A gay, bi-racial's take on this whole mess

[Albetta]

Some of you might see futility in this thread, as this has been discussed to death over the last two weeks (man alive, has it really been going on this long?), and a lot of people are just tired of hearing about it. If you think this then feel free to just not respond and let my thread die. But regardless I want to indulge myself on some soapbox standing because I feel like I have something worth saying.

Nobody can represent me but me. All too often in life we find that people who claim they have our best interests at heart often don?t, be they politicians, bankers, teachers, or (god forbid) people we love and are close too. In addition to this, I find that there is a very thin line between flattery and being patronized, and that?s just how I?ve felt recently: patronized.

Do I want more people like me in games? Absolutely. But what I want more than that is good games, which brings me to my first point: Games that are praised for being ?inclusive? and nothing else are not good games. Gone home is a terrible, lazy, pretentious excuse for a game. Now let me be clear here: I don?t necessarily think that the gaming media at large has an ?agenda? per se. But I do believe that what we are seeing is a form of band-wagoning, an echo chamber where free thought isn?t valued and shunned in favor of vogue opinions and narcissistic ego stroking.

And there is the harsh truth that doesn?t make me so frustrated at the SJW and anti-GG crowd as I am disappointed and even sympathetic. They have allowed themselves to be manipulated for the self-serving, ego centric, narcissistic, and frankly, borderline megalomaniacal needs of a small group of journalists and academics. It boggled my mind for a long time as to why the people complaining about how sexist and gross and full of white straight male power fantasies games where didn?t just?I don?t know?make their own games that didn?t have those things, or at the very least support kickstarters for games that promised to be different. But that?s when I really grabbed the root of the problem here: they don?t really care about solving the problem, so much as building up their image complaining about it (and lying or fudging the truth where needed to do so).

This might feel a little ranty at this point, but I?ll try to sum it up:
I?m a liberal progressive. Liberal to the point that some people might call radical. But I?m capable of critical thinking, and I know how to call BS on things that don?t feel right. It doesn?t matter to me how ?progressive? some claims to be, I hold them to the same scrutiny I would anyone else, and unfortunately a lot of other people here don?t hold that principle in regard.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Gone home is a terrible, lazy, pretentious excuse for a game.

DISAGREE

I didn't like Gone Home because of its diversity quotient. I liked Gone Home because it was atypical. There was no real central conflict, the resolution was warm and upbeat, and while player interaction was minimal it allowed someone to unravel the narrative at their own pace in a unique way.

What Gone Home does is illustrate a serious issue with rating/ranking games, and the whole concept of "GOTY". Gone Home, like To the Moon or The Walking Dead, does what it sets out to do and constitutes a very solid entry of its type. But how do you run it up against something like Skyrim, or DOTA 2, or XCOM? It's like comparing an animated short comedy against a five film epic drama. Except there are no film awards that do that, because that would be inane.

PS - It was also overpriced.

But that?s when I really grabbed the root of the problem here: they don?t really care about solving the problem, so much as building up their image complaining about it (and lying or fudging the truth where needed to do so).

How did you determine this? Did you steal their diaries?

 

[Albetta]

DISAGREE

I didn't like Gone Home because of its diversity quotient. I liked Gone Home because it was atypical. There was no real central conflict, the resolution was warm and upbeat, and while player interaction was minimal it allowed someone to unravel the narrative at their own pace in a unique way.

Thats your opinion and I respect it.

How did you determine this? Did you steal their diaries?

Come now. Surely you haven't been missing the litany of game footage, stolen from lets players, and taken out of context Feminist Frequencies' rants. The fact that they used as false evidence shows either:

a. A lack of understanding of the material, therefore lying through ignorance.

b. An attempt at willful deception to prove a point.

Both of these are ethically troubling for the person making the argument. I would question the motives of anyone caught telling mistruths.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Thats your opinion and I respect it.

It's an atypical game in a space plagued by me-tooism and clones. Even if I thought it was a complete failure, I'd still applaud the attempt to do something tonally different.

Come now. Surely you haven't been missing the litany of game footage, stolen from lets players, and taken out of context Feminist Frequencies' rants.

I'm...not even sure what you're saying here. What is it I'm missing? A litany of game footage? What? Who is taking what out of context? Is that a reference to Sarkeesian using unattributed Let's Play footage? If so, what does that have to do with your topic?

I'm sorry but this is very confusingly stated.

The fact that they used as false evidence shows either:

Who is "they", specifically? Evidence against what? Attribution please.

a. A lack of understanding of the material, therefore lying through ignorance.

