E3 is only a week away, and so far, nothing's been leaked yet (probably a new record). So, I figure I might go the same route as yesteryear and make another predictions post (though this time not separate it by conference because that's a hell of a lot of work).
- The biggest part of the upcoming E3 will be, without a doubt, the official announcement of the "upgraded" consoles -- PS4 Neo, Xbox One whatever it is, and the NX. Though these new consoles have been advertised to not replace their current systems, I feel like that's not likely. Of course, that's not an E3 prediction -- my E3 prediction is that we'll be hearing a lot about these new consoles, as well as big releases to be shown as the spearheads of the new consoles -- one or two of them might be a special surprise to get people really interested.
- Based on news I forgot, this might already be deconfirmed -- but I feel like the smartest thing for Nintendo to do right now is show off a healthy amount of the new Zelda, as well as clear up some things about the game. Zelda's status has changed a million times -- from a Wii-U exclusive, to a Wii-U and NX game, to coming out on NX first, to who knows whatever it is. I feel like an extended demo with some concrete explanation will help the game.
- For Ubisoft, we'll likely see some footage of a new Assassins Creed or Far Cry or some yearly release game, as well as some more of the For Honor game they showed off last year. For Ubisoft's mandatory "special suprise" game, we'll probably be seeing Watch Dogs 2 -- a game that was already leaked earlier this year.
- Obviously, we'll be seeing both Battlefield 1 and Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare. Don't be surprised to see CoD trying to win back its audience after its reveal trailer bombed -- they're already announced an extended campaign demo on the floor, and they're likely to go even farther beyond that at Sony's conference.
- We'll probably see the last trailers for games coming out soon -- the most likely being The Last Guardian and FFXV. Also don't be surprised if we see even more of the FF7 Remake -- it seems like its a big deal for both Sony and Square Enix.
- As for this year's krazy prediction, I'm gonna say that there will be a FF7 Remake demo packaged with FFXV. I don't... really have anything to go off of on this. I mean, they put a FFXV demo inside Type-0, so the next logical conclusion is... this? Listen, my main reasoning for doing this is because I've had a strange feeling it was going to happen and if it does I want to say that I had a sick E3 2016 premonition.
Well, those are all my predictions for this year. I'll be sure to make a predictions review and wrap up post similar to how I did last year for E3. There will also probably be an episode of the AstukaGaming Podcast dedicated to E3, though it will take place a few days later.
----
Follow us on:
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Youtube
Monday, June 6, 2016
Thursday, June 2, 2016
"So what was with #IStandForHateSpeech on Twitter?"
Assuming you saw it trending last night, you're probably asking that question. I was asking that question as well, though I had a small bit of context.
The second I saw it, I knew it probably had something to do with the ... Gamegates? The Anti-Feminists? Not sure what they're calling themselves nowadays, but the point still stands. Anyway, a bit of research later and I found that the hashtag was in response to a European Union ban on all hate speech across major social networks. Okay, that makes a bit more sense -- here in the United States things tend to go more around the way of "You're allowed to say what you want, but you're going to have to suffer the consequences for it". A ban like that would likely never be allowed in the US, so its reasonable to believe that Americans -- particularly the young conservative "anti-SJW" kind -- would be very upset at such a ruling. And to be honest, it makes sense, and I too disagree with the ruling. So, that's it then? Actually not. In fact, that entire paragraph was just the context. In reality, this article will be answering a different central question:
Who the fuck thought this hashtag was a good idea?
Awhile back, I wrote an article called "Opposing Fronts: Why both Radical Feminism and Men's Rights are Stupid". Looking back on it, I don't really like a majority of the article because it feels like for the most part I was trying to stray away blame that I wasn't actually receiving. The whole thing seemed kind of pointless, except for one key part:
"...some moron somewhere decided it was a fantastic idea to name two opposite ends of the spectrum the same thing. Seriously, I used to have an early post up called "Feminists are fucking hilarious" because it was before radical feminists were even called anything, not even SJW. People just decided to go all "literally" on it, except "literally" isn't an extremely controversial topic that constantly gets confused on which one you're talking about. "Yeah, I saw a guy bashing feminism..." Which one? The one we all believe is wrong, or the one we all believe is right? I understand that most of us by this point have been able to find our own words for radical feminism besides just feminism, but I feel like there's just enough of the population who is using the same word for both that it STILL manages to be an issue."
