The irony here is delicious.

Both of your responses rely on the fallacy fallacy, and instead of correcting my interpretation like many other people have done, you are responding hostility, which is not productive at all.

That is a much more clear description of a concept of diversity in games, but that isn't the way her opinions and points read to me.

I guess it's confusing since there is diversity. I guess her point is that isn't enough diversity, but then I would ask how much is enough?

Because that is never part of her opinion as it is portrayed in this article. Did I miss it somewhere? I see quotes like this, and it makes it seem as if no female villains should every be sexy:

You are part of the problem.

The way her opinions read is as if "real women" are not sexy, do not have toned bodies, and do not dress in attractive ways, and that is simply not true.

That smells like an assumption to me. You should have wiped better.

OK...

Wow, March is starting to get pretty crazy for PS4. Helldivers, OlliOlli 2, Hotline Miami 2, Axiom Verge and then Bloodborne to top it all off.

Meanwhile, it got a 9.5 on Destructoid. Oh, internet.

You knows what you might think it pretty awesome, Kirk? While playing Dying Light, I actually thought of your past article, since Dying Light is definitely an example of a developer doing graffiti correctly. I am glad you took the time to acknowledge it.

Molyneux just loves the sound of his own voice and the attention. Whether he is making ridiculous promises about games, or apologizing about the fact that he can't keep his ridiculous promises, or talking about the fact that he will never talk again.

It's not the only alternative.

My response implies that you are wrong, and that it isn't even worth denying.

Making assumptions about people on the internet and basing your comments around them is a sign of stupidity.

Just saying, Game Informer had no problem writing an article about this without throwing Obamacare in the headline:

It's still used in both contexts, though, and that is the point of my comment.

I don't.

They don't call it Obamacare in any of the materials that this article is describing, so it appears that you decided to throw Obamacare in the headline and article for some reason.