw that out there. People have the right to make their own decisions, but it's irritating to see people who genuinely think that life wouldn't be life without casual sex.
report
40)   13 January 2012 12:22 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Aurora Firestorm:OP: I think your subjective preferences about women are making the game "too easy" for you here. I know people who played the game and said, "Holy cow, I would never date Katherine, ever. She's smothering, boring, possessive, and she generally wants to ruin my fun. On top of that, she's pregnant, and I sure as hell don't want a kid, let alone one I didn't expect to have." For them, it was obvious that Catherine was the right answer, because they didn't want what Katherine was offering. Is that immoral? Well, that's your conclusion to draw, but everyone draws a slightly different one.
The game isn't about moral choice or even cheating. The cheating is the framework -- the game itself is about what you want out of your relationships as a whole. It's about stability and long-term bonding vs. "sowing wild oats" and really fun flings. It's about what you need (arguably) vs. what you want, about sacrificing for the former vs. running with your impulses so you can have the latter. There are people who subscribe to either side. Many people may be in the middle. You happen to swing really hard towards the Blue end of the meter, but that doesn't mean everyone else who plays the game sees it that way. You have your married men and your lifelong bachelors and everyone in between.
I thought it had one of the most nuanced moral choice systems there, because it doesn't make you rail the meter hard in either direction to get a different ending. There are 8 endings, which is neat.
If getting to know someone before you have sex is conservative, you have not at all lived in real conservative society. Also, you don't have to have sex to really "be living." Just figured I'd throw that out there. People have the right to make their own decisions, but it's irritating to see people who genuinely think that life wouldn't be life without casual sex.
What? I'm personally a virgin. I was exaggerating. I pictured my friend's parents while reading his posts. They don't approve cussing, smoking, sex before marriage, the works. That is where the comment came from. I just want to know what makes sex morally right if you get to know someone first. Is it magic? Tell me it is magic.
report
41)   13 January 2012 12:23 pm
The Man in a Mask
Posts: 10887
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
If getting to know someone before you have sex is conservative, you have not at all lived in real conservative society. Also, you don't have to have sex to really "be living." Just figured I'd throw that out there. People have the right to make their own decisions, but it's irritating to see people who genuinely think that life wouldn't be life without casual sex.
Its also annoying to see people that believe that enjoying sex outside of marriage, that being before tying the knot, can make someone a slut and a hussy. They make get offended by us calling them conservative, but really? Having a one night stand is not something to be ashamed of and should be not be labeled as something like that. Scared of passing STIs? Wear a condom, same thing prevents unwanted babies too.
report
42)   13 January 2012 12:25 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 352
Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Forlong:People also kill each other over money. That doesn't make it right or rational.
Did you really compare having casual sex to killing people over money?
Careful you don't light any matches near the strawmen you seem to enjoy making. I'd hate to see you get burned.
I believe his point was that no one has that right. You can stupidly label that as sexism so you can transmit all the STDs you want, that isn't going to make you in the right.
People don't have the right to do with their bodies as they see fit? That's news to me. And here I thought people were expected to be able to be able to make rational decisions about matters which don't affect the lives of others, and take responsibility for any decisions they make, rational or otherwise. I'd hate to live in a country where the law was based on your apparent moral standards, or worse, a world where no one is given the right to decide what they do with their own body.
If you honestly believe no adult has the right to choose to engage in sexual acts with any other consenting adult that they choose to, regardless of their being in a long term relationship with the person or not then I truly pity you. Not because you choose not have casual sex, but because you are so naive as to believe that others should be held to your completely subjective, and absolutely unrealistic, sense of morality.
Also, I'm not sure if you're aware, but there are these neat little inventions called condoms. Might want to look into them sometime.
report
43)   13 January 2012 12:25 pm
Gone Gonzo
Posts: 3667
Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Forlong:
She still took part in the same action Vincent did. She is just as guilty as him. Gender equality.
Nope. Two people can engage in the same sexual act, yet their personal situations can render its meaning very differently for them both.
Vincent has a girlfriend. Therefore, sex with Catherine = infidelity.
Catherine is single. Therefore, sex with Vincent =/= infidelity.
An experienced woman could have sex with a guy who's a virgin. They'd both be taking part in the same action. Yet the fact that he's a virgin doesn't mean she is too, simply because they're having sex.
People also kill each other over money. That doesn't make it right or rational.
Absolutely ludicrous statement. Consensual sex does not harm anyone, it does not rob anyone of anything, it does not (usually) cause pain, and is in fact rather more pleasurable than any act of burglary or murder. You might as well have said "People nuke each other during times of war" for all the relevancy your comment had.
