alanschu

I wish your optimism was contagious; I actually think that if she didn't bother to contact the artists and ask her permission she mustn't had much respect for her. Or it could be that she just did a google search and grabbed something convenient (seems like that's her MO) I was speaking from Tammy's perspective (and why she decided to go after this with a tribute piece of a character she didn't create), not Anita's. I suspect in Anita's case, it was a google image search that popped up with that image with a degree of underhandedness to remove the watermark from the image. It's a "shake my head" moment for Anita (someone that I know I've been much more willing to defend on this board than a lot of others)

In my own experience, my opinion tends to be that I observe it more in people that disagree with me. I recognize that I have an inclination to grant those that share my perspective greater leniency than those that don't share my own. In that sense, I'm ascribing my own assumptions into your world as well (which may not actually be accurate, but hey... we disagree and that you pointed it out reaffirms my original perspective )

Day 3 found here Enjoy!

My assumption is that there's a bit of jadedness that the art was used as evidence of objectification against women/justification of the video, when the intent was as a tribute towards Daphne. Just a gut feeling, however.

I think the fallacy is applied pretty generally across humanity, rather than to any particular side of a particular group.

There's still some issues (I don't know about nursing, specifically) in some situations. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full Synopsis. 127 scientists looked at an undergraduate applicant's paperwork. 63 were told the applicant was a man named John. 64 were told the applicant was a woman named Jennifer. Scientists were asked to rate the applicant based on competence, hireability, salary conferral, and mentoring scales (out of 5). The scientists were made up of both men and women, and the results of these evaluations were based on a split based on student gender, and further split on faculty gender. (That is, they look at how male/female students scored split by male/female faculty). In all cases the effect of student gender was significant (significance meaning the difference in values were not due to random chance, as opposed to "large" or "important"), while the effect of faculty gender was NOT significant. In other words, female faculty members were also harder on female applicants than male applicants. The suggesting here being that there may be assumptions that people make about someone's capability based on their sex, and that it affects all people and not just men. Here's a breakdown of the scores Competence: Male Faculty Male applicant (M/M): 4.01 Female applicant (M/F): 3.33 Female Faculty Male (F/M): 4.1 Female (F/M): 3.32 Hireability: M/M: 3.74 M/F: 2.96 F/M: 3.92 F/F: 2.84 Willingness to mentor: M/M: 4.74 M/F: 4.00 F/M: 4.73 F/F: 3.91 Salary offered: M/M: $30,500 M/F: $27,100 (88.9% of Male) F/M: $29,300 F/F: %25,000 (85.3% of Male) The study discusses the following point: I think it's important to point out that stuff like this is possibly (I'd say probably) not intentional. That is, no one is consciously suggesting that the woman is less qualified simply because she's a woman.

The last part of my lets play, I defeat him, if you're looking for some visual assistance.

Well tell him bravo for South Park!

Is this still applicable if Kerry (and the current administration) also feel that invading Iraq in the first place wasn't a good thing? (I honestly have no clue what their views were.

Eh, "must" play is an exaggeration. Obviously it's not a requirement to be a good game developer.

It says BioWare right at the start. 4 seconds in.

I believe that going public was pretty successful in starting the discussion. Though I only did a quick skim of the person's twitter.

Figured it'd make the most sense to post this here, in case people are interested. I have 12 parts up right now. Obviously the links will contain spoilers, but it's probably best to keep spoilers out of the thread or masked with spoiler tags as this is a no spoilers subforum. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLv1uX4i1Tm5JEdbOKrdGW31WXY1b6Ltww

Good point regarding Wasteland 2's success. Nice thing about Kickstarter is he can leverage it again if sales aren't particularly great, but the contributors are mostly happy.

It's too late. Shodan is coming.

Anita Sarkeesian used unlicensed artwork in her kickstarter pitch Author tried communicating to no avail, so she took it more public.

Yea.. that reason is tens of millions of more people are playing computer games nowadays than when the older games came out. It's non-trivial to conclude that those same people would have also picked up the original Fallout games (which still weren't barn burners compared to other games that became higher profile). We'd have to look at what it is about gaming that has made tens of million more people playing games now compared to back then. But yes, comparing the sales of Fallout 1 with Fallout 3 is going to be a simplistic way of looking at it. I would be skeptical if Fallout 1 would have been as successful as Fallout 3 was, though, if it was released today (complete with better graphics)

Interpol receives a request for international warrant for Yanukovych Crimean MPs vote unanimously leave Ukraine - Add response to referendum to vote for joining with Russia

There's only one button I wish I could remap (G). The control scheme for the game is pretty simple I find.

Stanley Parable: Introspective look at reconciling telling a game story while balancing player autonomy in a video game.

The classic campaign game already has lightweight story elements, in that the losing team is pushed back and has to evacuate the battleground. In terms of experience rewards, the losing players are awarded just as many points for a win if they are able to evacuate. I don't think it's a strategic map at all. But you're right, I am not sure what they mean at all either, so I'm quite curious what exactly they plan to do.

Well, I suppose it'll be clear on whether that is the case before you'd be interested in buying. But yeah, I'd rather you know what the game is about than to plop down some money and go "wow, none of this is for me!!"

It wasn't clear in my post, but I agree. It may not be professional, but perhaps it still needed to be shared with people at large. A behind the scenes conversation may not solve anything (though may still cost her her job).

Just to be clear, I'm not getting the impression that the campaign mode is a "co-op multiplayer mode." Have you heard otherwise? I thought it was still going to be human team vs. human team. Just with extra flavour during the missions to help flesh out a new setting. That is, I thought it was more "this is the multiplayer we want you to be playing, but here's some extra fluff to help you enjoy the setting more."

Russia Today responds to Liz Wahl's resignation I can agree that this may not be the most professional way of doing things. At the same time, however, I am not sure if it is shameless self-promotion or not because I could see an act like this compromising her professionally. On the other hand, sometimes people feel something needs to be said in a particularly shocking way. In any case, she made her bed in this way.