I think the link is broken.

Will this be on steam for linux any time soon? Great progress.

Subhumans lack challenge in everyday life because they are not trying to comprehend the infinite wisdom of icy. That's why they are looking for fullfilment in games. Any human knows that games are only meant to lighten up your free time in a complex yet pleasurable and easy manner. Like mashing space and watching differential equasions being solved (which is actually exactly what happens in modern fps).

Yeah, Thus Spoke Zarathustra would also be way better if it was written by an AAA book writing team instead of just one independent writer.

SOUND EFFECTS
PLAYER INPUT
COLOURS AND SHAPES

But seriosuly, not enough people put screenshake in their games.

After watching the movie, were you unaware that Belfort had scammed hundreds of people for millions of dollars? Were you unaware that he was a drug-addict that was abusive to his wife and cheated on her?

I was fully aware, but I feel the movie was pulling people's attention away from those things. I think the universal knee-jerk reaction to the actual scamming scenes is admiring Belforts skills and laughing at the people he's scamming. The movie doesn't give you time to contemplate upon the fate of those scammed people, it's all fun and games.

If we're to continue with your Hitler analogy (Goodwin's Rule, hurrah!), it would be like showing Hitler being admired by his closest allies (who, naturally, shared his political beliefs), but at the same time seeing him giving orders that resulted in the murder of 11 million people, then still claiming that the movie went to great lengths to make us love Hitler.

Yeah this analogy was way too far-fetched, sorry. And I think this is due to the fact that murder is never acceptable in our sosciety, while there is a big culture around 'good thieves' and self-made people who play the system. I think even more so in my country, which suffered totalitarian rule for quite some time.

No, Belfort didn't kill anyone when driving high. Should the movie have warped the truth and have him kill someone even though he didn't in real life? Is drunk driving or driving while so high on drugs that you literally can't walk only wrong if you kill someone in the process? Did you really need the movie to hit you over the head like this?

Again, it's more about the image it creates than the actual things he's done. The high driving scene was supposed to be funny, I think it actually was, and as such I doubt many people are going 'oh god, how could he' upon seeing it. I fully expect people to root for him in this scene, so he could reach his destination intact and on time, I know I did.

And his family is fine because they'll have money? I'm sure having a scam-artist and drug-addict of a father who still spent 1½ years (I think) in jail isn't going to affect his daughter in any way whatsoever growing up... But, hey, they have money, so they'll be fine. Because that's what it's all about, having money, right?

For the characters in the movie, I think so, yeah.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. The movie does not go to great lengths to make us love Belfort. It shows us what a smooth-talking devil he is. It shows us why his colleagues and friends loved him (he made them money -- kinda superficial love, don't you think?). Does it rely on the audience to look beyond his speeches and his co-workers and friends' opinion of him? Sure. Does the movie have funny scenes were you're laughing at (again, as I mentioned before, I certainly don't hope you're laughing with) Belfort and his friends? Definitely. It's a black comedy. Does this mean that the movie is poorly made or somehow misses its mark? I don't think so. And all I'm really getting from the complaints is that the movie is perhaps a bit too nuanced instead of being the typical Hollywood mainstream movie where the bad guy gets taken down by the good cop. Good guy wins, bad guy loses. Leave the theater satisfied.

I definitely don't think the movie is poor or misses its mark. I think it is highly nuanced and forces the viewers to think for themselves instead of just absorbing the obvious opinions they are fed. But if one was to just absorb mindlessly what the narration shows then I think he would hold Belfort in admiration for his genius, charisma and humour, because this is what the narration strongly focuses on. This and his indulgent lifestyle which many people envy.

In real life I hate people like Belfort with all my guts but I also rarely pity people who let such individuals scam them. And I definitely laughed WITH Belfort many times throughout the movie, but I am probably a terrible person a little.

PS: The Wolf of Textwall

But the movie does show and tell what Belfort did, so that's not really an apt comparison. The stuff cactus mentioned isn't something that the movie just glosses over, it's long drawn out scenes. It's the entire core of the story. Belfort is a smooth-talking devil. But he's still a devil and an asshole. And the movie in no way tries to hide that.

As far as I remember the movie not once shows the results of people trusting their lives savings to Belfort, those are the real victims.
He didn't kill anyone when driving high, it was presented as a funny story. His family? They will probably somehow keep enough money to never work again.
Only his first wife was somehow concerned with the people he destroys, but that was just one scene.

On the other hand the movie shows his coworker crying and thanking him for turning her life around, it shows how great a guy he is when he saves the shoe guy speech and it shows him saving the life of his choking friend. Later he also warns him that he is collaborating, and guess what, his friend betrays him, solidifying his image as the 'good' guy.

I think the movie goes to great lenghts to make us love Belfort and it doesn't surprise me that this is how many people feel about him after watching it.

I'm pretty sure the segments also get shuffled around and aren't all the same every time. Sometimes there's a dead end where there was an intersection last time. But there is also a lot of fixed points throughout the levels.
All in all I think it's a great balance between random and crafted.

Instead I find it rather interesting that half of the people who saw the film basically lets all of this awful behavior slide simply because DiCaprio is charismatic and handsome (and as such can't possibly be a bad guy).

I think it's more due to him being both the main character and the narrator of the movie. The narrative never focuses for long on the people he screwed over, instead it focuses on how much fun he is having and how everyone at the office loves him. And he kinda is the best boss ever if you think about it.

