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

[visiblenoise]

The fact of the matter is that a lot of people aren't jaded about the same old straight white protagonist Hollywood summer action trash stories (or whatever is being labeled as "bland" and "trite"), because they haven't played that many of those video games. When they do play video games, they want awesome gameplay that makes them feel invincible, to save the girl, stop the nuke from blowing up, etc. They are probably happy with getting their fix of depth and meaning elsewhere.

I really take issue with people who insult all of these types of games that might otherwise be quite solid. It is the equivalent of complaining about how bland pop music is, which is something that most people grow out of after middle school.

Good OP, by the way, I admire your openmindedness.

 

[Dango]

That was more of a joke, the Shellshock games are universally considered absolutely abysmal. I just find it funny that she's trying to use a game absolutely no one likes to prove her point. And I guess, in a way, her using it can be an example of her lack of awareness and familiarity with the gaming community and culture as a whole.

So did she say that it was a AAA game or something? That it was a popular game? I'm confused, because without any context, none of this particularly indicates a lack of familiarity or even a problem with her use of it.

No she didn't say that, though Anita's series as a whole is supposed to be a look at gaming culture, and including a game that's agreed to be universally bad and that almost no one has played that can hardly be used to represent gaming is just kind of silly.

Though again, I meant it more as a joke. I think it's funny that she included the game, considering how terrible and obscure it is, but I also meant that if you want to look at it in a certain way, it could say something about Anita's series and research.

And I say research because it's clear she does this all at a distance and, at the best of times, it is hilariously obvious that she's unfamiliar with the games she's talking about, as well as basic principles of game design. But I don't really want to have a serious argument, I really just wanted to explain a joke.

 

[Beliyal]

I have heard of it, yes. So, you think that a game I can make by myself for myself can be in any way on par with the work done by professional game designers and that I should just be satisfied with the best I can do, having no education on good and efficient game design?

Myself and a lot of others judge a game on things like quality of writing and character development. If you suck at those things then your game won't be up to par no, but if you can create an entertaining story with good characters then you have made a good game, which deserves to be judged on its own merits.

If you think a game needs shiny graphics and a large budget to be good then you have no idea. Plenty of RPG maker games ahave recieved recognition. I think the best friends played Clive Barkley shut up and smash Gaiden recently. So basically yeah you have no excuse.

But by all means please continue trying to change an opinion on the internet.

My problems with this reasoning still stand though.

Yes, the game needs quality writing and characters. I'd like to see more of that in the gaming industry. Me making a game for myself is hardly going to do anything about this, especially if I am, in fact, not capable of good writing and characters. Tough luck then, I guess?

Yes, games needs more than shiny graphics and a large budget. To The Moon is one of my favourites and it was made with an RPG Maker, for example. That doesn't mean I don't want to play other types of games. Games that I can't make on my own. Tough luck, again?

You can certainly have your opinion unchanged, but I don't think you understand how inane it is. And ultimately pointless. I'm not going to make a new Mass Effect game or a new Assassin's Creed game and I want to play those. I have to rely on professional game developers and publishers for that. If I spend my money for them, I have all the legitimate right to complain to those developers and publishers about what I'd like to see in those games. Even if I make my own RPG Maker games on the side.

 

[KokujinTensai]

All I got from this topic is that no one really knows what exactly they want.

So humanity. Remember the days of collecting gold rings and gold coins. Sometimes I wish that gaming had never "grown up"

 

[Vigormortis]

snip

I...know? And I don't necessarily disagree on any one point.

The only claim I was trying to make was that all three videos, or rather all three presenters, often resort to logical fallacies to back-up their claims while simultaneously accusing the others of using similar tactics. Hell, the latter video presenter used ad hominem attacks as he was accusing Thunderf00t of using ad hominem attacks against Anita.

All three are irrational and hypocritical.

That's all I was getting at. So, I'm not sure why I was the target of the rant.

If you just needed to rant, and my post provided a segue, then I understand. Rant away. Otherwise, you're basically preaching to the choir.