Actually that's the definition of the word "whore".
whore noun, verb, whored, whor·ing.
noun
1.
a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse for money; prostitute; harlot; strumpet.
verb (used without object)
2.
to act as a whore.
3.
to consort with whores.
Care to tell me where in the game Catherine has sex for money?
Also, genius, sexism would be thinking little of someone based on gender or holding one gender to a higher standard than the other. I told you that I hold men to the same standard as women and think little of Catherine based on her actions, so I am not sexist. I just don't like it when people are promiscuous with sexual intercourse.
Funnily enough, your opinions on sex are not the same as objective fact. Also, you may not like the fact that men have sex too, but you used the derogatory term 'whore' directly at Catherine because she is a woman who engages in casual sex. That is sexism. Sexism does not automatically equate to outright hatred of women. It also applies to any insult levelled at someone because they are of a certain gender. You did just this by levelling the term 'whore' at Catherine, because of the fact she is a sexually active woman. I fail to see where in your post you also called Vincent a whore for engaging in casual sex with Catherine.
Have you ever had casual sex? Those are all the reasons you need, if you're unhappy in your current relationship. People don't tend to choose sexual partners based on how many hobbies they share.
No, because I have a little thing called "self control". If all I wanted was sex, I could get it easily. I choose not to because I want the sex I have to be meaningful.
Ah, the good old "I'm so much superior to everyone else, so I'm going to belittle them by telling them how bad casual sex is, and how much stronger a person I am for holding out" approach. I'm surprised you haven't started warning us about the dangers of masturbation yet...
"I can't do the casual sex thing." That's what he said about it. He doesn't like the idea. That's his default view on the matter. He and all his friends are shocked to find out that he cheated on Katherine and he feels terrible about it. He has default morals that make the actual act of cheating out of place.
Except that he's a guy in a relationship that he's not entirely happy with. That's all it takes for a guy to choose to cheat if presented with the opportunity. Even quite pious, gentlemanly guys can cheat if they're unhappy in their relationships. Romance isn't clear cut, you see. Love and sex are complicated. That is what Catherine tried to address in its story.
Also, the fact that the character Catherine is
rather implies that she's pretty damned good at seducing men, no matter how resolute they may be.
EDIT
j-e-f-f-e-r-s:I have spent this entire thread trying to argue with you that in a modern, progressive society, gender equality means women have just as much right to sleep around as men. A right that the majority of young adults now fully make use of in the western world.
I believe his point was that no one has that right. You can stupidly label that as sexism so you can transmit all the STDs you want, that isn't going to make you in the right.
I am not above making snide comments, but generally speaking I try to restrain from making out and out insults in forums. For this post however, I am going to make a very clear exception:
Fuck you. Fuck you for implying that I have STDs. Fuck you for implying that I have casual sex in order to spread STDs around, a crime punishable by jail time. Fuck you for implying that I'm too stupid to know what a condom is. Fuck you for stating that people don't have the right to freedom of sexual intercourse. And fuck you for reducing the entire topic of casual sex into "LOL, tey're spredding teh syphillis! Dirty whores!" Perhaps you will be insulted by all this, but I was was already insulted by your claims that I argue for sexual freedom as a cover to spread sexual diseases.
report
44)   13 January 2012 12:27 pm
GotY - Catherine
Posts: 6252
Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Its also annoying to see people that believe that enjoying sex outside of marriage, that being before tying the knot, can make someone a slut and a hussy. They make get offended by us calling them conservative, but really? Having a one night stand is not something to be ashamed of and should be not be labeled as something like that. Scared of passing STIs? Wear a condom, same thing prevents unwanted babies too.
Why should I have to wear a condom when a woman should know to take her pill? It's ridiculous that I have to manage my own sex life by carrying condoms around with me wherever I go.
And it's something someone should totally be ashamed of, at least for women. They're not supposed to be tramps and yet so many of them are. It's disgusting and shameful and they should all know better. They come in and hit on guys just to get laid. No romantic attachment, just sex. Do you not see what's wrong with that? They're destroying the image of women everywhere and they should be ashamed.
report
45)   13 January 2012 12:53 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 441
Joined: 7 Nov 2008
I disagree with what you're saying about OP being sexist purely for labelling Catherine a slut (I haven't read many/any of his replies, just disagreeing about your original position on his original position)..
On the one hand, you're saying that he's sexist for thinking Catherine a slut, because equality, women etc. You're then comparing that to society's position, which is that men are encouraged. You've then concluded he's sexist.
That's not true, unless he holds the same values as society regarding men. He may merely think that anyone engaging in casual sex is to be considered as of low character, in which case what he writes is perfectly legitimate.
report
46)   13 January 2012 1:09 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 372
Joined: 1 May 2008
*throws hands up* Right! I should have clarified my conditions more on the "hey guys, sex isn't mandatory for awesome life" commentary.
