|
Popular Thug Drink posted:how is it censorship to give a game a bad review and then explain why you gave it a bad review That is in fact Phil Fish
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:28 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:if there was a sufficient amount of people repeating bannable information it makes eminent sense to delete the whole thing rather than surgically excise the posts that people are just posting to prove that they can post them Why would you think that? If that was true, why did Reditt reprimend the moderator that did it and then allowed "Kotaku in action" to come into being? And for the most part kotaku in action had little problems as far as posting personal data was concerned. Popular Thug Drink posted:which logical fallacies did i use when criticising your argument? Mainly a composition/division falacy with a touch of strawmen. Popular Thug Drink posted:so why are gamergaters more concerned with the absolute bottom rung of budget indie games than AAA studios? you keep citing billion dollar industry, what percentage of that is represented by tiny studios with shoestring budgets who make art games? Probably because of the idea that the indie scene was suppose to be different. Popular Thug Drink posted:a mailing list, news articles, and articles you find distasteful that others itt have claimed as prove of a desire to eradicate gamers forever - none of this adds up to a leftist feminist conspiracy to destroy games. not to be offensive but this all sounds, well, really disjointed and incoherent That's not what I have claimed. Like come on, I sense something in you wants to have a legitimate debate, why not just cut the bullshit trolling?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
My only current thought on gameygarters is I wish they'd stop calling it gaming journalism. It's friggin gaming PR, done by third parties. Get it right you loving fucks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
Shinjobi posted:My only current thought on gameygarters is I wish they'd stop calling it gaming journalism. It's friggin gaming PR, done by third parties. Is that why PR companies and departments are constantly getting mad at journalists for loving up their Metacritic bonus?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:A fair bet would be that no one would have a problem with minorities being represented in games and that would be a positive. Giving them an unfair advantage in reviews and penalizing games that don't would be bad however. Hence the whole censorship debate. If you agree that minority representation in gaming is a positive thing that people want, why is it a problem if reviewers give games points for being inclusive of minorities?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Argondamn, all games that are not purely about trying to get a brightly coloured pixel from point A to point B and other non-narrative forms of game design are games that are not purely about gameplay. What you're objecting to is cultural criticism of games that you personally disagree with. That is fine. You don't have to worry, because no one is forcing CDprojekt to put black people in Witcher.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Why would you think that? If that was true, why did Reditt reprimend the moderator that did it and then allowed "Kotaku in action" to come into being? And for the most part kotaku in action had little problems as far as posting personal data was concerned. it's also possible that the overall conversation was so obnoxious that a moderater just burned it to the ground without proper authority, which again isn't really censorship Shadoer posted:Probably because of the idea that the indie scene was suppose to be different. wasn't it different? it seems different to me Shadoer posted:That's not what I have claimed. Like come on, I sense something in you wants to have a legitimate debate, why not just cut the bullshit trolling? we are having a legitimate debate. you're advancing arguments, i'm asking questions, you're responding to them, and sometimes i explain that i find some of your responses lacking or not compelling. that is a debate
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:If you agree that minority representation in gaming is a positive thing that people want, why is it a problem if reviewers give games points for being inclusive of minorities? Personally I don't think it's a problem so long as they state it as such. Not so much if it's a license to ignore a games flaws or if it's not being stated. Popular Thug Drink posted:it's also possible that the overall conversation was so obnoxious that a moderater just burned it to the ground without proper authority, which again isn't really censorship I don't know, but the leadership of reditt didn't seem to think so. So I guess it's safe to assume it wasn't, Popular Thug Drink posted:wasn't it different? it seems different to me Different in an ethical idealist sort of way. Popular Thug Drink posted:we are having a legitimate debate. you're advancing arguments, i'm asking questions, you're responding to them, and sometimes i explain that i find some of your responses lacking or not compelling. that is a debate Forgive me if I've been finding your side of this debate rather disingenuous as I've made certain positions of mine crystal clear, repeatedly. And you've continued to press points as if I've made them, when I make it clear repeatedly that I'm not. Popular Thug Drink posted:how is it censorship to give a game a bad review and then explain why you gave it a bad review Well that's part of the wider argument in gamergate, what is censorship and when is it bad. The anti-side has taken the position that it's only censorship if the government does it. If you happen to pressure every game publisher and journalist to not cover something and push the product to the fringe of the market or outright oblivion, that's not censorship. The Gamergate side has taken the position that it is censorship and pushing