aluminiumtrioxid

Yyyeah, that's not how human beings operate, really, and expecting the other side to consist literally of a host of saints who are perfectly willing to make concessions to the other side they not only find deplorable, but that has also presented itself to be unwilling to make the same concessions is unrealistic. Of course, if your goal is to hold your opponents to an unrealistic standard and decry them morally bankrupt when they don't hold up to that standard, it's a completely reasonable expectation.

If you say so. I respect your opinions, and the fact that you are putting a lot more energy into digging up stuff related to this thing, therefore you're probably way better informed than I am. Still, from what I've seen here, this is a pervasive and undeniable attitude present in a huge chunk of GG-related stuff that has been linked to. The other way around. They are hypocrites. Let me get this straight. Anti-GG spokespeople get harrassed. They respond to this by collectively calling GG-ers abusive backwards cavemen or something. GG-ers brush this off and get their pitchforks. The sight of pitchforks awakens atavistic impulses in certain elements of anti-GGers, who start to harrass GG-ers. GG-ers collectively call anti-GG-ers bad names, and when they do the exact same thing GG-ers have done a few days ago when faced with name-calling based on the actions of a deranged few, it's a proof of their inferiority and lack of moral backbone? Meh, the SJW crowd is worse at that particular aspect. Both sides shout a lot, and some intimidate, dox etc. But there's only really one side that is standing for and enforcing censorship- the ultimate method of shouting down, by ensuring the other side can't even speak- and that ain't the GG side. ...Yeah, I'm not sure it's that cut-and-dried.

Which is a lofty idea I'd be much more receptive to, if it didn't seem to mean "fighting thereof by shouting down criticism I don't agree with". I don't really know where the idea of "SJWs have to make gestures we are unwilling to make, BECAUSE REASONS" is coming from, but it looks like a huge steaming pile of horsecrap from where I'm standing.

It's not a perfectly valid argument to make since it's not true. GG has no roots there. The movement was founded on the principle that Gamers are NOT the people organising a campaign. Everything else has been a misrepresentation to fit a false narrative created by journalists. The roots fall squarely in a series of slanderous, offensive articles regarding that campaign and not the campaign itself. Except a/ the whole mess originated on the 4chan message boards in Aug 18., in response to which said articles were written. If you search back the public archives they've released, you'll see Quinn's name mentioned over a 100 times in the first few days, while "journalism" comes up <20 times. "Ethics" doesn't even get mentioned until we're 4 days in. Also, b/ note my usage of "perceived as".

See, this is why it's become impossible to take a side here. Because the sides don't see it as what it is - consumer revolt. They see it was a battle, a war. And bad stuff that happens is casualties of war. At this point, both sides have become the bad guy because of people's penchant for being overdramatic. Yeah, basically. Also don't forget the whole "you can't really be a moderate/neutral party here" angle, when the self-proclaimed moderates on one side are throwing around charming phrases like "social justice fascists want to force all games to conform to their deplorable and morally bankrupt worldview". On the other hand, I'm firmly of the opinion that... when you take it at face value, the GG narrative just doesn't really add up. There is the assumption that the events of the last few weeks were "just the straw that broke the camel's back". (It's a phrase I've heard repeatedly from various GG-related people.) That means GG-ers haven't put much stock into what game journalism says... let's say since 2012, when another (actually, in my opinion, much better argued and more insightful) article came out about corruption in game journalism. But if it's established that they're crooks, why does anyone find it such a huge betrayal that a journalist sleeps with an indie developer (who, by the way, unlike big publishers, has very limited influence and therefore impact on the industry as a whole)? If their opinion doesn't matter, who cares what they write about "gamers", whatever they mean by that label? If GG-ers haven't given their money to game journalists, even the "they are insulting their customers!" argument doesn't hold water. Not to mention the fact that most of us are adults with various jobs, responsibilities and hobbies, gaming being only a small portion of it. Is "gamer" really such a core part of our identities as to warrant this reaction when threatened by people we don't give a **** about? No, I'm fairly convinced this whole thing isn't about games journalism (which deserves to die in a fire, though, so be my guests to do the pitchfork-y/torch-y thing).

"No."

I'll join in the wild mass guessing regardless, and hazard the guess that they're of the eminently reasonable "oh my god, this whole thing is dumb" opinion. Nice dodge. Says the guy whose knee-jerk reaction to a fairly likely explanation of why Obsidz might not want to wade in this whole mess is "DOESN'T MATTER IT'S FOLLY TO THINK ABOUT IT".

I'll join in the wild mass guessing regardless, and hazard the guess that they're of the eminently reasonable "oh my god, this whole thing is dumb" opinion.

Actually "for many people, the fact that GG has its roots in what's widely perceived as an organized harrassment campaign against Zoe Quinn is enough to turn them off the whole movement on principle, regardless of what it's morphed into since (which is not necessarily a very rational stance, but there you have it)" is a perfectly valid argument on Bruce's part, which you haven't addressed thus far.

Quick and easy method of resolving hanging plot hooks in a sandbox.

Cthulhu simulator kickstarter!

Wow, that's... beyond ****ty. Links please?

Science fantasy dragons!

Would a link violate forum rules?

Lots of maps to use as you see fit. Sadly, the blog is no longer active, but it was among my favorites. It sold me on the new edition of Hackmaster. Gave cool tips on monster design. It has some other useful stuff, but nothing groundbreaking. Still, I remember it fondly. Also, the maps are a good resource.

The first part I can fully empathize with, actually. They're running a business, not a charity. The second? Wow, that's dickish.

...Well, you're not in that game (yet), so I'll go ahead and say it does.

...So, actual plays... They're useful as memory aids on the short term, reminders of the cool stuff you did on the long term, and GM/player CVs. I also couldn't help but notice that mine seems to be regularly viewed by a 100-ish people (or so I presume), which points at the fact that they might provide entertainment even to those who were not actually involved in the game. So given my fondness for these, my other Dark Heresy group (the one I'm a player in) asked me to serve as a chronicler to our game. I've agreed on the condition that there needs to be an outside interest in our misadventures, because even my exhibitionism/narcissism has limits. So I'm asking here. Would anybody be interested in another actual play, similar to the Enigma, but this time from a player's perspective?

I feel compelled to point out the "White Large" words on the container. Can't help but snicker (and feel bad about it).

Ah. Reading it now.

I'm gonna be strong and not give them a view by clicking on it.

Prey, the latest Alone in the Dark episode, not predetermined but a possible outcome in Castlevania: Dracula X Chronicles and Pandora's Tower, not-love-of-your-life variant in a God of War spinoff (your mother), in Borderlands 2 and Duke Nukem (classic and Forever both). Funny thing is, it'd work. Endorphines get released by walking, so sending people to walk it off is surprisingly efficient in treating depression.

Read Magic fumble table!

I guess when a lot of the alternatives boil down to "the love of your life has been corrupted so you must execute her in cold blood", even Dear Esther is starting to look good.

Well, she did mention Dear Esther, To the Moon, and some other indie game as examples where the death of female characters "wasn't used in a cheap or sensationalistic manner" or something like that, so...