Huck's Journal of Sorts

I know this may verge on being political or social, but upon reading about the Desert Bus game I was reminded of how companies are on a tightrope when it comes to not offending people.   The Grand Tour for example sparked a bit of controversy when they nicknamed their test track the "Eboladrome" after the virus. It may sound like in poor taste considering the epidemic's casualties, but some rebutted that it wasn't to make fun of the victims but rather to mock at the virus itself , kind of like how Downfall parodies mock Hitler but not Holocaust victims.   Same goes for C. & J. Clark getting angry reactions from salty mums who were for some reason incensed at a particular pair of Mary Jane shoes whom the company gave the name "Dolly Babe". A number of reviews state that the shoes get trashed by some wearers and as such they weren't worth the asking price, but what's egregious is the name being a target of unwarranted criti...

So, you’ve heard that right: Emuparadise is gone, or at least shuttered its ROM operations. And so are the likes of LoveROMs whom the Big N slapped a hefty fine on. Is it a good thing? Yes if you really are strict about copyright, but what if you put things like preservation, cultural heritage, accessibility and fan or customer relations to account? As a bit of a background, Nintendo has gained quite a notoriety for being the litigious firm that is known and scorned for. It won a case against Universal Studios over whether Donkey Kong was a parody of King Kong , sued Galoob for the Game Genie, which turned to be in vain as the courts decided that no derivative works were made from games being hacked by the cheat device, banned Japanese stores from offering video games for rent (because they need to PRINT MONEY!!!1!), and sued a Taiwanese bootlegging operation named NTDEC to certain death, not to mention that the bootlegging outfit’s name stood for N in T en D o E lectronic C o. Pirac...

The Filipino mainstream sure aren't the only ones known for ad-hominems and brash mud-slinging. I may not be close friends with the Chrisman couple, i.e. Sarah and Gabriel, but I can somehow relate to how people with dissenting views are being put down by the status quo. Sure enough, they have some points as to how the Victorian era isn't the best time period ever, but as some would rebut, is the present any ideal either? And while the couple's hobby of theirs may sound like serious business , what's with all the fuss and arguments against them? They may have made a mistake or two along the way, but it isn't in their goals to get in any person's way or be like those swag/yolo/whatever freaks who care more about superficiality and childish hedonism. Free speech sure is a double-edged sword, as they say. You'd rally for stuff like LGBT rights and whatnot, and yet when it comes to stuff like what Sarah and her husband happily does, or in my case, adul...