 

[Netrigan]

snip

I...know? And I don't necessarily disagree on any one point.

The only claim I was trying to make was that all three videos, or rather all three presenters, often resort to logical fallacies to back-up their claims while simultaneously accusing the others of using similar tactics. Hell, the latter video presenter used ad hominem attacks as he was accusing Thunderf00t of using ad hominem attacks against Anita.

All three are irrational and hypocritical.

That's all I was getting at. So, I'm not sure why I was the target of the rant.

If you just needed to rant, and my post provided a segue, then I understand. Rant away. Otherwise, you're basically preaching to the choir.

I'm not sure if I was disagreeing with you on anything. Could have been me using your comments as a springboard... or disagreeing about one little thing which I no longer remember and just generally going off on a tangent. I do that kind of thing

Although they're kind of playing the telephone game. Sarkeesian has a particular viewpoint she argues in favor of and it's not terribly hard to catch her bending things a bit out of shape to fit that viewpoint. Then along come Thunderb00t who has a particular viewpoing he argues in favor of and it's not terribly hard to catch him bending things a lot out of shape to fit that viewpoint. By the third voice, they're so far removed from reality it's just pointless.

I think Sarkeesian has some value. Even will concede Thunderb00t has some value, although I think he's so intent on winning an argument that value plays virtually no part in the process. Commenting on people commenting on people commenting gets less and less valuable the further from the source you get.

 

[NeutralStasis]

I typically don't put too many comments out there....hence the first comment on this site, but I actually feel some need to weigh in here for some reason. I spent the better part of two days trying to understand this whole GamerGate thing. I read the vitriol being put out there by both sides of the equation. I saw some very limited views of what inclusion, diversity and equality being used from both sides. And finally I decided to make a comment...

It seems that this whole "GameGate" is a response to small minds on both sides of the fence acting as experts in things that they know little about overall. While I am not an expert myself, it does not take a 190 IQ to look at some of these arguments and find logical problems. Both sides most vocal representatives are overtaking what could actually be a valuable discussion. Every once in a while, in different threads on different sites, I see members of the gaming community come to the table and ask some good questions or make some valuable points. Then the trolls on both sides weighs in and we are lost in a ocean of nonsense once again.

The real pain for me comes from people making sweeping generalizations about the world from their personal lens of experience. I see people using concepts, such as privilege, to actually attack others and try to silence them.

Having entered my late 30s, I have some life experience myself. The only truth I have found is that power corrupts. It does not matter who holds it. It does not matter if they have the moral high ground or not, power corrupts. I feel that I am a fair man. I believe in social justice. I believe in equality. I think that Sarkeesian has a right to talk and put out videos. I think that a good debate can bring about change. I also believe that those who viciously attack another person's rights should be held accountable. I hold these beliefs and consider them universal. No one should be discriminated against because of their identity, gender, race, social status...no one should be discriminated against. I have also seen the concept of equality turn into equity. The outcome of this change often disturbs me, as it seems those once and still oppressed are starting to turn into the very beast they are trying to overcome.

I would hope that the different viewpoints could find better champions than Sarkeesian, ThunderbOOt and others. I hope that better champions can be found, as this rift in the gaming community is not going to become better until we have people that can argue their points more effectively.

I wish everyone happy gaming

 

[veloper]

I typically don't put too many comments out there....hence the first comment on this site, but I actually feel some need to weigh in here for some reason. I spent the better part of two days trying to understand this whole GamerGate thing. I read the vitriol being put out there by both sides of the equation. I saw some very limited views of what inclusion, diversity and equality being used from both sides. And finally I decided to make a comment...

It seems that this whole "GameGate" is a response to small minds on both sides of the fence acting as experts in things that they know little about overall. While I am not an expert myself, it does not take a 190 IQ to look at some of these arguments and find logical problems. Both sides most vocal representatives are overtaking what could actually be a valuable discussion. Every once in a while, in different threads on different sites, I see members of the gaming community come to the table and ask some good questions or make some valuable points. Then the trolls on both sides weighs in and we are lost in a ocean of nonsense once again.