I imagine that if they made a similar movie about Hitler, assuming nobody knew who Hitler was and what he actually done, then the audience would also root for the main guy - he was great at giving speeches too I heard.

the main thing is that she is letting her pants "drop", which is like a stripper-thing to do, whereas most people (both males and females) when removing their pants pull their pants down, they don't just let it drop to the floor from a standing position, so it seems somewhat unrealistic in that regard

I do that everytime my military pants are weighted down enough by whatever is in all the pockets - which is exactly what I see in this picture: saggy, heavy duty pants full of tools drop the moment you unhook the belt.
It's one of the reasons why I love it so much, she's done tinkreing with the suit, it's time for action, so she just drops all her mechanic gear and jump into the thing unrestricted by it.

- even if the dev sees nothing personally wrong with it, and even if there is objectively nothing wrong with, it's still true that it will cut into the game's audience. e.g. it'd not only cut down on the female audience a little, but like, fundamentalist christian parents wouldn't want their kids playing such a game if they see that animation. though even tasteful nudity has some of that problem, let alone fan service like this

You can't seriously think that good games are made by trying to cater to as wide an audience as possible, it's like the most un-indie thing to say.
And what fundamentalist christians would want their kids to play games where you kill demons with robots anyway?

- another thing is that even though it may be realistic (in the sense that it'd actually happen), not everything realistic has to be portrayed visually. it's also realistic that she would urinate and defecate, but you don't animate those (generally)

I'd say things that look awesome and add character are worth including.

Those pixels and animation are absolutely gorgeous! I think they might be the best I ever seen. I really hope that this becomes a finished game one day, I'd definitely buy it. Are you planning on linux support?

Also, I'm a disgusting MRA pig and I love the panties animation because it's sexy and full of grace.

The worst thing about this is that when the project inevitably fails he won't see it as his failure, only the failure of the devs, or even the audience.

I'd love to see good devs sign up for it, kick him from the team, and release an actually good game.

Update: There is some confusion over whether this will be an "independent" game. As a matter of fact, it will be a highly dependent one: everyone will be dependent on everyone else — no one will be independent. Hope that clears this up.

• all the best things from Deus Ex 3
• also totally the best part of Far Cry 2
• so much better than the above
• the biggest game team ever, like RE6!!!1

In order of bestest to least best:

Samurai Gunn

Mark of the Ninja FOR LINUX

Ridiculous Fishing

Well pepsi is clearly emotionally/psychologically/behaviourally superior.

In order of play:
Super Hexagon, Hotline Miami, Fez, Mark of the Ninja, Samurai Gunn.

Most of those are probably from last year, but I always lag behind on games. All in all a great year, as I think Hotline Miami, Super Hexagon and Samurai Gunn might currently be in my all time top 10.

I know a few female gamers, and none of them had problems with the third point. Some of them were getting lots of attention simply for being girls (especially when socialising with people in guilds etc) but they didn't mind it as far as they tell.

did you actually ask them or are you just assuming they don't care because they don't say anything? 
http://fatuglyorslutty.com/

They specifically talked about it.

it's not an opinion. gender stereotyping and claiming it's biology is massively sexist

IT'S NOT AN OPINION BECAUSE IT'S SEXIST.

It is a deterrent, a commonly reinforced one.
Before girls try to play games, they 'don't play games'.
When they try to play games anyway, they 'don't know how to play games'.
When they persist anyway, they 'are invading men's spaces' or they're 'asking for the attention' simply by being there.

I know a few female gamers, and none of them had problems with the third point. Some of them were getting lots of attention simply for being girls (especially when socialising with people in guilds etc) but they didn't mind it as far as they tell.

And the first two points are the same for everyone. It's actually funny, because you say that women don't lack "some imaginary man-specific visual and digital acuity" and yet you say that girls have a harder time getting into games because they have to learn how to play them?

[more]

I would not say that psychology is homogenous between any subsection of the human species. I'd say your bolded statement is one that I agree with. You cannot make assumptions about a persons mental profile based on their physiology. Even among individuals of a species, any species, there is bound to be a range of expression of behavioral traits. The reason they stand out more in other species, I'd guess, is that their niches require the species to remain relatively stable. A male lion that doesn't exhibit dominant behavior is far less likely to survive in an ecosystem where lions have had prides for thousands of years. In the human species, there is no selection for or against any behavioral traits, we are far too numerous, occupy more niches than any other single species on the planet, and have essentially no natural predators. A wider range of behaviors can be expected because there's no pressure towards any one or the other, and we are apparently capable of many.

I think this is very true, and is exactly the reason why our society becomes more and more varied and at the same time homogeneous, without clear divisions between social groups. But even though our gender predispositions are becoming less relevant and each individual can easily overcome them, they still play a role and even though it is not visible in any individual person it is visible when comparing groups statistically.

I'm a little lost here. All I claimed was that saying "women are emotionally, mentally and behaviorally different from men and that's a biological fact" is not actually a well reasoned or well documented scientific fact. I think it falls into the same category as racist "science" that seeks to use actual biological phenomena as a springboard for oppressive beliefs. I genuinely believe any person, man or woman, has the potential to have any thought any other person is capable of. That's how we learn.

I don't see how it can only be one or the other. The fact that we are psychologically different as a group doesn't imply it's not true that "any person, man or woman, has the potential to have any thought any other person is capable of". It only means that there is a pattern in how men vs women think when you look at the statistics. Of course it is unfair to use statistics when dealing with an individual person, but doesn't mean they are not true.

I would argue that the differences between men and women that play games are based on societal traditions and roles more than any kind of biological predisposition.

"More" is the keyword here, and I agree. But biological predispositions also play a role, and we live in times when societal traditions are less important with each passing day. People aren't lemmings blindly following whatever traditions and role models they saw in their own family, we all think for ourselves and our preferences aren't forced on us.
I really don't think when a woman likes to play Sims or Farmville it's because of the oppressive society, and she definitely doesn't think that either, she just likes to play it.