"Lying through ignorance"? What?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie

"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive"

Ignorance is its own cross to bear, but one does not "lie" about something just because they misunderstand it. Whatever the fuck it is we're talking about, I'm still not sure.

 

[Albetta]

So you don't know about the now infamous Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe that Feminist Frequency went on? (As a side note I would like to point out that this was the same argument used by Jack Thompson and his Ilk in the past against GTA and violent video games.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

So you don't know about the now infamous Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe that Feminist Frequency went on?

1. Is Feminist Frequency Anita Sarkeesian?
2. Is this entirely about Anita Sarkeesian? You made some generalizations about a "group".
3. No I haven't watched her videos past about 20 minutes of one, which was plenty. If you can point me to a brief clip outlining your particular issue that would help. I'm not watching 25 minutes of video though.

EDIT: Ugh and if it's fucking Thunderf00t I'm not watching it at all.

(As a side note I would like to point out that this was the same argument used by Jack Thompson and his Ilk in the past against GTA and violent video games.

Nah it's different. We've already discussed the Jack Thompson issue and how Sarkeesian compares on these forums. Censure =/= censorship, and "influencing a mindset" or "influencing society" =/= attempting to establish a 1:1 correlation between playing violent video games and committing violent acts.

Honestly it's a pretty lazy comparison, people should probably stop making it. I don't like Sarkeesian's work, but it's not remotely comparable to Thompson's crusade in any meaningful way, other than that they both broadly criticized the medium on social/ethical grounds.

 

[Rayce Archer]

The only game I can think of that lets you play a specifically biracial character is Arcanum. I'm not sure being a half elf or half orc really resonates with the experience of being biracial in the modern world, although if there was a game that could manage it it's PROBABLY Arcanum. And you can absolutely be gay.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The only game I can think of that lets you play a specifically biracial character is Arcanum. I'm not sure being a half elf or half orc really resonates with the experience of being biracial in the modern world, although if there was a game that could manage it it's PROBABLY Arcanum. And you can absolutely be gay.

Good old Arcanum.

Admittedly I kind of HATED it at the time. It was sooo buggy and broken at launch. Couldn't walk five feet in the wilderness without being prey to a ceaseless ursine and lupine assault.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

1. Oh Anita. Even by her standards those are some poor arguments, and are entirely unsubstantiated.
2. I see Hitman still has its sleaze factor set to 11. The jiggling tits when the girl is lying prone and unconscious? Classy.
3. Never heard anything about "Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe" though.

 

[Netrigan]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

1. Oh Anita. Even by her standards those are some poor arguments, and are entirely unsubstantiated.
2. I see Hitman still has its sleaze factor set to 11. The jiggling tits when the girl is lying prone and unconscious? Classy.
3. Never heard anything about "Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe" though.

Tm
Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

 

[Dragonbums]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

1. Oh Anita. Even by her standards those are some poor arguments, and are entirely unsubstantiated.
2. I see Hitman still has its sleaze factor set to 11. The jiggling tits when the girl is lying prone and unconscious? Classy.
3. Never heard anything about "Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe" though.

Tm
Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

But even then that penalized score was easily negated by hiding the bodies inside a box. Which means there still wasn't much of a "penalty" to begin with, and score reductions to people who don't give a shit isn't exactly off putting to the majority of the players. I believe a rebuttal video of Thunderf00t's criticism pointed that out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N-tkrxAEWw

 

[Netrigan]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

1. Oh Anita. Even by her standards those are some poor arguments, and are entirely unsubstantiated.
2. I see Hitman still has its sleaze factor set to 11. The jiggling tits when the girl is lying prone and unconscious? Classy.
3. Never heard anything about "Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe" though.

Tm
Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

But even then that penalized score was easily negated by hiding the bodies inside a box. Which means there still wasn't much of a "penalty" to begin with, and score reductions to people who don't give a shit isn't exactly off putting to the majority of the players. I believe a rebuttal video of Thunderf00t's criticism pointed that out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N-tkrxAEWw

Well, what do you expect from an outsider activist like Tb00t who doesn't seem to understand gaming culture?

 

[Lono Shrugged]

Good work on being who you are. Your opinion means as much or as little to me as anyone else's on the topic. I don't see how you being who you are should affect my opinion over anyone else's. I honestly don't care that you are gay and bi-racial. It does not impress me in the slightest. I do not think that you or your life situation should have any effect on my hobby. I believe games should be for the good of all and not to represent minorities. I will only play games that appeal to me, a white straight man.

That all said.

I think that my opinion should mean as little to you as anyone else's on the topic. Who I am should not affect your opinion over anyone else's. You should not care that I am straight and white. You should not be impressed by that. My life situation has no effect on your hobby. You should believe that games are for the good of all and not represent minorities. You should only play games that appeal to you, a gay, bi-racial person.