The real pain for me comes from people making sweeping generalizations about the world from their personal lens of experience. I see people using concepts, such as privilege, to actually attack others and try to silence them.

Having entered my late 30s, I have some life experience myself. The only truth I have found is that power corrupts. It does not matter who holds it. It does not matter if they have the moral high ground or not, power corrupts. I feel that I am a fair man. I believe in social justice. I believe in equality. I think that Sarkeesian has a right to talk and put out videos. I think that a good debate can bring about change. I also believe that those who viciously attack another person's rights should be held accountable. I hold these beliefs and consider them universal. No one should be discriminated against because of their identity, gender, race, social status...no one should be discriminated against. I have also seen the concept of equality turn into equity. The outcome of this change often disturbs me, as it seems those once and still oppressed are starting to turn into the very beast they are trying to overcome.

I would hope that the different viewpoints could find better champions than Sarkeesian, ThunderbOOt and others. I hope that better champions can be found, as this rift in the gaming community is not going to become better until we have people that can argue their points more effectively.

I wish everyone happy gaming

Welcome to the Escapist new guy! You couldn't have picked a more terrible topic to add your very first post to.
I hope you don't forget to laugh at our first world problems.

Jim Sterling here is probably a better champion for this stuff than Anita already.

 

[NeutralStasis]

Thank you for the genuine welcome Veloper. I do indeed enjoy the videos from Jim Sterling. I believe I will be posting many more comments in areas of the forums that are not quite this intense lol. Thank you again.

 

[ilayoeli]

Here's my take on the subject:
Diversity in games for the sake of diversity in games=racism

 

[verdant monkai]

I'm asking whether or not you think it's an intelligent argument.

It's not an argument.

If you want something that no one is making, you should go and make it.

What is there not to understand?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

It's not an argument.

If you want something that no one is making, you should go and make it.

What is there not to understand?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argument

Admittedly, when posing that question to you, I was completely unprepared for an eventuality where you were unaware of what the full definition of "argument" was.

So, again...that's your position? You believe that "If you don't like X, make your own X" is an intelligent argument? I just want to be clear on that.

 

[Beliyal]

Tough luck then, I guess?

If you are as talentless as you say you are then yes tough luck mate.

Oh. Damn.

I want more diversity and inclusivity, but I can't do it on my own. Shit. I guess the best would be for me to drop gaming and go do something like gardening. Thanks for the compelling and useful conversation.

Goodbye games!

 

[verdant monkai]

It's not an argument.

If you want something that no one is making, you should go and make it.

What is there not to understand?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argument

Admittedly, when posing that question to you, I was completely unprepared for an eventuality where you were unaware of what the full definition of "argument" was.

So, again...that's your position? You believe that "If you don't like X, make your own X" is an intelligent argument? I just want to be clear on that.

Oh the "old here's the online dictionaries definition", fair play mate whatever you are trying to say is right. I can't be asked with this anymore. My opinion was and still is If you want something no one else is making then you may as well make it. If we want to get into definitions here then that in itself is a statement not an argument.

I just wanted to leave that statement there, like a chip in someone's drink. The flaming headed dude wants an argument, and you just sort of chimed in. As you are both perfectly entitled to do so, as this is a place for discussion. I just can't really find a defence for you dudes saying you disagree with me. Now your bringing in Dictionaries, we're really getting side tracked. And I can't be asked. And I haven't really read anything past the first line of your replies, I'm sorry. I've been distracted today, thats kind of why my replies are so short. So you dudes win by default of participation and conviction. I concede.

Tough luck then, I guess?

If you are as talentless as you say you are then yes tough luck mate.

Oh. Damn.

I want more diversity and inclusivity, but I can't do it on my own. Shit. I guess the best would be for me to drop gaming and go do something like gardening. Thanks for the compelling and useful conversation.

Goodbye games!