games and products out of the main market because they don't follow your political views is inherently wrong and effectively censorship. And if you are going to do things like penalize games because of your political views, it should be made clear that it's why you are doing it. Shadoer fucked around with this message at 06:59 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:phil fish is the super angry guy who freaked out and canceled his game, right? The way I heard the story is that he tweeted some message supporting zoe quinn and was subsequently personally doxxed, his company site was DDOSed, his company paypal was hacked and the social media for both himself and his company was hacked. Then, he liquidated his IP and got out of the business entirely. I would be pretty angry if all that poo poo happened to me over a tweet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Games are already about things that aren't just the gameplay and plot ding dong. For all that gamers like to cry that games are art (they are) they don't actually want to treat those things like actual art Gameplay should always be the most important thing, not how in-line the game is with feminist ideals.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:To be perfectly honest, no. It's just speculation still, and as I have said something worse investigating. Shadoer posted:A fair bet would be that no one would have a problem with minorities being represented in games and that would be a positive. Giving them an unfair advantage in reviews and penalizing games that don't would be bad however. Hence the whole censorship debate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Wait, the conspiracy was to shut down discussion on gamergate? Or collusion to rate these indie games well? I'm confused, because I thought we were talking about the latter. The exposure revealed the former (and also explained why those samey "gamers are dead" articles all came out around the same time) and led many people to assume the latter was also the case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
argondamn posted:Gameplay should always be the most important thing, not how in-line the game is with feminist ideals. The first part is pretty dumb. The second part is dumb too but only because that's not a thing anyone said.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Honestly do you guys even play games?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 06:59
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Personally I don't think it's a problem so long as they state it as such. Not so much if it's a license to ignore a games flaws or if it's not being stated. For what other media does a reviewer have to qualify their subjective opinion like that? Why should a game reviewer have to state the criteria of their review, when that's not a thing for movies, books, art, fashion or lawn equipment?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Forgive me if I've been finding your side of this debate rather disingenuous as I've made certain positions of mine crystal clear, repeatedly. And you've continued to press points as if I've made them, when I make it clear repeatedly that I'm not. i apologize if you think i'm being disingenous, but i'm just trying to understand what you find suspicious about a game that many people said was good reciving high ratings from those same reviewers argondamn posted:Gameplay should always be the most important thing, not how in-line the game is with feminist ideals. what is gameplay, and why is it the most important thing? argondamn posted:Honestly do you guys even play games? i play many games. i may not play the same games you play, but i do play and enjoy video games. right now i'm playing ck2, wolfenstein, and cities skylines I thought gone home was very good, for example
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:what is gameplay, and why is it the most important thing? What is
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:The way I heard the story is that he tweeted some message supporting zoe quinn He supported Zoe Quinn by blaming someone for being near her when they mentioned she had abused them at a wedding. Rather than just denying anything happened he leapt straight into the "nobody even wanted you there you poo poo" line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
argondamn posted:What is i think if you're going to claim that gameplay is the most important consideration as to if a game is good or not, you should be able to define gameplay in a way where one game can have less of it and another more
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
The Droid posted:The exposure revealed the former (and also explained why those samey "gamers are dead" articles all came out around the same time) and led many people to assume the latter was also the case. Seems like a pretty big leap to me. I don't see anything wrong with reviewers coming together to take a stand against online harassment and the toxic elements of gaming culture. If anything it's more likely that the latter influenced the former; you're naturally going to want to defend something that you like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