 

[Mikeybb]

*snipped for space*
This might feel a little ranty at this point, but I?ll try to sum it up:
I?m a liberal progressive. Liberal to the point that some people might call radical. But I?m capable of critical thinking, and I know how to call BS on things that don?t feel right. It doesn?t matter to me how ?progressive? some claims to be, I hold them to the same scrutiny I would anyone else, and unfortunately a lot of other people here don?t hold that principle in regard.

Thankyou for posting this.
Ranty or otherwise it's always interesting to read someone's opinion on the situation.

The only game I can think of that lets you play a specifically biracial character is Arcanum. I'm not sure being a half elf or half orc really resonates with the experience of being biracial in the modern world, although if there was a game that could manage it it's PROBABLY Arcanum. And you can absolutely be gay.

Good old Arcanum.

Admittedly I kind of HATED it at the time. It was sooo buggy and broken at launch. Couldn't walk five feet in the wilderness without being prey to a ceaseless ursine and lupine assault.

That game was something special.
So many different ways to play through it, and for all the flaws, the ambition of the scope it tried to convey and the world it let you loose in were wonderful.

Trying to play a genuinely stupid character was quite entertaining.
You might not have had many options in dialogue yourself, but reading other peoples reactions to your grunting monosyllabism was all the fun you needed.

 

[grassgremlin]

Here's some things you need to understand before you make these conclusions.

1) The internet has a habit of making individuals more evil then they are. Don't be swept by conspiracy theories that easily push things out of context.

2) Is gaming being ruined by what pro-gamergate people call SJWs? The answer is now. Those games will still exist regardless, and I know this because those games are still being made. Nowhere have a read an article stating that a game, for example, like dead or alive should no longer be made. If they have, that is very irresponsible and they should be called out on it.

3) Some people genuinely like Gone Home and games like it.

4) Diversity IS important. Sorry, it doesn't matter to you if you just want to game and you don't care. That's an opinion. Because you don't care, this part does not matter to you. It matters to others. You don't get to judge how another minority feels about a game because you are one yourself. That's like saying, I like obama and other black people like me like obama. It's just not true.

To add, I don't care too much about who I play either in a good game, but I do feel a certain kind of way when a player character I play reflects myself. I draw enough gay characters to know, deep down that's what I want if I had the choice.

5) To many games are overwhelmingly white. Sorry. We only don't care because we put up with it for years. The difference is you're not as fed up over it as most people who played those kinds of games. You simply have not played enough of a similar kind of game to get tired of it.

This is why this is a discussion with journalists. They play every game that's shoved into their laps as a job, they're burnt out.

6) Game Journalists really shouldn't argue this when the majority of them are white. Sorry, but we need to talk about diversity in game journalism, too, because that would be nice to discuss.

7) Gamer Gate has a stigma that is completely incapable of being shaken. They perform the same tactics as the game journalists they criticize. If you want your words to be heard, support something else.

To end, I'm black and gay, so people don't go calling me out on my words or whatever. I'm also nuetral. Not pro-gg or anti-gg.

 

[Skatologist]

Okay, not gay, but pretty non-manly small multiracial gender and sexuality questioning person here, which in all honesty is not as "bad"[footnote] could not find a good word to put there, maybe different, unique, idk [/footnote] , but let's go through this.

Nobody can represent me but me. All too often in life we find that people who claim they have our best interests at heart often don?t, be they politicians, bankers, teachers, or (god forbid) people we love and are close too. In addition to this, I find that there is a very thin line between flattery and being patronized, and that?s just how I?ve felt recently: patronized.

I'm not sure by who or what you made you feel patronized, so I'll ask respectfully. You could give one example or a few, or just say general mindset or whatever, but try to think carefully about it.

Do I want more people like me in games? Absolutely. But what I want more than that is good games, which brings me to my first point: Games that are praised for being ?inclusive? and nothing else are not good games. Gone home is a terrible, lazy, pretentious excuse for a game.

Nah, not me, I just want diversity in perspective, characters and such. Games, if used as a proper tool, can communicate a message better than many other forms of media outside of any meme-esque posters and quotes and short videos. As for Gone Home, haven't played it, know it deals with some form of lesbianism or something, don't want spoilers. I also wouldn't say "inclusive" describes many of those games, I would see them more as perspective changers. Inclusive things, I consider, are usually things where sex, race, gender, disorders, ethics, etc. are not brought up, like Kirby.

Now let me be clear here: I don?t necessarily think that the gaming media at large has an ?agenda? per se. But I do believe that what we are seeing is a form of band-wagoning, an echo chamber where free thought isn?t valued and shunned in favor of vogue opinions and narcissistic ego stroking.

