Cyberpunk's creator slams critics who claim Cyberpunk 2077 is racist / inaccurate to the source, refutes their claims

[SupremeGOAT]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm not into shooters, but I still write reviews for shooters after playing them. Why? Any input is valuable. Doesn't matter if it's my two most hated franchises, Battlefield and CoD by IW, or my two favorites, R6Siege and CoD by 3ARC. We are all allowed to provide press coverage for anything.

It is pointless to have a vegan review a cheeseburger. Do you know why there are prerequisites to judge a competition? why not let any vagabond be a literal judge? 

 

Google: A target market refers to a group of customers to whom a company wants to sell its products and services, and to whom it directs its marketing efforts. 

 

The same reason you don't let a person who only plays madden and fifa review Sekiro is the same reason you don't let a person who has all the CoDs review harvest moon. Some people like a specific genre that caters to them and the reviewer may or may not share that sentiment. IF YOU ASKED ME TO REVIEW ANY ANIMAL CROSSING GAME "1/10 MONKEY SHIT" i tried it and hated it its sooo stupid. I would be telling the truth from my perspective but why would i even bother reviewing the next and greatest animal crossing if i know that's not my flavor? Games Journalism is obsolete, watching gameplay, understand the story and a quick forum scope/steam reviews can let you know if you want to play a game or not. EFF Granddad

[ARikozuM]

18 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

It was also Game Informer years ago.

Those f@#$ing cunts!

 

I had three mags of theirs, total shit. Superman 64 is great. - IGN GI

[ARikozuM]

23 minutes ago, SupremeGOAT said:

It is pointless to have a vegan review a cheeseburger. Do you know why there are prerequisites to judge a competition? why not let any vagabond be a literal judge? 

Again. Freedom of expression. I'm not going to stop one person from talking just because they're against me. I will respond back and do respond back. 

 

A gamer is a gamer. The reader can do their own homework and make a decision by themselves. 

 

As someone eating a high protein (meat-derived) diet, am I not allowed to review vegan burger? Of course I am. The reader also has the right to say I'm a carnivore POS. My meat bias is going to cloud the review, but that doesn't stop me from making a review. 

[SupremeGOAT]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Again. Freedom of expression. I'm not going to stop one person from talking just because they're against me. I will respond back and do respond back. 

 

A gamer is a gamer. The reader can do their own homework and make a decision by themselves. 

Freedom of expression is fine... what if the person does not know what they are talking about? What if I SupremeGOAT were to write an article on a major "gaming news" website stating that Animal Crossing: Wild World is the worst game ever released on the 3DS. I go on to state how uneventful and meaningless the game is with its limited mechanics, nonexistent story and lackluster gameplay 1/10 offensive. That article would represent what that particular "gaming news" website thinks of the game. The average person who would otherwise enjoy that kind of stuff would not even give that game a second look because "I" didn't like it. Freedom of expression can be done in the review section of steam or the games forum. Claiming to know what you're talking about (when in reality you are not about that life) is the same as lying.

 

(Sekiro is not for everyone- Not just anyone should review Sekiro) True/False?

 

[Technous285]

6 hours ago, miagisan said:

Do you one better,

 

Imagine Mel Brook's movies being released today.

 

Blazing Saddles would literally start a new civil war in this country lol

 

(yes i am showing my age with these movie references)

Hell, Monty Python would be harassed and abused to hell and back if they tried making their movies and skits today, like Life of Brian.

 

I personally pre-ordered CyberPunk 2077 as it seems to have an interesting story and gameplay, whilst letting me have a character creator that doesn't trap me in the "male/female" binary like 95% of other games do until you mod the fuck out of them (see: Skyrim & Fallout 4 and certain non-Nexus mods to allow you to play as a MtF or FtM trans person). <take a wild guess as to why I prefer playing trans, or at least female characters when possible.>

 

Would it be nice to have more games with character creators that don't limit you to just "Male/Female" as the options? Sure, but I get why that might not always be feasible for all game devs to implement (like breaking the duality it might "go against" some form of gender-based power dynamic in the fantasy world they build, based upon how things were in the real world during a time like the Middle Ages. or the devs are just lazy or they don't wanna piss off people who play their games but think there's just a single binary for both sex and gender).