I moved from Super Conservative South (which I often disagree with) to Super Liberal North USA (which I also often disagree with). I see lots of extremists and not a lot of moderates. People are either "SEX IS BAD" or "GO SLEEP WITH RANDOM PEOPLE IN BARS." I like to try to be the voice in the middle. I do agree with you, RedEyes -- I thought you were leaning more towards the latter when you were more in the middle. Apologies.
Moral lines aside (because that's a huge can of worms), I personally find it very uncomfortable to be sexually close to someone I don't know. Other people may not. Still, I know that doesn't answer your question; I just tend to lean towards "why would you do that, it seems kind of creepy and dangerous." So that colors my statements, I'm aware.
Kasurami: Okay, now if men do it, is this also shameful? If not, you're being a sexist pig. If so, I can deal with that. But allowing men to go sleep with whoever they want, while women can't, is ridiculous. What, because I have a vagina, I have to be Prissy Prude, while you get to run off and screw ten chicks? What a horrible joke.
Did you *really* just say you shouldn't have to manage your own sex life? It's YOUR sex life! Yours! So manage what is yours like a big boy! It's not anyone else's responsibility to manage your sex life.
Not all women can take birth control pills safely, by the way, and they don't prevent STDs. Sleeping with a total stranger may not get you pregnant if you're on the pill, but you might walk away with something besides an unwanted baby. There are female condoms, but male ones are much easier to come by. If you're going to have sex with someone, stop being so selfish and just help make it safe, at the very least. You're engaging in an intimate act, where like it or not, you two are getting really physically close and thus you should be a good person and at least consider the other human being in this act. She's not a piece of meat; she's a woman. Treat her like a person.
report
47)   13 January 2012 1:12 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 372
Joined: 1 May 2008
(Haugh, double post, apologies, the site was weird.)
report
48)   13 January 2012 1:19 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Aurora Firestorm:*throws hands up* Right! I should have clarified my conditions more on the "hey guys, sex isn't mandatory for awesome life" commentary.
I moved from Super Conservative South (which I often disagree with) to Super Liberal North USA (which I also often disagree with). I see lots of extremists and not a lot of moderates. People are either "SEX IS BAD" or "GO SLEEP WITH RANDOM PEOPLE IN BARS." I like to try to be the voice in the middle. I do agree with you, RedEyes -- I thought you were leaning more towards the latter when you were more in the middle. Apologies.
Moral lines aside (because that's a huge can of worms), I personally find it very uncomfortable to be sexually close to someone I don't know. Other people may not. Still, I know that doesn't answer your question; I just tend to lean towards "why would you do that, it seems kind of creepy and dangerous." So that colors my statements, I'm aware.
Kasurami: Okay, now if men do it, is this also shameful? If not, you're being a sexist pig. If so, I can deal with that. But allowing men to go sleep with whoever they want, while women can't, is ridiculous. What, because I have a vagina, I have to be Prissy Prude, while you get to run off and screw ten chicks? What a horrible joke.
Did you *really* just say you shouldn't have to manage your own sex life? It's YOUR sex life! Yours! So manage what is yours like a big boy! It's not anyone else's responsibility to manage your sex life.
Not all women can take birth control pills safely, by the way, and they don't prevent STDs. Sleeping with a total stranger may not get you pregnant if you're on the pill, but you might walk away with something besides an unwanted baby. There are female condoms, but male ones are much easier to come by. If you're going to have sex with someone, stop being so selfish and just help make it safe, at the very least. You're engaging in an intimate act, where like it or not, you two are getting really physically close and thus you should be a good person and at least consider the other human being in this act. She's not a piece of meat; she's a woman. Treat her like a person.
I'm glad we cleared that up. I'm more "a person has the freedom to approach sex in anyway they want. Whether that be one night stands or waiting until they are married. It isn't for me to judge and I don't really care what a person does." type of person. But conservatives who insult people just for being promiscuous really bug me.
report
49)   13 January 2012 1:25 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 387
Joined: 4 Jun 2009
I really think he was being sarcastic, or, well, at least, I SUPREMELY hope so.
RedEyesBlackGamer:
What? I'm personally a virgin. I was exaggerating. I pictured my friend's parents while reading his posts. They don't approve cussing, smoking, sex before marriage, the works. That is where the comment came from. I just want to know what makes sex morally right if you get to know someone first. Is it magic? Tell me it is magic.
Well If you get to know someone and care about them before having sex with them it can be more emotionally satisfying, and therefore more enjoyable, to some, at least. But otherwise it's just as physically satisfying though.
OT:
Have like, ANY of the people condemning Cathrine and Vincent actually played the game?
