PULSE: One of the more heated topics of debate was over
the female scout armor. How much truth is there to the
argument that game developers try to exploit women to
appeal to male gamers? In your opinion, do you think CIG has
done so or will do so in the future?
modify or replace design components. A full game takes an
Idea - then someone to assign individual tasks. Designers do
their part and return the work for co-ordination with other
parts and then comes the changes and adds and subtracts and
redesign and on and on and on...
NUEBLUE: Fact: There are an overwhelming number of male
gamers compared to female players. Do gaming companies
exploit women? Absolutely, yes. Will Chris and RSI do the
same? I do not believe this has any priority or serious effect
on the game development. The pros and cons, based on the
forum posts, indicate that this is more ‘fun forum PVP’ than
serious. I think SC will simply avoid the subject as a goal since
spacesuits tend to be generic. Females will look like females
and males will look like males. The subject might be brought
up with avatars without spacesuits but I believe that Chris will
simply not allow any exploitation of any sexual subject be
allowed to affect game development in any major way. Make
the avatars and go on with business.
You could ask a developer like Chris for a more detailed
explanation of a computer game. Financing, logistics,
corporate overhead, inter-connectivity, communication flow,
programming, de-bugging - An article such as that is what he
might do - after he retires and has time to write a book. Not a
bad idea in fact but not now - please.
PULSE: How do you think CIG should handle previews of
works-in-progress moving forward?
NUEBLUE: By all means CIG should handle WIP previews
as they have done and I believe that should be continued.
Such previews carry an inherent risk of adverse reactions
to expectations as we have already seen. For example, the
Hornet release date and the change to DFM release. So far
the bala