[ARikozuM]

7 minutes ago, SupremeGOAT said:

Freedom of expression is fine... what if the person does not know what they are talking about? What if I SupremeGOAT were to write an article on a major "gaming news" website stating that Animal Crossing: Wild World is the worst game ever released on the 3DS. I go on to state how uneventful and meaningless the game is with its limited mechanics, nonexistent story and lackluster gameplay 1/10 offensive. That article would represent what that particular "gaming news" website thinks of the game. The average person who would otherwise enjoy that kind of stuff would not even give that game a second look because "I" didn't like it. Freedom of expression can be done in the review section of steam or the games forum. Claiming to know what you're talking about (when in reality you are not about that life) is the same as lying.

You'd be able to write that review. If we're talking about a publisher, they have the right to place your review up or not by the editor. You, as a general gamer, are entirely allowed to review any game as you like. I can agree that WW is uneventful and meaningless. I would still look at other reviews.  

7 minutes ago, SupremeGOAT said:

(Sekiro is not for everyone- Not just anyone should review Sekiro) True/False?

I'm not taking a T/F on a two point question. 

 

Quote

(Sekiro is not for everyone-

True.

Quote

Not just anyone should review Sekiro

False. 

[Chett_Manly]

One my favorite things about this is that the Games Journos decided to attack YouTubers, and YouTubers are now lighting them up. 

 

Yong leaving no survivors.

 

 

[Derangel]

3 hours ago, SupremeGOAT said:

It is pointless to have a vegan review a cheeseburger. Do you know why there are prerequisites to judge a competition? why not let any vagabond be a literal judge? 

 

Google: A target market refers to a group of customers to whom a company wants to sell its products and services, and to whom it directs its marketing efforts. 

 

The same reason you don't let a person who only plays madden and fifa review Sekiro is the same reason you don't let a person who has all the CoDs review harvest moon. Some people like a specific genre that caters to them and the reviewer may or may not share that sentiment. IF YOU ASKED ME TO REVIEW ANY ANIMAL CROSSING GAME "1/10 MONKEY SHIT" i tried it and hated it its sooo stupid. I would be telling the truth from my perspective but why would i even bother reviewing the next and greatest animal crossing if i know that's not my flavor? Games Journalism is obsolete, watching gameplay, understand the story and a quick forum scope/steam reviews can let you know if you want to play a game or not. EFF Granddad

There are A LOT of problems with modern journalism in general, not just the gaming sector, but trying to discard all of it is doing nothing but buying into a corporate agenda. The mega publishers would love all gaming coverage to be from "influencers". They're a lot easier to pay off and no one even thinks twice about their favorite "influencer" playing and raving about some hot new game. They would also love to be able to control the message and get rid of "pesky" things like exposes that call out their shitty working conditions, articles talking about how much such and such person was paid to play a game, all of that loot box and microtransaction talk, anything that casts them in anything remotely close to a negative light. ALL of that gets lost without games journalism. Even with its myriad of problems, games journalism is still vital to keeping consumers informed. The goal should be fix the problems, not to discard it entirely.

[Lathlaer]

5 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm not into shooters, but I still write reviews for shooters after playing them. Why? Any input is valuable. Doesn't matter if it's my two most hated franchises, Battlefield and CoD by IW, or my two favorites, R6Siege and CoD by 3ARC. We are all allowed to provide press coverage for anything. 

Yeah, sorry if I sounded that people shouldn't write those reviews. That stance was too narrow and too radical when I think about it.

 

Though the preferences of the reviewer are important factor (to me) when I read one. If I see someone slam the latest Avengers movie but know that the guy is a huge fan of black and white neo-noir cinema, I know that while he didn't enjoy the movie, it might not mean that I won't enjoy it. Sure, he can write whatever he wants because freedom of expression and whatnot but I will probably ignore most of it.

[mr moose]

Maybe the whole world just needs to burn and start again.   I mean, it's not hard to put human differences behind us and train ourselves not to be scared of other cultures,  but instead we seem to decide that being an indecent dick is more appropriate or that we need to shovel a socialist rhetoric so hard it loses all meaning.

 

 

[EldritchMoose]

17 hours ago, RuffRuffmcgruff said:

So my argument is still valid then. Sure snowflakes have been around for all of history but you've only reinforced my point, now only really since the introduction of social media has it given people a stage.

