rayne (of bloodrayne fame,) to appear topless in playboy. really.

It's CG. And she's not the only videogame character posing in the issue, either.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/25/comm...ming/index.htm

Lame. I'd expect this from Play, not Playboy.

Damn, that is sad.

LOL

This means theyre gonna cut out valuable pages of hot-nude-women or tittilating-interviews for some fucking CG... if I subscribed to Playboy I would be pissed.

I think it's awesome, if only for novelty's sake.

I'm sure there will be other issues of Playboy with plenty of real live naked women. Can't say I'm feeling the loss on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

LOL

This means theyre gonna cut out valuable pages of hot-nude-women or tittilating-interviews for some fucking CG... if I subscribed to Playboy I would be pissed.

---

Believe me, I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master of 7s

So I take this to mean that the game itself will be utter shit since Majesco has to resort to such ridiculous publicity tactics? The videos I've seen don't look impressive at all (same random mess masquerading as a fighting system) and the graphics are nothing special (same shitty, made-for-your-PC animation with better textures).

Other than that, only topless? Gimme a fucking break!

This is Playboy! No money shot = why even bother?

More proof that game developers are emotionally arrested little boys still giggling about teh b00berz. hee hee hee.

EDIT: I am going to laugh SO hard if this publicity stunt backfires and causes Majesco to lose sales on the game. :lol:

---

I like your sig, and Playboy is retarded. Penthouse/Hustler owns them.

Playboy is mostly ads anyway, this won't make much a difference in the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolemite

It's CG. And she's not the only videogame character posing in the issue, either.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/25/comm...ming/index.htm

Lame. I'd expect this from Play, not Playboy.

---

There are no words to describe how lame this is. :\

Playboy is about depicting the nude female form as art rather than simple beat-off material. This is why they are a respected American institution and why most people (yes even some Christians) really have no problem with them.

But this bullshit just reeks of fanservice. Fanservice belongs in the latest issue of Anime Nation or Play magazine, NOT Playboy.

Hef, I've lost respect for ya buddy. :|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roufuss

Either way it's still retarded.

I'd expect this from FHM or Maxim, not a self touted "sophisticated men's magazine" like Playboy.

---

Why not. If they can put in fake tits why not everything else?

I think it's alright, and I fucking hate gimmicks. Just as long as they don't make it regular thing, or worse, start making the playmates CG, I say it's cool.

Besides I think Playboy may have already lost some sophistication when they published Girls of Enron and Wal-Mart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingoffighters

I like your sig, and Playboy is retarded. Penthouse/Hustler owns them.

---

Penthouse is full of piss shots and I've never bought Hustler.

I'I've subscribed to Playboy off and on. They seriously do have good articles. From a subscribers perspective, those who say they buy it for the articles or pictures are lying. The first day is spent respecting the breasts (fake or real) and the Jokes page, the first week is all about jacking it, and that leaves three weeks for nothing else but reading the articles. So of course they’re going to put in some good journalists. They’re best hit this year was their prediction on the Rangers.

You folks sure do take your pr0n seriously. The chicks in Playboy are so airbrushed and otherwise engineered that they might as well be CG.