And could this statement be ANY more right than with this case right here? Like I feel as though I don't even need to explain it any farther than that. Of COURSE the hashtag "IStandWithHateSpeech" is going to sound bad to practically EVERYONE who isn't involved in your movement, and isn't the point of a movement like, I don't know, to get other people into it? Like which autismo on 8chan stepped up and said "You know what? Know what we should call our hashtag? We should call it ISTANDFORHATESPEECH". And who AGREED WITH THAT? Who actually thought that was a good idea? If you gave people some fucking context on the topic, they would likely agree with you. But if you just say "I Stand with Hate Speech" they're going to think you're some sort of bigoted white supremacist. It's like saying "I hate white people" in a crowd of white people when in reality you're just talking about like the Nazis. And then you get mad at those white people and call them Nazis for liking the Nazis, but then the white people think you're just calling them Nazis because you hate th- listen the point is that this whole thing is really stupid and you all need to STOP
---
Twitter: @CodexofAegis
Facebook: facebook.com/CodexofAegis
The second I saw it, I knew it probably had something to do with the ... Gamegates? The Anti-Feminists? Not sure what they're calling themselves nowadays, but the point still stands. Anyway, a bit of research later and I found that the hashtag was in response to a European Union ban on all hate speech across major social networks. Okay, that makes a bit more sense -- here in the United States things tend to go more around the way of "You're allowed to say what you want, but you're going to have to suffer the consequences for it". A ban like that would likely never be allowed in the US, so its reasonable to believe that Americans -- particularly the young conservative "anti-SJW" kind -- would be very upset at such a ruling. And to be honest, it makes sense, and I too disagree with the ruling. So, that's it then? Actually not. In fact, that entire paragraph was just the context. In reality, this article will be answering a different central question:
Who the fuck thought this hashtag was a good idea?
Awhile back, I wrote an article called "Opposing Fronts: Why both Radical Feminism and Men's Rights are Stupid". Looking back on it, I don't really like a majority of the article because it feels like for the most part I was trying to stray away blame that I wasn't actually receiving. The whole thing seemed kind of pointless, except for one key part:
"...some moron somewhere decided it was a fantastic idea to name two opposite ends of the spectrum the same thing. Seriously, I used to have an early post up called "Feminists are fucking hilarious" because it was before radical feminists were even called anything, not even SJW. People just decided to go all "literally" on it, except "literally" isn't an extremely controversial topic that constantly gets confused on which one you're talking about. "Yeah, I saw a guy bashing feminism..." Which one? The one we all believe is wrong, or the one we all believe is right? I understand that most of us by this point have been able to find our own words for radical feminism besides just feminism, but I feel like there's just enough of the population who is using the same word for both that it STILL manages to be an issue."
And could this statement be ANY more right than with this case right here? Like I feel as though I don't even need to explain it any farther than that. Of COURSE the hashtag "IStandWithHateSpeech" is going to sound bad to practically EVERYONE who isn't involved in your movement, and isn't the point of a movement like, I don't know, to get other people into it? Like which autismo on 8chan stepped up and said "You know what? Know what we should call our hashtag? We should call it ISTANDFORHATESPEECH". And who AGREED WITH THAT? Who actually thought that was a good idea? If you gave people some fucking context on the topic, they would likely agree with you. But if you just say "I Stand with Hate Speech" they're going to think you're some sort of bigoted white supremacist. It's like saying "I hate white people" in a crowd of white people when in reality you're just talking about like the Nazis. And then you get mad at those white people and call them Nazis for liking the Nazis, but then the white people think you're just calling them Nazis because you hate th- listen the point is that this whole thing is really stupid and you all need to STOP
---
Twitter: @CodexofAegis
Facebook: facebook.com/CodexofAegis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)