Weekend Confirmed 177 - EverQuest Next, Pikmin 3, NCAA Football 14

By Ozzie Mejia, Aug 09, 2013 11:00am PDT

This week's Weekend Confirmed looks at old things that are new again. Hosts Garnett Lee and Jeff Cannata welcome in Shacknews' Andrew Yoon and Insomniac's James Stevenson to discuss EverQuest Next and World of Warcraft before diving into NCAA Football 14 and Pikmin 3. After discussing listener feedback, the team discusses the use of game guides and whether they enhance or take away from the overall gaming experience. That discussion leads into a new round of Finishing Moves to send you into your weekend.

Weekend Confirmed Ep. 177: 8/9/2013

Subscription Links:

Here's a handy pop-up player so you can listen from right here on the page. Let us know how it works for you.

If you're viewing this in the GameFly application, you can play Weekend Confirmed Episode 177 directly.

Weekend Confirmed comes in four segments to make it easy to listen to in segments or all at once. Here's the timing for this week's episode:

    Show Breakdown:

    Round 1 - 00:00:17 - 00:10:27

    Round 2 - 00:11:25 - 00:48:37

    Round 3 - 00:49:14 - 01:42:27

    Round 4/Finishing Moves - 01:43:02 - 02:27:56

Follow the Weekend Confirmed crew on Twitter, too!

Weekend Confirmed @WeekendConfirmd

Garnett Lee @GarnettLee

Jeff Cannata @JeffCannata

Andrew Yoon @scxzor

James Stevenson @JamesStevenson

Remember to join the Official Facebook Weekend Confirmed Page and add us to your Facebook routine. We'll be keeping you up with the latest on the show there as well.

Original music in the show by Del Rio. Check out his latest music video, I Brought It Here, featuring cameos from Jeff Cannata and Christian Spicer on YouTube. Get his latest Album, Club Tipsy on iTunes. Check out more, including the Super Mega Worm mix and other mash-ups on his ReverbNation page or Facebook page, and follow him on twitter @delriomusic.

Click here to comment...


  • As a male, you know what I find offensive? People suggesting that every muscle-bound violent dope of a character in any game ever is somehow just me playing out my "male power fantasy," meanwhile every exaggerated female character is nothing more than eye-bait for my prehistoric caveman brain that always demands sex.

    I find this incredibly insulting and deeply troubling, and more often than not, it's simply a way of completely dismissing effectively half the entire population's opinion on a matter. How could I possibly respond to that? The truth of the matter is I can't, because no matter what my opinion is it doesn't matter because I am a 'privileged male' just living out my "male power fantasy."

    I find this whole discussion (not this podcast in particular, I mean more along the lines of this whole controversy) insulting not just from my 'privilaged male' perspective, but looking on the women's side of the fence as well. What is being argued is that somehow it is deeply troubling and exceptionally harmful to the entire gender for women to be depicted in games with large breasts.

    Ignoring for a second the fact that there are fully natural women out there just as stacked as the Sorceress, what this argument is saying is that women are so weak and fragile that we have to protect them by making sure they aren't sexualized in any way, otherwise some unknown horrible thing will happen to the entire gender!

    So aside from the entire argument being flawed and silly, and incidentally insulting, the truth is that there is a logic behind the exaggerated body parts, not just in the women but also the men.

    Sorceress: She's voluptuous with wide hips and large breasts. Her class is the "support" or "priest" style character. Breasts and hips are symbols of motherhood and taking care of people, hence why that's her most exaggerated physical attributes.

    Elf: She's thin but with wide legs. Her class is the archer, but she's also agile and acrobatic, which requires a slender frame with strong legs. She looks like a gymnist and plays like one too.

    Amazon: She's very muscular with a focus on her 'behind.' As a berserker, it makes sense for her muscles to be crazy ripped, the lack of clothing represents the typical wreckless behavior of a barbarian/berserker class, and enormous legs and butt are also due to her acrobatic skills and strength.

    Dwarf: He's a walking boulder of muscle, but there's a reason for it. As the "throw" style class, he uses his low center of gravity and massive muscles to hurl his opponents every which way. He's very similar in stature to a sumo wrestler.

    Wizard: He's mysterious, serious, and slender. As a wizard, this makes sense, as wizard's are known for having immense intellect and to think before acting.

    Fighter: He's massively top-heavy with comically small legs. Once again, this makes sense. He's a heavy defensive-orientented character, and he's built like a defensive blocker on a football team.

    I don't understand why none of this is ever mentioned whenever this "controversy" is discussed. There are reasons for the art direction, but the question is always whether or not it's appropriate for the Sorceress to have large breasts.

    But even if there were no legitimate reason other than beauty, what's the harm in that? Haven't artists for hundreds of years depicted both men and women in an ideal fashion in sculptures, paintings, and just about every artistic medium in the history of humanity? Why do we suddenly have to be "ashamed" at sexualization? And isn't this shame far more harmful to women in the long run than exaggerated sexual characteristics?

    "Censoring" the female body or otherwise demanding that artists not depict women sexually will be what really hurts women. It will be reverting history back to the Victorian era, where women were used as nothing more than husbands and babymakers.

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 4 replies.