Like... ALL the way through?
It really doesn't seem like it
report
50)   13 January 2012 1:25 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 392
Joined: 5 Mar 2011
Just going to throw it out there that it's easier for women to get sex then it is for men and that's why it's generally seen that promiscuous women are sluts but not promiscuous men.
You can disagree and throw out a bunch of anecdotal evidence but in general, men have to work harder to get sex. Maybe one day I'll commission a study for this; have 1 moderately attractive guy walk up to 100 women and ask if they'd like to fuck and then tally the results and do the same with 1 moderately attractive woman and 100 men.
report
51)   13 January 2012 1:29 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
RedEyesBlackGamer:
What? I'm personally a virgin. I was exaggerating. I pictured my friend's parents while reading his posts. They don't approve cussing, smoking, sex before marriage, the works. That is where the comment came from. I just want to know what makes sex morally right if you get to know someone first. Is it magic? Tell me it is magic.
Well If you get to know someone and care about them before having sex with them it can be more emotionally satisfying, and therefore more enjoyable, to some, at least. But otherwise it's just as physically satisfying though.
OT:
Have like, ANY of the people condemning Cathrine and Vincent actually played the game?
Like... ALL the way through?
It really doesn't seem like it
I have, but this turned more into a discussion of promiscuity and who is at fault if two people hook up at a bar and the guy has a girlfriend.
report
52)   13 January 2012 1:30 pm
On the Record
Posts: 5332
Joined: 21 Jan 2009
Its also annoying to see people that believe that enjoying sex outside of marriage, that being before tying the knot, can make someone a slut and a hussy. They make get offended by us calling them conservative, but really? Having a one night stand is not something to be ashamed of and should be not be labeled as something like that. Scared of passing STIs? Wear a condom, same thing prevents unwanted babies too.
Why should I have to wear a condom when a woman should know to take her pill? It's ridiculous that I have to manage my own sex life by carrying condoms around with me wherever I go.
And it's something someone should totally be ashamed of, at least for women. They're not supposed to be tramps and yet so many of them are. It's disgusting and shameful and they should all know better. They come in and hit on guys just to get laid. No romantic attachment, just sex. Do you not see what's wrong with that? They're destroying the image of women everywhere and they should be ashamed.
And men are any better? No they are ENCOURAGED by society to sleep with as many women as they want/can but women are slut shamed. Just because a woman enjoys sex she is automatically a slut or a whore or any other derogative word. And also, condoms protect against transference of STI's which is why condoms should be used. The pill only helps protect against pregnancy. Do your homework.
As a woman I am offended that you appear to be putting all the blame just on women for feeling ashamed of sex. Especially as an adult woman who has had casual protected sex(as in condoms and birth control) with another consenting adult I am offended. Sex is a perfectly natural biological urge(yes I know there are asexuals who have no sexual urge and that is perfectly natural for them and a different topic altogether) and no one should have to feel ashamed of it. Exception would probably be rape(but once again that is another topic for a different day). Normal consensual sex between two consenting adults should be nothing to be ashamed of. This is is more backwards rather than forwards thinking. Stop with the slut shaming and put it to two consenting adults made a decision to sleep with each other for their own enjoyment and since it doesn't directly affect you, it is none of your damn business.
Aurora Firestorm:Kasurami: Okay, now if men do it, is this also shameful? If not, you're being a sexist pig. If so, I can deal with that. But allowing men to go sleep with whoever they want, while women can't, is ridiculous. What, because I have a vagina, I have to be Prissy Prude, while you get to run off and screw ten chicks? What a horrible joke.
Not all women can take birth control safely, by the way. There are female condoms, but male ones are much easier to come by. If you're going to have sex with someone, stop being so selfish and just help make it safe, at the very least. You're engaging in an intimate act, where like it or not, you two are getting really physically close and thus you should be a good person and at least consider the other human being in this act. She's not a piece of meat; she's a woman. Treat her like a person.
Also, this ^
report
53)   13 January 2012 1:30 pm
GotY - Catherine
Posts: 6252
Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Kasurami: Okay, now if men do it, is this also shameful? If not, you're being a sexist pig. If so, I can deal with that. But allowing men to go sleep with whoever they want, while women can't, is ridiculous. What, because I have a vagina, I have to be Prissy Prude, while you get to run off and screw ten chicks? What a horrible joke.
It's different. It's just how guys are. Women shouldn't be like that as they need to maintain respectability and sleeping around ruins that completely.
Did you *really* just say you shouldn't have to manage your own sex life? It's YOUR sex life! Yours! So manage what is yours like a big boy! It's not anyone else's responsibility to manage your sex life.