Not sure if I see that, I'm mostly either here or YouTube and good luck not getting shouted out of conversations and having words put in your mouth because you said Thunderf00t or TheAmazingAtheist are misrepresenting feminists' points in their comment sections. The 500 character provocative as all hell comment mentality still rings true for YouTube and actually conveying complex thoughts and points of view in a respectful manner are either ignored or misrepresented.

And there is the harsh truth that doesn?t make me so frustrated at the SJW and anti-GG crowd as I am disappointed and even sympathetic. They have allowed themselves to be manipulated for the self-serving, ego centric, narcissistic, and frankly, borderline megalomaniacal needs of a small group of journalists and academics.

Tell you right now, I didn't need to listen to anyone to know what people were saying about Sarkeesian was BS when after watching videos taking her down, I actually watched hers and realized people were misrepresenting her, whether intentionally or unintentionally is not for me to say. I'm anti-GG until someone makes a list of demands that doesn't include firing everyone they disagree with or they still think is part of the conspiracy. Public apologies and recognition for specific actions against journalism ethics maybe, but not firing, that's borderline life ruining for a lot of these people.

It boggled my mind for a long time as to why the people complaining about how sexist and gross and full of white straight male power fantasies games where didn?t just?I don?t know?make their own games that didn?t have those things, or at the very least support kickstarters for games that promised to be different. But that?s when I really grabbed the root of the problem here: they don?t really care about solving the problem, so much as building up their image complaining about it (and lying or fudging the truth where needed to do so).

I'm not seeing that. And almost everyone complains about things they will never fix or aid in fixing, look at anyone with strong political opinions but doesn't vote or get politically active as an example. The "make their own games" argument doesn't help. When GG was happening, some asked why they didn't make their own forum and they said things like expenses and maintenance and such and games are much the same for excuses. Even if a kikstarter was made, news would have to spread, and wouldn't you think people would complain that sites like this were promoting an "SJW" game? You wouldn't think people wouldn't try to stop it or send some kind of threats to the developers or anyone trying to spread it?

I?m a liberal progressive. Liberal to the point that some people might call radical. But I?m capable of critical thinking, and I know how to call BS on things that don?t feel right. It doesn?t matter to me how ?progressive? some claims to be, I hold them to the same scrutiny I would anyone else, and unfortunately a lot of other people here don?t hold that principle in regard.

Essentially the same here, but a different side of the same coin I suppose. Claims about yourself don't matter to me anymore. When I spent my time essentially banging my head against the wall trying to deal with "antiracist is codeword for antiwhite" folk, I realized you can't say you are for or against these abstract things when dealing with most people because they'll come breathing down your throat with so many BS questions and hypotheticals. Stating exactly what you want is usually best instead of stating who you specifically support or what vague concepts you get behind. I don't make the claim that I am for "social justice" when I think I point out something mildly sexist against women in media as much as I am that I'm a "defender of free speech" by pressuring a business or person to not take down a video. I just do me.

 

[kilenem]

I don't really have a problem with more diversity just don't single out a company when they aren't being diverse but don't say shit when they have a diverse selection characters. The protagonist from Assassin creed vita game didn't get as much press as the Protagonist from the next assassin creed game. Granted Ubisoft had a dumbass explanation for all four characters being male.

 

[Dragonbums]

I don't really have a problem with more diversity just don't single out a company when they aren't being diverse but don't say shit when they have a diverse selection characters. The protagonist from Assassin creed vita game didn't get as much press as the Protagonist from the next assassin creed game. Granted Ubisoft had a dumbass explanation for all four characters being male.

But during the whole multiplayer fiasco there were plenty of people who not only brought up Liberation, but praised it for it's diverse cast.

It's not like Ubisoft themselves hyped the shit out of the game and they ported it to the ever sinking stone that is the Vita.

 

[kilenem]

I don't really have a problem with more diversity just don't single out a company when they aren't being diverse but don't say shit when they have a diverse selection characters. The protagonist from Assassin creed vita game didn't get as much press as the Protagonist from the next assassin creed game. Granted Ubisoft had a dumbass explanation for all four characters being male.

But during the whole multiplayer fiasco there were plenty of people who not only brought up Liberation, but praised it for it's diverse cast.

It's not like Ubisoft themselves hyped the shit out of the game and they ported it to the ever sinking stone that is the Vita.

I heard no one bring up Liberation or the Hati DLC. I feel sorry for VITA owners at the beginning it looks like it could do as well as the PSP, which is pretty damn good compared to the rest of the Non-Nintendo handlhelds. Sony does not have the money to properly support that system.