 

I think someones triggered considering the amount of people you quoted lol

If your argument doesn't hinge on it being a thing that is just bad "these days," yes. People get offended. I just pointed out that this is hardly a problem specific to this time period or even at its most prolific.

 

Or I just came to a discussion 20 hours in and wanted to poke holes into poorly-reasoned arguments by taking them to their logical extremes or questioning them in other ways. It's a style of commentary I learned from watching South Park and Monty Python, that should be an indication of how easily I get triggered. Hell, I am literally more offended by the fact that "triggered lol" is the best you could come up with.

15 hours ago, Lathlaer said:

But there is a vested interest in having a fan of a genre review something from that genre.

 

If a game is catered towards anime fans there is little point in giving it to anime hater for review because he doesn't represent the target audience for the game.

 

If I am a fan of Baldur's Gate style of RPG, I want another enthusiast to review games like Pillars of Eternity, Divinity Original Sin or future BG3 so I don't have to hear that the isometric graphics sucks or that there is too much text compared to Dragon Age or smth. I want to hear about pros and cons within specific set of criteria that define the genre, not which aspects of the genre itself suck or not.

And exactly because a fan of something has a vested interest in the product being well-received, I would argue that someone who isn't a fan of a game's genre or its source material will give me a better idea about a game's flaws. Of course this would require that the writer in question is a skilled writer. At least I know for certain that someone who wasn't planning on liking a game will list everything they can find that's wrong with the game, whereas someone who writes a glowing review of the newest hyped-up game that manages to find every possible synonym for the words "buy," "it" and "now" will not give me any indication about whether or not I will like the game. After all, not every game that reviews well will necessarily also be something I enjoy and inversely, not every game I enjoy is reviewed positively.

 

If a writer is good enough at writing, they'll be able to convey whether or not they dislike a Dragonball Z game because it's based on an anime he doesn't like, because it's based on an art form he doesn't like or because the game just isn't enjoyable. I have much more use for a viewpoint that aims to make me hate something because it gives me a list of negative points for which I can decide whether or not I agree they are negative. I was around for the launch of Ultima 9. It received glowing reviews. It was a buggy disjointed mess that I regret buying to this day.

15 hours ago, Lathlaer said:

If it's positive, sure. If it's negative because of it, it brings literally nothing to the table.

This is literally the opposite of what a critic's job is. Anyone capable of critical thought benefits from critical reviews regardless of the biases the reviewer brings.

14 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Some people just need to politicize everything.^

I'd go even further and say that too many things are needlessly politicized these days by people, corporations and politicians alike. I don't think art really falls into this category because art tends to be political anyway. We live in a world that has managed to politicize the right to refuse service, the right to fly a battle flag of a long-defeated enemy and even the nomenclature of a particular style of fried potato pieces.

 

Life could be so much better if we focused on solving the problem rather than complaining about examples of the problem.

12 hours ago, SenpaiKaplan said:

This thread is exactly 2 seconds from being locked, lmao.

 

Cyberpunk 2077 is a game, for those of you who didn't notice. Why are all of you taking it so seriously?

We're taking it all seriously because this thread is about an article that takes the game way too seriously. It gets derailed because this is a political thread and politics is totally serious business.

3 hours ago, SupremeGOAT said:

Freedom of expression is fine... what if the person does not know what they are talking about? What if I SupremeGOAT were to write an article on a major "gaming news" website stating that Animal Crossing: Wild World is the worst game ever released on the 3DS. I go on to state how uneventful and meaningless the game is with its limited mechanics, nonexistent story and lackluster gameplay 1/10 offensive. That article would represent what that particular "gaming news" website thinks of the game. The average person who would otherwise enjoy that kind of stuff would not even give that game a second look because "I" didn't like it. Freedom of expression can be done in the review section of steam or the games forum. Claiming to know what you're talking about (when in reality you are not about that life) is the same as lying.

If you were to do a better job of detailing why it would be the worst game ever released (and in particular, manage to avoid that level of hyperbole because games that were released onto Steam Greenlight without EXE files exist and are objectively worse than a game that could actually boot), I don't see an issue with your review. It would be easy enough to tell that you're not a fan of the Animal Crossing formula and the rest of your review would be read through that lens.

