This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Fast Eddie: I suppose it would be nice to know if it was a TV show, Comicbook, Anime, Webcomic ... or what?
Tanto: It's a video game. A Wide-Open Sandbox game from the makers of Grand Theft Auto.
That is the extent of my knowledge about it.
Skazka: Not to be a whiner about it, but from the rather inadequate description given- heck, *I'd* take issue with this game. Could someone write up something a little more fitting?
Kingogtheingdaw: Who keeps saying that Parker is NOT an Upper class twit? Only ONE line of dialogue would prove he is truely stuck-up while every single other line is sympathetic or downright kind, as for the bribing of teachers the jocks do it as well so that is totally irreleveant.
McJeff: Parker actually has a fan editing this very entry, trying to claim that Parker isn't an Upper-Class Twit. Look. Parker is clearly intended to have a decent nature. That doesn't change the fact that he bullies people, attacks anyone in bad standing with his clique, will extort protection money from people, buys his grades, and thinks he should be able to buy friends and love because he's rich. Being the best of the Preppies doesn't make you anything else than slightly less of a Jerkass than the other Preppies.
Kingogtheingdaw: Of course he attacks people who are in bad standing with his clique, what if a stupid kid beat the shit out of your closest friends, egged your friends house, stole your pals girl and did anything in his power to make you and friends life hell? You are going to try to kick his ass, he doesn't extort he asks for like what 10 bucks to be your bodyguard, most of the jocks and preps buy their grades so how does that blemish Parker more then them? All of his lines and The only point I can't refute is the friends thing that is just assholish. dialogue are sympathetic and kind even when he is attacking you tells you to run away and laments how he will feel bad the next morning.
McJeff The only reason I'm lowering myself to argue with a 15 year old is because said 15 year old is so easily proved wrong and I need justification for edit warring to revert his wrong entries. The crux of his argument is that Parker's bullying and aggression towards Jimmy is justified because of the events during Chapter 2. Go try and be friendly with Parker during Chapter 1 and see what happens. He will demand money in exchange for not beating you up and sucker punch you on the arm. The argument that his grade-buying isn't bad because everyone else does it is ludicrous - try that defense in any court and see what happens. And he can't even deny how thinking he should be able to buy friends and love is pure Upper-Class Twit.
kingogtheingdaw: Yes but all of his other lines are kind, the jocks buy thier marks so according to your logic they are upper class twits to, I argue against Parker being one because out of all of his lines he was about two or three mean ones, and all the rest are kind. I don't think the kid is a saint but he isn't a big enough twit to be classified as Upper-Class Twit. Also my age has nothing to do with the argument so quit it with the weak insults.
McJeff: I removed a few characters who were listed as Jerk with a Heart of Gold (Parker Ogilvie and Bo Jackson) because I didn't think they were gold-hearted enough to fit. But I'm not yet familiar with all the tropes on this side. Is there a trope out there to describe a bad guy who's underlying nature is that of a decent guy, and who's badness is mainly just because he was raised wrong or fell in with the wrong crowd, or because of peer pressure?
Skazka: Wait. I'm not going to argue that Gary hasn't gotten the Draco in Leather Pants option, but since when does being put in a slash pairing automatically = Leather Pants? Portraying Derby as a genuinely kind, gentle, just-so-misguided-and-misunderstood Woobie would be a DILP scenario, not just the fact that he's put in a pairing with JUST ONE LINE OF DIALOGUE OMG to support it. Badly written slash is badly written regardless of who's screwing whom. The fact that it would only be supported by one of the throwaway dialogue options is the least of their problems if your claim would be correct. (And let's face it, people would pair them if there wasn't that one line.) I'm still kind of annoyed at how people insist that having a hot girlfriend (even one you're related to) means that there's no possibility of ho yay. Or being in an awkward quasi-relationship with your impromptu bodyguard. But... ah, who cares.
Malcowitz: Is it ne pas Double Standard that hitting girls is so bad but boys is ok?