If that's how you feel I won't stop you. But surely even a man with as little story telling prowess as you profess to have, must have someone on the internet who likes games/computers, why not pool money with them and make a diverse game. Other than that the above bits for you too.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Oh the "old here's the online dictionaries definition", fair play mate whatever you are trying to say is right.

Do you find the introduction of the dictionary definitions of words problematic when there is a debate over the meaning of a word? What's your preferred method? Paper scissor stone?

My opinion was and still is If you want something no one else is making then you may as well make it.

Well, thank you for clarifying. I had considered that after some of the discussion on that particular point people who had casually offered up that position may wish to reconsider it, but I can see that you do not. That was all I wanted confirmed.

 

[AntiChri5]

I'm asking whether or not you think it's an intelligent argument.

It's not an argument.

If you want something that no one is making, you should go and make it.

What is there not to understand?

Alright, you heard him, pack it in folks. All discussion of videogames is now officially done. No more commenting. If you have something to say you need to make a game that says it.

No more reviews, no more critiques, no more debate.

Are we still allowed game news?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I don't see how them being strippers makes the death itself sexualized. Sure, strippers/prostitutes themselves are sexualized of course but unless their killers are something out of Law and Order: SVU that target them BECAUSE they're strippers/prostitutes/sexualized or whatever, I don't see how an extra squick factor can be accounted for.

Well, first, I didn't say "them being strippers" makes them sexualized, more that that particular set of murders or takedowns or whatever they were had an air of sexualized violence, much as the "latex nuns" trailer did. It strikes me as very "porny" violence. This is obviously a subjective assessment, but this is media criticism, so it is what it is. It's not like we have a metric we can employ. What I'm saying is I can totally understand how someone could view that scene and think "ew".

They don't really react to being killed in a different way compared to all the other NPCs outside of the jiggle physics, which seems more like an unintentional consequence of a lack of quality programming since they really only spaz out when moving the body

That's a very particular body part to start jiggling uncontrollably, but intentional or unintentional the end result is the same to the viewer.

Also, I don't think you can really compare testicles to breasts outside of them being sexual organs.

It was an analogy, First Lastname. Work with me.

It's kind of like saying being able to kill a black person in a game presents an aura of racism when them being black had absolutely no involvement with their death.

It's not really like saying that all, unless your argument is that there has been an ongoing concern regarding sexual violence towards black people and portrayals of same. If a game were to present black people as poor or uneducated or prone to violence, then I could give you something.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

No, I don't think it's particularly important what private entities "censor" on their privately owned websites. I can understand why some people feel aggrieved about it, but this isn't Rosa Parks refusing to sit at the back of the bus, or Mark Felt blowing the lid off Watergate. As with Sarkeesian's rather lazy Feminist Frequency videos, the reaction to the event is a significantly more telling story than the event itself.

Uh..yeah ok. Not sure why you'd bring Rosa Parks or Watergate into this.

Well, they sort of have a right to censor people on their forum. Here they're more like to bring down the ban-hammer and leave your comment up to show why they did it, but if they deem the comment to be too far out of line, they'll delete the comment outright.

Sure, ban people who break the rules. But let's look at what you said:

I've got no guff with people criticizing stuff. Criticizing stuff is often how you let people know they need to fix things. Feedback is good.

If someone is banned or censored for criticizing something, is that ok?

"Hey maybe this controversy brings up a good case for why these journalists should be more upfront about their relationships?"
"No, you're banned"

I wander in and out of this conversation so I missed the fireworks, so I have no idea what kind of stuff was being posted or whether I agreed with the decision to delete it. Considering the lack of fact-checking that went into the accusation that Zoe Quinn got a favorable review from her then-boyfriend (namely there was no review at all) and that said accusation continues to be repeated as fact, I'm not terribly inclined to believe much of what GamerGate insists is true. I've not found the source to be terribly reliable.

Christ, Zoe Quinn is NOT the issue. GamerGate has flat out ignored her for a while now.
The precedent is what matters.

What will be the next thing that is off-limits to talk about?