 

Having too many poorly-written reviews like that usually ends up reflecting more poorly on the website, its editorial staff of just the reviewer themselves. If I read that a game is so bad that it killed the reviewer's firstborn, I'm sure as hell going to check out other reviews to see if this was an isolated incident or if the game appears to be made with the intent of infanticide. And even then it would not necessarily be a dealbreaker because I don't have any children for the game to kill.

Quote

(Sekiro is not for everyone- Not just anyone should review Sekiro) True/False?

Sekiro is not for everyone, nor does it have to be. That said, I get more from people who are critical about Sekiro than I get from the people who give it a perfect score because "it's soooooo hard!" and detailing how much the reviewer in question has their self-worth tied to their ability to finish a difficult game.

 

I like a challenging game, but I no longer have the time to spend 4 consecutive hours trying to kill the same boss. Perfect-score reviews will not tell me if there are many boss fights in the game that will make me feel like I'm bashing my head against a wall for 4 hours, critical reviews will.

20 minutes ago, Lathlaer said:

Yeah, sorry if I sounded that people shouldn't write those reviews. That stance was too narrow and too radical when I think about it.

 

Though the preferences of the reviewer are important factor (to me) when I read one. If I see someone slam the latest Avengers movie but know that the guy is a huge fan of black and white neo-noir cinema, I know that while he didn't enjoy the movie, it might not mean that I won't enjoy it. Sure, he can write whatever he wants because freedom of expression and whatnot but I will probably ignore most of it.

his is the crux of my argument above. I tend to base my purchase decisions on negative reviews rather than positive ones because I want to know what issues I can expect and decide for myself if those are issues I can't handle either. It all comes down to reasoning why. The article that launched this thread does a good job of pointing out why the writer doesn't like the game based on what was presented. For me, the writer's problems are not dealbreakers, so it didn't really affect my opinion on the game.

[RuffRuffmcgruff]

23 minutes ago, EldritchMoose said:

Hell, I am literally more offended by the fact that "triggered lol" is the best you could come up with. 

Triggered lol

[EldritchMoose]

14 minutes ago, RuffRuffmcgruff said:

Triggered lol

[Lathlaer]

1 hour ago, EldritchMoose said:

I like a challenging game, but I no longer have the time to spend 4 consecutive hours trying to kill the same boss. Perfect-score reviews will not tell me if there are many boss fights in the game that will make me feel like I'm bashing my head against a wall for 4 hours, critical reviews will.

A perfect score review might as well give you that kind of information, only for some people it would be on the "pros" side of the note. Some people like to be challenged and like the feeling of elation that finally overcoming a hard obstacle can give. 

 

Inversely, a critical review might contain information that the game is too easy for them. 

 

One man's con is another man's pro which is why I pick my reviewers carefully and try to find those, whose interests align with mine. 

 

That way I don't have to roll my eyes when someone lists "too much text to read" when reviewing Pillars of Eternity, for example.

 

Though I do agree that there is inherent danger of being too biased in the opposite direction and this is also not a good thing.

[Lathlaer]

3 hours ago, Derangel said:

There are A LOT of problems with modern journalism in general

 I think today's journalism apparent problem is frequent huge gap between opinions of the professionals and the audience scores. You see it in games and in movies but I have this feeling that the phenomennon is getting much more out of hand lately and to be fair, both sides are to blame here (journalists not being critical enough and audience trashing titles left and right without any regard of what consists of properly formulated argument).

 

It doesn't look good when you pull up a game review and see the critic score in the high 7's-low 8s and audience score orbiting around 3-4/10. The first thought is probably that the journalists are disconnected from their audience preferences but as always, the truth is somewhere inbetween.

[Derangel]

5 hours ago, Lathlaer said:

 I think today's journalism apparent problem is frequent huge gap between opinions of the professionals and the audience scores. You see it in games and in movies but I have this feeling that the phenomennon is getting much more out of hand lately and to be fair, both sides are to blame here (journalists not being critical enough and audience trashing titles left and right without any regard of what consists of properly formulated argument).

 

It doesn't look good when you pull up a game review and see the critic score in the high 7's-low 8s and audience score orbiting around 3-4/10. The first thought is probably that the journalists are disconnected from their audience preferences but as always, the truth is somewhere inbetween.

