>>420242
Aw, I see the flawless strategy of "
Endlessly ridicule the very people who you are trying to convince to give you money" is alive and well. Also who are those two?
>>420246
The entire argument is a deflection in the first place. On the one hand, the reality is that games are fictional productions, meaning that you do not need to adhere to "realistic" standards of beauty in the first place because none of it is real. Then on the other hand, it's ignoring the reality that there are very attractive women out there, and games have used some of those lucky ladies for modeling purposes for decades when it came to designing female characters. So what's actually going on is that they want people to stop having standards for what you consider to be appealing and attractive, and the fact that people are not accepting that argument makes them angry.
>>420259
>>420262
>>420263
Does anyone remember that Valve adopted the episodic model in the first place because it was suppose to "decrease" the amount of time between game releases?