Women are the one who can pregnant and so they have the responsibility when it comes to the kids. If they want to be taken seriously for sleeping around they should have to deal with the consequences.
Not all women can take birth control pills safely, by the way, and they don't prevent STDs. Sleeping with a total stranger may not get you pregnant if you're on the pill, but you might walk away with something besides an unwanted baby. There are female condoms, but male ones are much easier to come by. If you're going to have sex with someone, stop being so selfish and just help make it safe, at the very least. You're engaging in an intimate act, where like it or not, you two are getting really physically close and thus you should be a good person and at least consider the other human being in this act. She's not a piece of meat; she's a woman. Treat her like a person.
If a woman can't take birth control safely, that's an even bigger reason for her not to sleep around. If a woman agrees to sex with a guy who she doesn't know she should learn to accept the consequences that might come with it and therefore no responsibility should be on him.
report
54)   13 January 2012 1:35 pm
Master Archivist
Posts: 8884
Joined: 17 Jul 2010
Forlong:Okay, I played "Catherine" over the holidays and would like to know what game the reviewers were playing, because this wasn't it. I have to be honest, I just plain didn't like the game. I'll get to that in a second, but first let me correct the reviewers.
The game isn't hard!
That's not to say its easy. Oh, no. It is challenging, but not hard overall. Unless you're some kind of idiot, most of the puzzles are straightforward. Now there are some that are notoriously difficult, but that means that its "hard at times". When I hear the word "hard", I think of NES titles. Now those games are harder than "Catherine" (most of them, at least).
Yahtzee was quite right to say that part of the difficulty of the game was due to absolutely awful controls. All you do is push blocks, and they somehow found a way to screw it up. The controls were disappointing, but not a deal breaker.
Now, here is my main problem with the game:
...
Um... Old NES games arent "hard". They seem hard cause you were young at the time and they were made for an adult gaming habit or you find them hard because you dont like the way the mechanics of the game work. If you can look past the rose coloured glasses or just play them new as a more grown person, you see they're either not hard, or the reason they are is that they're broken in some way that today's games would get fixed (people would bitch about and condemn the game for because such standards are unacceptable).
Besides, maybe you're just good at Puzzles. I aced through the lowest difficulty, did moderately well on the mediums, and started to sweat on the hard despite having played them twice already. Some lwere harder than others, and quite a few times it was a lucky quick twitch that saved me from failure. But still, I idnt have too too much trouble, cause I do... well I do well at puzzle games. Im not god at them, but im not a noob either.
Towards the mechanics and controls, yeah, they're a bit bad at times, but what you say is awful, I call challenging. that sudden change in direction adds to what can be a boring and mundane castle crawler. Like I siad before, what most say makes old NES games hard, I say is just awful programming/game building.
...
The moral choice is NO choice.
Making a moral choice system is hard enough, but to make a game centered around it is rather bold. The problem with "Catherine" is the same thing as with most other games with moral choice in them: only one choice is in any way rational. This is made even worse by the fact that the whole game just beats you over the head with the moral choice instead of using it as a gimmick, like most games with moral choice in them. How did they screw it up? Let's take a look.
The first scene (after that weird acid trip intro), does a good job setting up Vincent and Katherine. I found it a bit hard to actually like Vincent, but not hard enough for me to think it impossible. Katherine is very well rounded. She is made to be very compassionate and understanding, but also pushy and easily annoyed. Although I liked Katherine and would date her in real life, I could understand why someone else might not. Unfortunately...
Catherine is a completely unlikable character. She is introduced waking up with Vincent after sleeping with him. She tried to convince me that I shouldn't think little of her for having sex with a man she met only five hours ago, but after that I was treated to a flashback of her saying that she thought marriage was an unnecessary tradition. Yeah, Catherine, you're doing a great job convincing me that you're not a wh*** (am I allowed to say that here?).
What they should have done was show us a bit of that night before entering the dream, to develop Catherin and make us like her even a little. I couldn't look past that terrible first impression of her. It wasn't helped by her constantly forcing herself on Vincent, despite me dropping several hints that I wanted her to buzz off.
I had trouble enjoying the story because I couldn't understand what Vincent saw in Catherin. I don't care how drunk he was, she is to abhorrent for me to understand why he would do such a thing. Staying with his girlfriend was the only choice that was reasonable. They did a terrible job with the moral choice. I don't understand why so many people like this game.
because, you know, every woman should subject themselves to the servitude of marriage and not have fun. it couldnt POSSIBLY be the fualt of the man who slept with her (especially when he's in the stable relationship that early on she doesnt necessarily know about and he just continues to lead her on). No, if women arent grounded and isntead just live the carefree lifestyle different from your personal views they're complete and total whores. it couldnt possibly be the guy who's her elder by a good amount, and is just sleeping around completely ignoring getting his life together. and vice versa.
besides, Catherine is like... I think 21 or so. Katherine is in her late twenties-mid thirties (her age escapes me at the moment). She's supposed to be ground and stable, thats her whole problem with Vincent. he cant get his life together while she can, and while she does love him, she just wants the best for him in her mind and to change a little bit, to grow up.