There is always going to be a disparity between critics and audiences. Aggragate score sites (Metacritic, OpenCritic, RT, etc) are a terrible way to judge a game"S reception as they all weigh critic and user scores differently. On top of that the "professional" reviews are a mix between seasoned and relatively new critics. Reviewers that have been doing this stuff for years (especially the handful with over a decade of experience) tend to be a lot more jaded than newer reviewers. In general, reviewers are going to have a very different take on something than people who only play a handful of games per year and are able to spend more time with them. Can you imagine trying to burn through something like an Ubisoft open-world game in under a week while needing to do as much side shit as possible? That's going to drastically change how you view it vs someone playing it over the course or weeks and picking and choosing what to do at their leisure.

[Derangel]

2 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

What if the negative review brings nothing more than "Anime sucks, so this game is bad!"  Or, a positive review is just "I love anime, this game is the best!"  My problem is with biased reviews and paid reviews.  I base my purchase on fair critical reviews.  I want to know about the combat system, bugs, ripoff dlc, stuff locked behind paywalls, story, themes, other gameplay mechanics, and so on.  Not 3 year old whining or fanboy reviews.  You shouldn't be a reviewer basing your review on money or biased reasoning is the thing.  It adds nothing of value.

There is no such thing as a nonbiased review. Reviews are opinions and our biases influence our opinions all the time. Outside of obvious things like good writing/speaking ability and being able to properly explain your thoughts, one of the key differences between a good reviewer and a bad reviewer is that a good reviewer is honest about their biases and doesn't allow them to be the singular focus of the review. Almost everything about video games is subjective, which means our biases (preferences) color everything. People love to throw around the word "bias" as if its some kind of negative thing, but it isn't. Humans are incapable of being truly objective, we are not machines.

 

If I were to try to write a review of something like DBZ: Budokai Tenkaichi 3 (probably my favorite anime game) I'd talk about the shallow fighting mechanics, the overuse of repeated special moves, how so many characters feel the same, the reliance on joke characters (something I, personally, hate in fighting games), how buggy the game can be, and so on. However, my love of DBZ, all the crazy match ups the game allows and how good it manages to capture the spectacle of the series is going to change how I present my over-all opinion. There is no getting around that. Heck, even comments on the fighting mechanics would be colored by me having grown up playing fighting games like SF2, MK, Virtua Fighter, etc. That is going to change how I judge fighting systems in games vs someone that primarily plays and prefers "accessible" fighters.

[melete]

Jim Sterling’s Final Fantasy XIII review will never not be relevant (can’t believe that was nearly 9 years ago).

 

 

[SupremeGOAT]

15 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

You, as a general gamer, are entirely allowed to review any game as you like.

and put it under the product page with my rating along with everybody else. Not coerce the general public with my uneducated view of the product from a pedestal. The Vox Populi holds significantly greater value now more than ever seeing how games "Journalism" has degraded to political slander. Imagine missing the days when the "journalists" were just paid off to write something positive or straight up plagiarised their reviews. Not everyone's opinion should be headlined, only qualified personnel. Being a professional reviewer is an occupation, just having an opinion does not qualify you for the job more so if that opinion is vacuous.

 

The reviews listed under an item on Amazon provided a wider field of view than a single person reviewing 1 item in an Article.

The reviews listed on steam provide pinpoint and up to date listings of pros and cons as they arise as opposed to an article that is released on launch day.

 

In conclusion, anyone can review anything but professional reviews should be done by qualified personnel.

[SupremeGOAT]

13 hours ago, Derangel said:

There are A LOT of problems with modern journalism in general, not just the gaming sector, but trying to discard all of it is doing nothing but buying into a corporate agenda. The mega publishers would love all gaming coverage to be from "influencers". They're a lot easier to pay off and no one even thinks twice about their favorite "influencer" playing and raving about some hot new game. They would also love to be able to control the message and get rid of "pesky" things like exposes that call out their shitty working conditions, articles talking about how much such and such person was paid to play a game, all of that loot box and microtransaction talk, anything that casts them in anything remotely close to a negative light. ALL of that gets lost without games journalism. Even with its myriad of problems, games journalism is still vital to keeping consumers informed. The goal should be fix the problems, not to discard it entirely.

