dium

Anyway, I don't understand how anyone could dislike Yoshi's Island. It's one of the most stylish, and most inventive (especially for its time) platformers. I'm reminded of the episode of Idle Thumbs where Zack Johnson voiced his distaste for the game, and I was hoping he'd get into why... but then he didn't. (this was also the episode where folks pooped on Majoras Mask without a given reason, it was a frustrating episode)

Are you trying not to be taken seriously on purpose?

It's much, much better. I can't remember much tutorializing at all (although I'm sure there was some). After Skyward Sword, the only direction was up, really.

This rule makes me sad. So many amazing games are hidden behind bad or non-existent documentation or in-game tutorials. It's not like I can argue with it, though; why should I invest in a game that can't be bothered to explain itself? (because the game might be a Minecraft or a KSP or a Crusader Kings, is the answer to that question)

This demo is gonna be available to everyone before the game releases, right? It's not gonna be limited distribution demo code only the entire time, right?

Very quickly looking up Nerdcore (it's an old webcomic) implies to me that it can't be serious; it's a comedy and the artstyle is a sort of inexpert/amateurish computer art thing that I seriously doubt could be used for titillation. I know the internet exists, nobody has to try and prove me wrong.

I watch a lot of bootleg Japanese daytime television (and commercials on youtube) because I'm a stupid, dumb nostalgia whore and Japanese ads and cooking shows somehow scratch that itch. But anyway, Japanese TV does this thing where they play 10-30 seconds of some song before immediately switching to something else, and Fly Me To The Moon shows up all the time in that context too. Also in a good number of advertisements. It's just a really popular song across the board, for some reason.

I played the original Bayonetta and the intro/first level with Fly Me To The Moon in it was so gloriously outrageous and fun. My interest in the game pretty rapidly fell off from that point on, though. I plan to buy a Wii U some time next month (4 smash of course), and everybody raving about Bayonetta 2 has me considering it... but if it isn't much different from the first one then I probably should skip it.

I quite liked The Dig, but I think I liked it as much as I did because I played it recently and not back when it came out (or when I was playing a lot of Adventure Games, which was a period shortly after the release of CMI). It's not a top, or even middle-tier Lucasarts adventure. But put into the landscape of post-lucasarts adventure games and it makes a really good impression. And now that I put that into words, it's a bit depressing.

I'm with you there. But continuing to support/develop for a game after its release is a relatively modern video game thing that it feels surprising to have Nintendo participate in. And good.

In contrast, I don't think Deanna Troi's similarly non-standard-issue form-fitting one-piece costume is ever explained. As far as I can tell, anyway. Then one episode somebody essentially goes "why are you wearing that?", no answer is given, and from then on she wears a Starfleet uniform like everyone else. So not this trope, is what I'm saying.

They seem to have been really good value so far. Also, Nintendo DLC represents (for me at least) Nintendo actually trying to compete in the current century of video games. Which is heartening.

Should the definition be gender-specific? Not leading or rhetorical, a real question. My gut answer was no. But after thinking about it, the implications of this trope with a male character are so different that it isn't really the same thing at any scale. I can't actually come up with any male examples so it may be moot.

How about... "When a character's behavior or appearance seemingly serves as sexual titilation/fan service, but has some in-fiction explanation meant to legitimize it."

Yep, understood. I always feel the compulsion to bring that up either way.

I'm not accusing anyone in here of doing this, but one gross implication that tends to pop up in conversations like this one is that large busts are inherently sexual in a way smaller ones aren't. I guess the fact that some writer would feel the need to "justify" a body-type like that is an example of how pervasive this unfortunate attitude is.

I guess I agree. But then I also think that the judgement-less version of this trope is extremely broad and largely uninteresting, and so, maybe, trying to define this phenomenon as a "trope" is similarly uninteresting. To be clear, the distinction I see here isn't one of execution quality, it's intent. The idea that something is being "justified" at all. In my hypothetical example, a story about strippers, is the story "justifying" the sexualized appearance of the subjects when the story is about their sex work? I mean, I suppose it is. But is this a trope worth pointing out? And in case it comes up: I generally subscribe to a "death of the author" attitude when it comes to serious literary/entertaiment criticism. I'm aware that my earlier statements would seem to contradict that. Oh well.

I personally find the concept more useful when it includes sexualization of any kind, wardrobe simply being the most common. But the essence of the trope remains the same whether we sub-categorize it or not, I think. And to more concisely state my opinion: when we discuss this trope we are absolutely talking about instances where the backstory seems to be there to justify the sexy; that's what makes it a trope of any interest at all. Either we choose to reflect that in our definition or we don't. If we do, the definition can't be very rigorous and (ultimately) becomes an exercise in guessing authorial intent. If we don't, the definition becomes (as Reyturner put it) "character is written to be conventionally sexy for any reason". I guess either works for me.

I'm starting to see things like Reyturner, actually: the problem with this trope, as defined, is that it comes from a place of assumed intent. It assumes that the character's backstory is there to support him/her being sexualized, and not the other way around. That's a pretty easy, probably safe assumption to make for a large percentage of entertainment media (especially in video games). But it's still an assumption, and quality of execution is absolutely not the only subjective element here. I don't think a serious (or any) story about a stripper/sex worker would fit into this trope, for example. I think Inara from Firefly probably does, but I recognize that I'm making a judgement call. There's definitely points in between that are even fuzzier. NOTE: I still like the idea of this trope and think it's useful to have an (awesome) term for it and to point it out, but I don't think it's possible to eliminate subjectivity from its definition (or even reduce it very much).

I ended up getting this. It was a curious decision on my part: I joked about the 3D boobs making this an "insta-buy", but in reality, the only function of the character designs is to make me feel self conscious and to prevent me from playing the game in public. But, I had a craving for a good looking 2d single plane platformer on my 3DS and Shantae seemed to be on the top of that heap. And it does look gorgeous (cringeworthy boobalicious talk sprites aside). I haven't played enough to comment on the gameplay, but it's very promising.

This might be the only definition where the venn diagram of this trope and simply "having a sexualized character design" isn't dangerously close to full overlap. I'd put it as having "a backstory that serves to legitimize a sexualized design" within the context of the fiction, and that the reason given isn't "because it's hot" (which is the real-world reason or course). I agree, Bayonetta wouldn't qualify for the same reason a porno wouldn't. Unless there's some sort of "power of libido" conceit that I'm unaware of, Bayonetta's powers work the way they do because "it's hot" and I don't think it's ever argued otherwise.

Kill la Kill is aggressively and unapologetically this trope. It comes off somewhat differently because they're so transparent about it (and because the trope is also its entire premise), but at a fundamental level it definitely applies.

Welp, if my SD card still has enough space to download it, I'm probably gonna buy it. If it doesn't have enough space to download it, I'll be sad about how buying a bigger SD card is now a thing I have to do.

I can imagine it being a pain in the ass to implement. But that's not a hardware limitation, and a lot of things are a pain in the ass to implement.

Yeah, I'm more excited by the idea that Nintendo may continue to develop things for Smash after release than I am for Mewtwo specifically.