IGN Article about PoE.

[Sensuki]

And I think people who use the term "social justice warrior" as an insult are vapid idiots.

Why specifically?

 

AFAIK it's a term that has become popular recently, and in my opinion it refers to people who white knight issues like racism and sexism (among other things) for the wrong reasons. RockPaperShotgun do it for the page hits, and I don't know if it's just me but when I read some of Nathan Grayson's stuff it just seemed like on top of being a popularity stunt he was trying to suck up to the female writer at RPS that was harping on about it as well to earn brownie points. I also use it to refer to the people who might have good intentions but take it way too far, as I thought was the case in this thread.

 

If that makes me an idiot in your eyes, so be it. Doesn't bother me.

 

Then again I come from White Australia and I grew up with Ching Chong Chinaman at middle school. So take that with a grain of salt if you wish.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

Having grown up a while in White Australia myself, I can certainly confirm the predominance of harsh treatment of anything different. Comments like eyetie, wog and chinaman were everyday phenomena, like three decades back, even in cities. In one school I went to, in year twelve there were like 1,500 pupils there, and only one of them, was of aboriginal descent. Other "minorities" were ironically, taken together, the majority, but it was an endless (and thankfully, often slightly lovingly, grain-of-salty) picking on your origins and looks, that kind of bickering was the norm.

 

That said, though, Sensuki, if I were you, I would refrain from any claims of knowing why people are fighting for various social issues. How you can separate what is right from wrong behind the internets and a digital screen, is beyond me. Isn't that kind of fight for social justice always important? Can we ever have enough of it?

 

Instead of jumping on some macho bandwagon, with condescending jargon, pouncing on anything that even remotely tries to live up to some common decency, why not just acknowledge that gamers are gamers regardless of gender, race, class, sexual orientation, and what not? Also, a thing to ask youself (we all need to ask ourselves this on a regular basis): What benefits do I reap from maintaining any of those hierarchies? "Girl gamer" is so last millennium. Give it a break, any of yous that still live in that la-la-land, and lay off with the hardboiled attitude already, and bring out your inner whimp.

[PrimeJunta]

Oo, my favorite minefield. Full speed ahead, then, and damn the torpedoes.

 

From where I'm at, some people say some annoying and counterproductive things in the name of 'social justice' -- i.e., to combat sexism, racism, homophobia, and what have you, in the geek/gamer/atheist/etcsphere. For example, I'm not a big fan of language policing or, especially, of white middle-class American males schooling people about how to speak about this kind of stuff. It's irritating and IMO often counterproductive. It also often runs straight into a wall: some language police who's vehemently opposed to mansplaining has no problem yanksplaining what a particular British vulgarism 'must' mean with no understanding of the context.

 

Similarly, I'm bloody annoyed at the way BioWare for example is going -- instead of, like, not putting in massively objectifying romances and lingering gratuitious T&A shots, their solution is to put in EVEN MORE objectifying romances but with men and aliens of all possible orientations, plus beefcake. That's not progress, it's INCLOOOSIVE! like in that Codex meme.

 

However--and this is a pretty damn huge however--the degree of annoyance of these annoying things is utterly trivial compared to the degree of damage done by the problems "SJW's" care about. The bald fact is that if you are a woman gamer and say anything in public that is at all complimentary about feminism, or express irritation about being treated as a "girl" gamer, and so on and so forth, you run a real risk of getting your inbox filled with rape and death threats, getting doxxed, photoshopped into animal porn, and so on and so forth.

 

So if Sensuki gets butthurt when someone calls him out for using the phrase 'girl gamer,' well cry me a river. Get back to me when somebody's made Flash game where we can punch your face and see the bruises build up, sent you a couple hundred emails telling you what they want to insert into your orifices prior to dismembering you and eating your liver for dinner, and then posted your home address online.

 

So my beef with "SJW-ism" is the same beef as with "playing the race card." Sure, I'm sure you can find an example of someone actually playing the race card or being a white knight/SJW -- but that's a good deal rarer than having someone play the "playing the race card" card or trying to shut down a discussion by going LOLSJW. And both of these problems fade into insignificance when compared to the sh1t uppity b1tches have to go through if they have the temerity to, I dunno, post a YouTube critique of sexism in a video game.

 

In other words, I think discussing whether some particular instance of SJW-ery is actual SJW-ery is a huge waste of time, and is in fact usually exactly what the individual making the accusation wants -- instead of talking about whatever incident prompted the comment, we've been derailed into discussing whether PrimeJunta is a white knight and SJW.

