aluminiumtrioxid

Which is wonderful, but it still has nothing to do with the image you directly responded to with the aforementioned post, given that said image was depicting a pretty high-ranking marketing guy at Warner Bros. masquerading as a random internet guy going off on a tirade about how it's totally expected for a game to have issues at release nowadays, and anybody raising complaints is "just a bunch of babies". Blaming journalists for that does everybody a disservice. Well, everybody who's interested in calling out anti-consumer attitudes on the publisher side, instead of pointing at the convenient scapegoat of gaming journalism.

Which still has nothing to do with this particular example of ****tiness. For heavens' sake, the guy chose to impersonate a random schmuck on the internet, which signals that they're well aware whose opinions we hold in higher esteem, that of the fellow gamer or journalists'.

...Or you can just admit the obvious, that this has very little to do with how a publisher's marketing people will operate. However, others are free to blame a shadowy cabal of gaming journalists for all the ills of the industry.

Occam's razor would say the reason for that has more to do with the established pattern of publishers being horrible without any outside help than with the press "advocating for them", but whatever.

Well this really has ended well, with a resounding victory for the gamer, and a black eye for the corrupt media whom wanted Steam to not allow a basic consumer right. I do wonder whether this would have occured before Gamergate, and whether the public actually standing up for their rights, and spurning the regressive press has given the publishers a little more respect for their audience. It's amazing how you can take a screenshot about a person on the publisher side behaving like an utter ****, and still blame the press.

Quite so. Between a branch of my family being quite enthusiastic in collaborating with the system, and another branch harboring an undying resentment towards the occupying forces (experiences in labor camps tend to breed that sentiment), and both branches being rather keen on convincing me that their way is the only way, I'd say I had a rather thorough education on how the regime worked.

To have lived my formative years under communism, yes. The statement "I have lived in a totalitarian* state" is, however, technically correct (the best kind of correct!). *for a given value of "totalitarian"

I'm touched by your concern for my levels of understanding regarding the ways a totalitarian state operates, I really am, but I have lived in one, thankyouverymuch. So maybe if you could dial down the condescension, it would be much appreciated. Sorry, it is hard to convey tone over the web. I'm genuinely curious as I realize my perspective may differ from most. Also, you didn't answer my question. I honestly think the term "totalitarian state" is meaningless. There's a huge spectrum of various possible systems of governance with authoritarian attributes (and varying levels thereof); calling all of them "totalitarian" makes the term rather useless. So yeah, personally, I reserve the term for the platonic ideal of the Orwellian nightmare.

I'm touched by your concern for my levels of understanding regarding the ways a totalitarian state operates, I really am, but I have lived in one, thankyouverymuch. So maybe if you could dial down the condescension, it would be much appreciated.

I'm just pointing out that the complete breakdown of civil liberties people envision as the ultimate and inevitable end result of "restricting freedom of speech in video games" seems not to have happened in Germany (yet).

They do that in Germany. They obviously hate freedom of speech. Down with the feminist agenda! Down with the shadowy cabal of SJWs that control Germany!

Yes it is. To quote a classic: "No."

Okay. "SJWs" are not "consumers" (presumably, they're sustained by sheer evil being pumped through their veins or something, and therefore have no need for worldly possessions); moreover, they hate "consumers" with such a fiery passion that they want to ban everything "consumers" like, just for kicks. That's a totally sane thing to believe in. You're an idiot, news at 9.

Perhaps, but that's the result of any platform or industry that is non-centralised and relatively free. There's going to be a whole a lot of stuff you do not like. Is it not the consumers' responsibility to make their preferences clearly known to the producers, however?

^So, um, there. That's why we need diversity. I would agree if it was about expanding the market for new potential segments and new demographics, kinda like Nintendo did with the Wii, but without trying to change the existing ones. I'm not entirely convinced "crappy portrayal of sex workers" is the bedrock any game series was built on.

^So, um, there. That's why we need diversity.

Seeing as the best selling games are the likes of Call of Duty X, Sports, and Bethesda looking for good writing from AAA games is like looking for good writing in a Michael Bay or Zack Snyder film. Smaller games haven't got much better IMO, with Divinity OS and Wasteland 2 having pretty mediocre writing despite being fun. And yes, it a your responsibility to make sure that what you buy isn't a complete piece of ****. Which is why having a variety of tools, such as YouTube videos showing how the game plays, that help one get a feel for the game is a good thing. ...So? You've lost me. Not sure how your points relate to mine.

Seeing as the best selling games are the likes of Call of Duty X, Sports, and Bethesda looking for good writing from AAA games is like looking for good writing in a Michael Bay or Zack Snyder film. Smaller games haven't got much better IMO, with Divinity OS and Wasteland 2 having pretty mediocre writing despite being fun. And yes, it a your responsibility to make sure that what you buy isn't a complete piece of ****. Which is why having a variety of tools, such as YouTube videos showing how the game plays, that help one get a feel for the game is a good thing. ...So?

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect good writing from video games in general. Moreover, I'd venture, it's the consumers' responsibility to demand quality work for their bucks. If we pay for ****ty content, that's all we'll get, because ****ty content is always easier and cheaper to produce than quality work.

But is that a problem inherent in decriminalization itself, or an emergent quality of the interplay between various thorny societal issues that could've been prevented with some foresight?

On one hand, who gives a **** whether a private video about someone, made available to the public without their explicit consent, is depicting said someone having an affair or not? It was still published without their explicit consent, which is pretty ****ing despicable. On the other hand, what the hell, "using prostitutes" in itself is a rather distasteful view of the transaction that takes place, and I don't see how it's incongruent to employ the services of sex workers who choose to be in that industry with not wanting fiction to depict sex workers as non-people completely lacking any sort of agency. On the mutant third hand, what does this whole discussion have to do with "journalism and bias in the gaming industry"?

Myupp. Also, session 3 was when you got acquainted with Grandpa Turtle and broke down the door to the Filthy Staff with Igor a cannon.

*shudder* "But the combat isn't rewarding!" "IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REWARDING YOU PONCE"

Wow. Just... wow. Ethics!

Pillars is a weird game, compared to other offerings on the market. It's very... workmanlike, in a sense. The sheer scope is incredible, if you compare it to other kickstarted games, but in every other arena, there's a game that beats it. Story? Decently written, with some likeable companions, but it can't hold a candle to Shadowrun: Dragonfall. Combat? It has a few memorable encounters, and there's a staggering variety of viable builds, but it doesn't even come close to the sheer joy of Divinity: Original Sin. Worldbuilding? I can appreciate the effort, I really can, but in the end, it's way too hung up on recreating D&D tropes to be really great. The Banner Saga created ten times as strong an atmosphere with a fraction of the wordcount devoted to detailing the world. I think it's definitely a milestone in the kickstarter renaissance (there's just so much quality content in it), but still one of Obsidian's weakest games.