Neither choice is more rational than the other, its all just symbolic of life and having you face your own morals and values. Picking Katherine is saying you want to be grown up, grounded, live an "appropriate" lifestyle for your age and work on the commitments youre either give or have chosen.
Meanwhile, picking Catherine is only "irrational" in that you know in the game its a death sentence, and even then, thats only if you continue cheating. Its saying yeah, you can live young and carefree, not caring about commitments in the least. Thats the playboy party life the stereotypical guy stereotypically dreams of and whats to live (thats the hugh hefner lifestyle, the Charlie Sheen tiger blood method). You're doomed to your destruction, its inevitable, but you live int he moment not look forward to the future. YOu'll go out in a BLAZE O GLORY! or just crash and burn.
And hey, if you wanna live that style, more power to you. There's nothing really wrong with it as long as you keep that mindset. Others may say it is, but if you dont think it is then fuck those people.
Catherine is temptation, but the desire to live forever young. Katherine is acceptance and growing up, boring and mundane compared to the alternative, but in the end much "safer" (which here is literal, but really it just means more stable in realistic view) to you and your health/future.
Besides, you dont like catherine, tso right away you take away one whole part of the game. This isnt a good or evil, black or white game like Infamous is, so you find it boring and there being no choice. One could equally say they hate katherine as a character, that she's overbearing, encroaching on their lifestyle, trying to change them and make them something they dont want to be and that being with her is Irrational. that the game is boring cause you know you're not going to be with her by the end and you'll do anything you can so by the end the end you're with Catherine.
I personally would like a girl thats the middle ground. grounded when she needs to be, but still having that young youthful adventurous spark. The kinda girl that would say lets go on a date to the movies, then if she sees we're alone says lets do it here and now. Someone that can add spice to life, but not destroy it.
then again, i know just among my friends some who like Katherine as a character and girlfriend, and I know ones that would like Catherine as a girlfriend. its about their values and what they want in life.
report
55)   13 January 2012 1:35 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Micalas:Just going to throw it out there that it's easier for women to get sex then it is for men and that's why it's generally seen that promiscuous women are sluts but not promiscuous men.
You can disagree and throw out a bunch of anecdotal evidence but in general, men have to work harder to get sex. Maybe one day I'll commission a study for this; have 1 moderately attractive guy walk up to 100 women and ask if they'd like to fuck and then tally the results and do the same with 1 moderately attractive woman and 100 men.
It has been done. A study was conducted at Florida Sate University (I think it was FSU. I read it in my old intro to psychology textbook.) An average looking man and woman propositioned members of the opposite sex about having sex later that night. Most women said no, most guys agreed (some asking whether they could do it right now). That still has no bearings on why promiscuous men are celebrated, and why promiscuous women are vilified.
report
56)   13 January 2012 1:37 pm
Gone Gonzo
Posts: 3667
Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Micalas:Just going to throw it out there that it's easier for women to get sex then it is for men and that's why it's generally seen that promiscuous women are sluts but not promiscuous men.
You can disagree and throw out a bunch of anecdotal evidence but in general, men have to work harder to get sex.
You can argue about the effects and benefits of fame all you like, but the fact is that all those guys are ridiculously good looking men who shagged hundreds of women between them, and probably wouldn't have done so badly even without the fame factor.
Anecdotal evidence time: I once had a mate who was not, by any objective measure, very good looking. Still got laid pretty damn often, and got propositioned by women on no less than three separate occasions. Dunno what it was, women seemed to really want to shag him. I've been propositioned myself. Turned her down, as I didn't find the girl personally attractive, but I could have quite easily gone back to hers and nailed her to the sheets.
It's just as easy for men to find sex as women. It's a confidence thing. Women tend to remain confident around men, whereas men become nervous stuttering teenagers as soon as a hot woman talks to them. Work out how to talk to a woman with confidence and just the right amount of wit and charm, and it becomes much, much easier to find a casual lay if you're looking. I don't mean for this to sound sexist. Just that women are generally pretty confident themselves, and they respond better when you display a bit of confidence too. Is a woman more likely to shag a guy who she has to coax out onto the dancefloor after much pleading and nagging, or a guy who asks her for a dance and then wows her with his dancing skills?
report
57)   13 January 2012 1:46 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 392
Joined: 5 Mar 2011
RedEyesBlackGamer:It has been done. A study was conducted at Florida Sate University (I think it was FSU. I read it in my old intro to psychology textbook.) An average looking man and woman propositioned members of the opposite sex about having sex later that night. Most women said no, most guys agreed (some asking whether they could do it right now). That still has no bearings on why promiscuous men are celebrated, and why promiscuous women are vilified.