 

And yes, I do think the culture must change--and it is changing. The tricky bit is changing it in a way that doesn't create a stifling climate where everyone has to tread on eggshells for fear of offending somebody. Not sending people rape threats, and not trying to ridicule people who publicly say that sending people rape threats is a Bad Thing, would be a good start.

 

SJW out.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Indeed. SJW arguments are nothing but smoke screens, fending off unwanted opinions, criticisms and (even) people. Sad, but true. It reeks of immaturity and ill-hidden fear, IMHO.

[Sensuki]

I probably wouldn't even have entered this conversation if ManifestedISO said something controversial. What he said was completely normal however especially considering the context, and had several people arcing up about what he said.

 

This kind of overzealousness ruins the flow of discussion on many forums, and it's something I find annoying. I thought it was appropriate to chime in here, specifically where previously I have avoided these discussions with a ten-foot pole because I come here to discuss Pillars of Eternity, not argue about social issues.

[IndiraLightfoot]

This kind of overzealousness ruins the flow of discussion on many forums, and it's something I find annoying.

Translation: Overzealousness=SJW

In my experience on forums, and its going way back, the blockage and clots caused by any such discussions, the vast majority of posts in them consist of anti-SJW. They treat any diverting opinions as some pop-a-mole game. Those discussions could have been much healthier, flowing and constructive, otherwise.  

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Indeed. SJW arguments are nothing but smoke screens, fending off unwanted opinions, criticisms and (even) people. Sad, but true. It reeks of immaturity and ill-hidden fear, IMHO.

 

Depends on the context. There are people who do jump on social justice issues, not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They have a 'me-too' personality and typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or campaigner at the time. And often jump to the next popular thing that comes along without any thought. Even when shown something they're campaigning doesn't make much sense, they quickly move onto the next popular thing. When asked about what they're doing on an issue they were parroting 2 months ago, they've all but forgotten about it. And when asked why they don't follow up on that cause, they admit they're more concerned about bringing to attention issues that's relevant today than something that's happened in the past, even if it was 2 months ago. They're equivalent to reporters in the media, where the SJW will swoop on a social issue like a seagull and with the same attention of that seagull will forget what that issue was about by moving onto the next hot topic.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Hiro: Fair enough. That can certainly be the case at times. As long as it can be confirmed (reasonably) that this is what's going on, any valid criticisms of that behaviour is welcome, but wouldn't you say that far too many shoot from the hip as soon as they suspect that's the case?

Edited July 29, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[dorkboy]

So.. how about that trap FX rectangle*? Is that prerendered?

 

(*the one when the trap is triggered, that is.)

Edited July 29, 2014 by dorkboy

[Karkarov]

So.. how about that trap FX rectangle*? Is that prerendered?

 

(*the one when the trap is triggered, that is.)

I love this post if for no other reason than that it is changing the subject.

 

A small close knit internet forum has never been and will never be the place to discuss social issues or display the arrogance to believe you fully understand them or that it is ever all black and white/one sided for either cause.  So let's move on and discuss those totally over the top trap graphics.

[PrimeJunta]

I know! Let's discuss whether it's appropriate to discuss what to discuss ITT. Hours of fun guaranteed for all.

[IndiraLightfoot]

So.. how about that trap FX rectangle*? Is that prerendered?

 

(*the one when the trap is triggered, that is.)

Thank you for putting this topic on the right track: And I like to know this as well? I'd guess it isn't, but there are other folks here on the forums that are much more qualified to discern stuff like that than me.

[Lephys]

I know! Let's discuss whether it's appropriate to discuss what to discuss ITT. Hours of fun guaranteed for all.

But we haven't yet discussed whether or not it's appropriate to discuss that! What are you trying to do... get us all killed?! o_o

 

I found a much simpler way to say what I was trying to say earlier, btw:

 

Stereotypes are bad, but stereotyping people into a group of "stereotypists" doesn't really help battle stereotyping. It doesn't take the figurative pollution down to zero.

 

Anywho... I dunno about that trap FX rectangle, either. All I know is it's trappy and dangerous. 8P

Edited July 29, 2014 by Lephys

[SophosTheWise]

On the whole "We don't want to spoil anything and we don't want to show unpolished stuff": It wasn't even that what struck me as being weird. What I found really odd is that there was no indication of this whatsoever, not even a little forum post or a small backer update stating "by the way guys, you'll get big news from gaming sites tomorrow". It was quite an anticlimactic showing of the game, especially after that loooong build-up and really short teaser trailer. It was just a bit "hey by the way there's a video". 

