By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter said:
Ruler said:

First of all its you who sees it that way, i dont see anything sexual about that. And why hasnt valve contacted the devolopers back and asked him if he could remove some of the art or make changes? They obviously didnt, valve is the one whos shady here to me. 

If you watch the trailers there's a shot directly up one of the girls skirts whilst she sits on the toilet, the one who likes to break the school dress code is wearing a white LMAO. You don't have to see anything sexual about it but you can at least acknowledge that its obviously made with an objectifying gaze in mind. Valve simply do not want to work the developer who makes games fetishising 9 year olds. 

It seems to have a lot of "the harm is on the eye of the looker". 



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."