Oh, I don't celebrate promiscuous men. I just have a bit more tolerance of them. I don't think anyone, regardless of gender should be having sex with everything with a pulse.
My point however, was that it's seen more of a negative for woman because they don't have to put as much effort into getting sex. It's all comes down to effort vs. return. Let's talk about casual bar sex. The woman just has to say "let's go have sex" and the deal is done. The guy however, in general, has to buy $40 of drinks before she even thinks about saying maybe. Even then if she says yes he has to worry about a rape charge because she wasn't in the right mind to consent to sex. Speaking of gender double-standards!
report
58)   13 January 2012 1:47 pm
Press Junketeer
Posts: 387
Joined: 4 Jun 2009
I have, but this turned more into a discussion of promiscuity and who is at fault if two people hook up at a bar and the guy has a girlfriend.
I wasn't really referring to the people like you here, who came in read the comments, and gave their two scene on what the conversation had evolved into, I was more referring to the people who drove the the conversation down that road. I just don't think Cathrine is the right game to argue about sexism over, as both sexes are basically just used as placeholders for the player to fill in.
But yeah, I wasn't really referring to you, you were just in Rome doing as the Romans do.
report
59)   13 January 2012 1:51 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
RedEyesBlackGamer:It has been done. A study was conducted at Florida Sate University (I think it was FSU. I read it in my old intro to psychology textbook.) An average looking man and woman propositioned members of the opposite sex about having sex later that night. Most women said no, most guys agreed (some asking whether they could do it right now). That still has no bearings on why promiscuous men are celebrated, and why promiscuous women are vilified.
Oh, I don't celebrate promiscuous men. I just have a bit more tolerance of them. I don't think anyone, regardless of gender should be having sex with everything with a pulse.
My point however, was that it's seen more of a negative for woman because they don't have to put as much effort into getting sex. It's all comes down to effort vs. return. Let's talk about casual bar sex. The woman just has to say "let's go have sex" and the deal is done. The guy however, in general, has to buy $40 of drinks before she even thinks about saying maybe. Even then if she says yes he has to worry about a rape charge because she wasn't in the right mind to consent to sex. Speaking of gender double-standards!
There is a really simple solution: don't be easy. If you don't think women make themselves easy, then don't make yourself easy as a man. This is really just a problem that men have, it isn't a woman's fault that a guy will just say "Yes, lets have sex."
I have, but this turned more into a discussion of promiscuity and who is at fault if two people hook up at a bar and the guy has a girlfriend.
I wasn't really referring to the people like you here, who came in read the comments, and gave their two scene on what the conversation had evolved into, I was more referring to the people who drove the the conversation down that road. I just don't think Cathrine is the right game to argue about sexism over, as both sexes are basically just used as placeholders for the player to fill in.
But yeah, I wasn't really referring to you, you were just in Rome doing as the Romans do.
Oh, I see. Never mind then.
report
60)   13 January 2012 1:53 pm
GotY - Catherine
Posts: 6252
Joined: 18 Apr 2010
And men are any better? No they are ENCOURAGED by society to sleep with as many women as they want/can but women are slut shamed. Just because a woman enjoys sex she is automatically a slut or a whore or any other derogative word. And also, condoms protect against transference of STI's which is why condoms should be used. The pill only helps protect against pregnancy. Do your homework.
A woman should know what's she getting into. If she gets an STD, that's entirely her fault and no one elses. That's what comes with such promiscuity. Sleep with a guy and he gives you something? You have no leg to stand on.
As a woman I am offended that you appear to be putting all the blame just on women for feeling ashamed of sex. Especially as an adult woman who has had casual protected sex(as in condoms and birth control) with another consenting adult I am offended. Sex is a perfectly natural biological urge(yes I know there are asexuals who have no sexual urge and that is perfectly natural for them and a different topic altogether) and no one should have to feel ashamed of it. Exception would probably be rape(but once again that is another topic for a different day). Normal consensual sex between two consenting adults should be nothing to be ashamed of. This is is more backwards rather than forwards thinking. Stop with the slut shaming and put it to two consenting adults made a decision to sleep with each other for their own enjoyment and since it doesn't directly affect you, it is none of your damn business.
It does affect me because I have to put up with all the woman who flaunt themselves around. It's a chore to listen to and a chore to put up with them.