 

As a side note, reading the IGN comments gave me cancer.

[ashtonw]

I found a much simpler way to say what I was trying to say earlier, btw:

Stereotypes are bad, but stereotyping people into a group of "stereotypists" doesn't really help battle stereotyping. It doesn't take the figurative pollution down to zero.

 

What does that mean... is that even English? 

[Lephys]

What does that mean... is that even English?

*sigh*... It means that stereotyping everyone who says "girl gamer" isn't helping anything when you're trying to get people to stop stereotyping female gamers.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[ashtonw]

Good point. We gotta stick up for the marginalized group of people who say "girl gamer." Please carry on talking about rectangles.

[Lephys]

Yes, but no other phrases. Only that one phrase. Glad you picked up on that.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Good point. We gotta stick up for the marginalized group of people who say "girl gamer."

 

roflmao.

[PrimeJunta]

Oh, Lephys, Lephys. Don't ever change.

 

There is a point to this kind of discussion, though, annoying as it is. It puts a social price tag on oblivious sexism. Take Sensuki, for example. He's really not all that argumentative and strongly prefers to discuss games rather than, say, cultural or social issues. He and others have already modified their behavior when they've noticed that certain kinds of behavior will bring out the SJW's and get threads derailed. It doesn't even require huge roaring battles, just "Hey, that wasn't very cool" followed by a few Likes. It imposes a social cost on dickish behavior. That's how the culture changes, little by little. The world ain't ever going to be perfect, but it can get better.

[Zwiebelchen]

Idk, I always connected girl gamers to something like this: http://www.twitch.tv/kaceytron/b/551217120 or this http://www.twitch.tv/kneecoleslaw/b/551595040

 

 

 

edit: Though, to be honest, they fall more in to the category of camgirls.

 

Those are not girl gamers. Those are - as you said - just camgirls that noticed they make more cash without actually needing to undress when playing games. It's practically the evolution of porn.

 

I wish they wouldn't call themselves gamergirls, because I feel they give a lot of legit gamergirls on twitch a bad reputation. You know, there ARE twich gamer girls where the cam window isn't as big as the screen window.

 

This summarizes the difference (and reality) quite good:

 

Edited July 30, 2014 by Zwiebelchen

[Elerond]

When speaking about twitch/'youtube gaming' personalities it should be remembered that they are first and fore most entertainers, who found some gimmick (like high level gameplay, gameplay commentary, reacting happenings in game with entertaining way, or some other act that entertains people) that gets people watch them day after day, giving them ability to do it as their job. Finding your audience in entertainment business isn't always most easiest thing to do, so when you find gimmick that works you usually keep doing it until it don't work anymore. So I wouldn't go judge people that get all/most of their lively hood by playing/commenting/criticizing games aren't gamers enough to call themselves gamers, even if you don't like gimmick that they use to entertain their audience. 

[Zwiebelchen]

When speaking about twitch/'youtube gaming' personalities it should be remembered that they are first and fore most entertainers, who found some gimmick (like high level gameplay, gameplay commentary, reacting happenings in game with entertaining way, or some other act that entertains people) that gets people watch them day after day, giving them ability to do it as their job. Finding your audience in entertainment business isn't always most easiest thing to do, so when you find gimmick that works you usually keep doing it until it don't work anymore. So I wouldn't go judge people that get all/most of their lively hood by playing/commenting/criticizing games aren't gamers enough to call themselves gamers, even if you don't like gimmick that they use to entertain their audience. 

 

Yeah, you may be right on that. After all, they are just playing the Youtube game. Can't blame them for that.

 

It's just sad that they get put on the same level as actual gamergirls on twitch, while it's clearly a different kind of thing:

 

When watching a streamer, I usually watch for the commentary and the gameplay. And for the feeling of "playing with someone". I know it sounds weird, but the most attractive thing about let's plays or twitch streaming is, that you are not "playing alone" (even if you aren't playing at all!). You can talk about your favorite game, you can discuss game events, etc. ... the whole experience feels a lot more involving that way. We all know that feeling of having seen an awesome movie in a theater, but none of your friends watched it. You want to talk about it, but you can't. In Let's Plays and twitch streaming, you always have people around to communicate. And that is a great feeling. You are part of a social event.