argondamn posted:Gameplay should always be the most important thing, not how in-line the game is with feminist ideals. This is actually only your opinion, and when it comes to gamers overall, it's a minority opinion. It's pretty sad that you and your ilk are salty enough to ruin people's lives over the fact that you're not being catered to though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:i think if you're going to claim that gameplay is the most important consideration as to if a game is good or not, you should be able to define gameplay in a way where one game can have less of it and another more OK. I remember why I don't post in D&D. Bye guys. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:He supported Zoe Quinn by blaming someone for being near her when they mentioned she had abused them at a wedding. Rather than just denying anything happened he leapt straight into the "nobody even wanted you there you poo poo" line. I'm unclear on what that means, I really don't know the story or care about these people's personal lives. Did he do something that you think warrants what happened to him?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Okay. Do you see how believing a conspiracy theory without any real evidence might make you seem like a conspiracist? To an extent yes, but wanting to investigate further isn't in itself conspiratorial. The fact is collusion happens in market places, has happened in the past, and there's been a lot of ethical guidelines and even laws in place to prevent it from happening again. Like I would say indications that say Google may be skewing it's search results to give itself an unfair market advantage has some evidence and is worth investigating as companies have done things like this in the past and there are rational reasons to do this. Saying there's a vast conspiracy behind 9/11 after several investigations and basing it on speculation that steel won't melt under burning fuel (which is scientifically false) is insane conspiracy ramblings. Exclamation Marx posted:I'm pretty sure all game reviewers go by their own subjective measures. If social justice issues affect their enjoyment of a game then it's their prerogative to take them into account. People who have similar values will listen to their reviews, and people who don't will go elsewhere. And that's effectively what's happening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:The anti-side has taken the position that it's only censorship if the government does it. If you happen to pressure every game publisher and journalist to not cover something and push the product to the fringe of the market or outright oblivion, that's not censorship. Are there any actual examples of video games actively not being covered because of pressure from any source anywhere? I'm really struggling to come up with an example here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'm unclear on what that means, I really don't know the story or care about these people's personal lives. Did he do something that you think warrants what happened to him? No no they'd never say that. They're only just saying. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
argondamn posted:Gameplay should always be the most important thing, not how in-line the game is with feminist ideals. I disagree, I still prefer Old Man Murray's crate based rating system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:To an extent yes, but wanting to investigate further isn't in itself conspiratorial. The fact is collusion happens in market places, has happened in the past, and there's been a lot of ethical guidelines and even laws in place to prevent it from happening again. it's very unlikely that collusion was the cause of gone home's high review scores. it is much more likely that the reviewers legitimately liked gone home, and gave it a high score in a review, as is the logical outcome of the review process Jesus Horse posted:I disagree, I still prefer Old Man Murray's crate based rating system. it was the objectively best rating system ever devised
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:07
|
|
|
argondamn posted:OK. I remember why I don't post in D&D. Bye guys. ...because people ask you to back up your claims?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:07
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'm unclear on what that means, I really don't know the story or care about these people's personal lives. Did he do something that you think warrants what happened to him? I don't condone any harassment, but Phil Fish isn't some noble and misunderstood developer that was attacked for defending a woman. He's a cantankerous little poo poo with a history of over-reaction to criticism and a tendency to blame people who speak up rather than address what they're saying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:The way I heard the story is that he tweeted some message supporting zoe quinn and was subsequently personally doxxed, his company site was DDOSed, his company paypal was hacked and the social media for both himself and his company was hacked. Then, he liquidated his IP and got out of the business entirely. I would be pretty angry if all that poo poo happened to me over a tweet. It wasn't just a single tweet, he went off his loving rocker. It doesn't excuse what people did to him of course, its just really odd behavior. Prior to the doxx deleted locked, and recreated his twitter account once or twice out of sheer rage. also this happened  And there was a moment where Notch made a tweet alluding to the ALS icebucket challenge and Fish just comes out of left field and says "Enough with this distraction, what about the events going on at #Ferguson?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Seems like a pretty big leap to me. I don't see anything wrong with reviewers coming together to take a stand against online harassment and the toxic elements of gaming culture. If anything it's more likely that the latter influenced the former; you're naturally going to want to defend something that you like. Well had they signed a open letter taking a stand on this issue, you'd be right. A series of articles that were almost identical and attempting to pass it off as "I just happened to write this one day" was pretty bullshit. Scrub-Niggurath posted:Are there any actual examples of video games actively not being covered because of pressure from any source anywhere? I'm really struggling to come up with an example here. Well that was a point brought up with Depression Quest before Gamergate was blown up. Several people had made recent text/choice games like that in the past which were far superior to Depression Quest, but only Depression Quest got tons of coverage and was greenlit on steam because it "advocated a good cause". Popular Thug Drink posted:it's very unlikely that collusion was the cause of gone home's high review scores. it is much more likely that the reviewers legitimately liked gone home, and gave it a high score in a review, as is the logical outcome of the review process Partly true, but it was odd that many of them missed the glaring flaw that the game could be over in a few minutes depending on your choices.