Oh, and to stay on topic, Catherine sucked.
report
61)   13 January 2012 2:00 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
And men are any better? No they are ENCOURAGED by society to sleep with as many women as they want/can but women are slut shamed. Just because a woman enjoys sex she is automatically a slut or a whore or any other derogative word. And also, condoms protect against transference of STI's which is why condoms should be used. The pill only helps protect against pregnancy. Do your homework.
A woman should know what's she getting into. If she gets an STD, that's entirely her fault and no one elses. That's what comes with such promiscuity. Sleep with a guy and he gives you something? You have no leg to stand on.
As a woman I am offended that you appear to be putting all the blame just on women for feeling ashamed of sex. Especially as an adult woman who has had casual protected sex(as in condoms and birth control) with another consenting adult I am offended. Sex is a perfectly natural biological urge(yes I know there are asexuals who have no sexual urge and that is perfectly natural for them and a different topic altogether) and no one should have to feel ashamed of it. Exception would probably be rape(but once again that is another topic for a different day). Normal consensual sex between two consenting adults should be nothing to be ashamed of. This is is more backwards rather than forwards thinking. Stop with the slut shaming and put it to two consenting adults made a decision to sleep with each other for their own enjoyment and since it doesn't directly affect you, it is none of your damn business.
It does affect me because I have to put up with all the woman who flaunt themselves around. It's a chore to listen to and a chore to put up with them.
Oh, and to stay on topic, Catherine sucked.
Your comment and forum title are sending me mixed messages. :P
report
62)   13 January 2012 2:08 pm
GotY - Catherine
Posts: 6252
Joined: 18 Apr 2010
RedEyesBlackGamer:
Your comment and forum title are sending me mixed messages. :P
Are you saying this whole thing was a parody to point out the stupidity of certain people on the thread that ended up with me being harshly quoted by two people who I in fact agree with completely?
You shame me to imply such a thing, sir.
report
63)   13 January 2012 2:09 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
RedEyesBlackGamer:
Your comment and forum title are sending me mixed messages. :P
Are you saying this whole thing was a parody to point out the stupidity of certain people on the thread that ended up with me being harshly quoted by two people who I in fact agree with completely?
You shame me to imply such a thing, sir.
I figured that you were trolling/being sarcastic. I've seen you post before and that was way out of character to me.
report
64)   13 January 2012 2:12 pm
GotY - Catherine
Posts: 6252
Joined: 18 Apr 2010
RedEyesBlackGamer:
I figured that you were trolling/being sarcastic. I've seen you post before and that was way out of character to me.
Wait, you've seen me post before and you think trolling/being sarcastic was way out of character for me?
I'm not sure you have seen me post before :P
report
65)   13 January 2012 2:18 pm
Infamous Scribbler
Posts: 579
Joined: 29 Aug 2011
I wish that there would be a future game with a morality system that allows you to make decisions that are not categorized by the obvious good and bad choices. Rather, your decisions will only effect the characters and environments around you, as some of your actions could create solutions and consequences to some, viewed differently among other characters, and cause you to make decisions that have less of a predictable and linear nature.
report
66)   13 January 2012 2:19 pm
Gone Gonzo
Posts: 3667
Joined: 14 Nov 2007
RedEyesBlackGamer:
Your comment and forum title are sending me mixed messages. :P
Are you saying this whole thing was a parody to point out the stupidity of certain people on the thread that ended up with me being harshly quoted by two people who I in fact agree with completely?
You shame me to imply such a thing, sir.
I was initially going to quite your post, under the assumption that you were trolling the OP and other posters who seem to think that women + sex = TEH EVILZ! I was going to congratulate you on how pitch perfect your satire was, and for maintaining it so brilliantly across several posts. Your satire, had it actually been there, was a perfect example of uber-conservative gender values taken to their logical extremes, and a brilliant reminder why I try my best everyday to be as progressive, open-minded person as possible when it comes to how I view and treat women.
Now though, I see that the satire isn't there, and you honestly believe these horrible things you say. I would like to add my voice to those calling you a horrible misogynist, and would personally like to say that you're an even more unpleasant fellow than that Stephen Colbert guy I've occasionally seen videos of...
report
67)   13 January 2012 2:19 pm
I am the killer, do not die.
Posts: 5037
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
RedEyesBlackGamer:
I figured that you were trolling/being sarcastic. I've seen you post before and that was way out of character to me.
Wait, you've seen me post before and you think trolling/being sarcastic was way out of character for me?
I'm not sure you have seen me post before :P
;)
OP: Are we going to discuss the game again anytime soon? I feel that the discussion currently going on deserves its own thread.
report
 (Pages: 1, 2)


I'm not responding to him because my ass would get banned but it would be something along the lines of "take your closeminded double standards and shove them up your arse"
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)