Reddit was responsible for blowing up and making aware the loot box travesty of Star Wars Battlefront II. A single person calculated the hours it would take to acquire all the items through free play. The moment a problem arises with a game you can see it under its review page on steam, Amazon or a forum. The integral purpose of games "journalism" is to provide information on a game that may influence the decision of a potential buyer. The category of information provided can be listed.

• Genre
• Gameplay
• Story
• Platform
• Release Date
• Additional Purchases 

Games "journalism" is not required to get any of this information and reviews from the product pages or public forums hold more weight than from a single source.

 

Please, explain what we can get from games "journalism" that we absolutely can't get anywhere else.

[ARikozuM]

Quote

In conclusion, anyone can review anything but professional reviews should be done by qualified personnel.

It's your job as a consumer to denounce idiotic campaigns. All of this information is available from the product page for a game. Vox made their decision to post this fluff, but it's now our job to tell they're wrong without taking away freedom of speech. 

 

It's not an "ignore it and they'll go away" issue. It's just a "respond back and they'll go away" issue. 

 

There's a reason we've all been given the ability to write reviews for games and products. It's because we have a voice that's more powerful than any single reviewer. 

[SupremeGOAT]

12 hours ago, EldritchMoose said:

If you were to do a better job of detailing why it would be the worst game ever released (and in particular, manage to avoid that level of hyperbole because games that were released onto Steam Greenlight without EXE files exist and are objectively worse than a game that could actually boot), I don't see an issue with your review. It would be easy enough to tell that you're not a fan of the Animal Crossing formula and the rest of your review would be read through that lens.

 

Having too many poorly-written reviews like that usually ends up reflecting more poorly on the website, its editorial staff of just the reviewer themselves. If I read that a game is so bad that it killed the reviewer's firstborn, I'm sure as hell going to check out other reviews to see if this was an isolated incident or if the game appears to be made with the intent of infanticide. And even then it would not necessarily be a dealbreaker because I don't have any children for the game to kill.

When you read an article from a gaming "journalist" on gaming news website about a particular game, what exactly are you looking for?

[DezGalbie]

It's amazing the sense of entitlement which some people exude towards ownership of the art and expression of other people.

As some have said in this thread (and many others I'm sure would agree) the best advice is - if you don't like the game then don't play it.

But that's not enough for these people. They aren't content with deciding what is right for them, they insist upon dictating to others as well. It's a strange sort of entitlement. We wouldn't accept any of our elected officials having such a heavy-handed control over our expression and artwork, so why does anyone pay the slightest attention to random rainbow-haired Macbook tappers who like to play journalist, and who haven't been appointed as our collective representative on anything at all?

I guess it's all just the tribalism of ideologies. If your ideology naturally aligns with the ravings of the rainbow-haired then you are more likely to play along and treat them as an authority because it bolsters your side having another "authority" to point to. If your ideology opposes them then you are more likely to question their "authority".

[Derangel]

3 hours ago, SupremeGOAT said:

Reddit was responsible for blowing up and making aware the loot box travesty of Star Wars Battlefront II. A single person calculated the hours it would take to acquire all the items through free play. The moment a problem arises with a game you can see it under its review page on steam, Amazon or a forum. The integral purpose of games "journalism" is to provide information on a game that may influence the decision of a potential buyer. The category of information provided can be listed.

• Genre
• Gameplay
• Story
• Platform
• Release Date
• Additional Purchases 

Games "journalism" is not required to get any of this information and reviews from the product pages or public forums hold more weight than from a single source.

 

Please, explain what we can get from games "journalism" that we absolutely can't get anywhere else.

And it never would have gotten the attention it did without the gaming press reporting on it all over. We wouldn’t have governments looking into loot boxes without the combined efforts of gamers and the gaming press. You also very conveniently ignore everything else I mentioned.

 

No, the purpose of games journalism is to report on the game industry. Be that reviews, news, or real investigative pieces. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

[Video Beagle]

On 6/19/2019 at 10:18 AM, NumLock21 said:

I've seen much worse. I think it was some Asian washing machine commercial or something. lol

The commercial is a chain of women removing their shirts and turning into other people...I think an asian woman became the black woman and the white woman became a latin woman...been a while since I've seen it so I don't quite recall the order...those pics are like a half second of a long change. (Iirc, it's about dove soap being great for everyone).