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well that was a point brought up with Depression Quest before Gamergate was blown up. Several people had made recent text/choice games like that in the past which were far superior to Depression Quest, but only Depression Quest got tons of coverage and was greenlit on steam because it "advocated a good cause". how were they superior? Shadoer posted:Partly true, but it was odd that many of them missed the glaring flaw that the game could be over in a few minutes depending on your choices. this is not a flaw. you can beat mario in ten minutes if you know what you're doing. you can beat morrowind in fifteen. is any game that can be speedrun flawed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:For what other media does a reviewer have to qualify their subjective opinion like that? Why should a game reviewer have to state the criteria of their review, when that's not a thing for movies, books, art, fashion or lawn equipment? Well I believe to an extent in books it's also being debated right now with the whole Hugo Award Controversy. Also, most movie reviews I've seen about things like "Fury Road" has had moments where they specifically praise the film for it's portrayal of women, and that's been a part of film review culture for some time. I don't read fashion or lawn equipment, so I can't really comment on that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
The Droid posted:It wasn't just a single tweet, he went off his loving rocker. It doesn't excuse what people did to him of course, its just really odd behavior. Prior to the doxx deleted locked, and recreated his twitter account once or twice out of sheer rage. I'm loving baffled at how mild this poo poo is. You say "went off his loving rocker", I expect Alec Baldwin level poo poo. This is the slapfight that led to a mob actively trying to ruin a man's personal and professional life? What the gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:how were they superior? More expansive, in depth story, far more options, more content, choices you make matter much more, and so on. You might want to play a few of them. Popular Thug Drink posted:this is not a flaw. you can beat mario in ten minutes if you know what you're doing. you can beat morrowind in fifteen. is any game that can be speedrun flawed? To beat mario in ten minutes or morrowing in fifteen you either need a gameguide or the equivalent luck of winning the lottery. Gone Home, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'm loving baffled at how mild this poo poo is. You say "went off his loving rocker", I expect Alec Baldwin level poo poo. This is the slapfight that led to a mob actively trying to ruin a man's personal and professional life? What the gently caress? No I meant the constant deluge of tweets that may as well have been "Uhg I am so mad about this!" "*directed at random twitter handle* Compare your life to mine then kill yourself" for days and weeks on end, not that one thing alone. That's why I said "also this happened". Literally The Worst posted:Games are already about things that aren't just the gameplay and plot ding dong. For all that gamers like to cry that games are art (they are) they don't actually want to treat those things like actual art Out of curiosity/desire for context, what do you mean by "treat those things like actual art"? The Droid fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well that was a point brought up with Depression Quest before Gamergate was blown up. Several people had made recent text/choice games like that in the past which were far superior to Depression Quest, but only Depression Quest got tons of coverage and was greenlit on steam because it "advocated a good cause". This may be the case, I genuinely don't know those other text games, but it's not the same as what I was asking about. There's a difference between 'why are these particular games getting media attention over these more deserving games?', which is a totally valid question to ask, and 'they pressured the media not to cover this particular game, which would have been covered otherwise', which seems a little ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well I believe to an extent in books it's also being debated right now with the whole Hugo Award Controversy. So, do you think that reviewers who mention Fury Road's portrayal of women should be specifically outlining their criteria for review at the front of the article? Is it unfair of these reviewers to be talking about how women are portrayed in action movies, instead of dramatic structure, VFX or cinematography?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:28 |
|
|
Shadoer posted:More expansive, in depth story, far more options, more content, choices you make matter much more, and so on. You might want to play a few of them. how does this make them better though? is more content the same as a better game? Shadoer posted:To beat mario in ten minutes or morrowing in fifteen you either need a gameguide or the equivalent luck of winning the lottery. Gone Home, not so much. i don't understand your argument. you said that a game that can be beaten quickly depending on player choices is flawed, but that's like 95% of games. now you're saying that the gamer needs knowledge of the game, but to beat gone home quickly you have to execute a specific sequence of events which is not readily apparent to the player i'm just not following this argument at all, sorry. why is gone home flawed because it's possible to skip straight to the endgame in a matter of minutes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:17
|
|