Think about Let's Players or commentators like Adam and Jeff from LagTV (http://www.youtube.com/user/LifesAGlitchTV). You watch them for their socializing. Because they are fun people and great comedians. In germany, the most popular Let's Player is Gronkh, a hearty bearded guy-next-door with an awesome voice and hilarious humor.

 

If I compare these guys with kaceytron, then you will simply notice a huge difference in value here. All you have there is guys drooling and staring at her ****. There is no entertainment, there is no playing value, there is no discussion. There is no socializing other than her answering private questions on chat.

Is she a clever business woman? Definitely. But does she have any redeeming qualities as a commentator or entertainer aside from her looks? No. Close the cam window, and nobody would watch anymore.

 

Several weeks ago, I was browsing twitch for some interesting channels and found a channel of an half-asian (maybe ... wasn't quite sure) girl playing some pretty unusual games (like Portal or Mass Effect). She was definitely good-looking, but delivered a lot more in-style of what you would expect from a real commentator and let's player. There was no camera window (just when she selected games or talked freely she switched over to camera mode), no tight clothes or revealing dresses. She didn't have stripper make-up or told private backstories to make guys drool. She was just there, playing games, commentating and being a fun and nice person. I had several good laughs about her snarky comments. It was enjoyable! And then I looked at the view counter. She didn't even have more than 100 viewers, despite doing everything terribly right. Occasionally, someone joined the channel and posted something like "show your ****!". She never responded and those people left soon after.

commentators like her go down between the masses of camgirls like kaceytron. I wish they wouldn't be put into the same category. I wish there was a search option for channels of "real" female streamers.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Zwiebelchen

[nipsen]

So.. how about that trap FX rectangle*? Is that prerendered?

 

(*the one when the trap is triggered, that is.)

It's likely one static resource/animation that fires from each of the pillars... as in they don't create the flame with fake physics by lighting a volume-body on fire, and so on. And that most of the effect is a 2d overlay effect. But each of them, each of the flame animations ..could.. :D have an element to it with the smoke, secondary fires and glow and so on that is rendered depending on whether something is underneath in the non-background areas. Very easy to have anything under an animation like that essentially be invisible. And I'm not completely sure, but it doesn't look like that's actually happening. Very much like the swirls and overlays in Dungeon Siege 3 (which were brilliant - that there's essentially an effect swirl rendered in a separate layer on top of the image, twisted depending on the view-angle from above. So depending on your definition - all realtime effects, but some of it is pre-rendered and placed only on the overlay. None of which you will notice, because the camera-angle is fixed. I.e., it's the 2d detail of the scene from the infinity engine, but with scaleable and amazing "next gen" tech, and without the obvious 2d breakage. ...incidentally, stuff like this is what Obsidian really should advertise more, because it's awesome even if you don't know anything about animation and rendering). 

 

I'm pretty sure that the actual flame animations also have "tints" that follow the lighting theme, or flame colour in outside and inside areas as well. That even if they have different flame animations and effects, that there's possibly some dynamic element of it that decides whether the flame looks yellow in the middle - instead of searing red and black, like it does in the trap.

 

But instead of me randomly making guesses about something I really wouldn't know - click your heels together a few times and wish for Josh to answer it instead...?

[dorkboy]

 

So.. how about that trap FX rectangle*? Is that prerendered?

 

(*the one when the trap is triggered, that is.)

It's likely one static resource/animation that fires from each of the pillars... as in they don't create the flame with fake physics by lighting a volume-body on fire, and so on. And that most of the effect is a 2d overlay effect. But each of them, each of the flame animations ..could.. :D have an element to it with the smoke, secondary fires and glow and so on that is rendered depending on whether something is underneath in the non-background areas. Very easy to have anything under an animation like that essentially be invisible. And I'm not completely sure, but it doesn't look like that's actually happening. Very much like the swirls and overlays in Dungeon Siege 3 (which were brilliant - that there's essentially an effect swirl rendered in a separate layer on top of the image, twisted depending on the view-angle from above. So depending on your definition - all realtime effects, but some of it is pre-rendered and placed only on the overlay. None of which you will notice, because the camera-angle is fixed. I.e., it's the 2d detail of the scene from the infinity engine, but with scaleable and amazing "next gen" tech, and without the obvious 2d breakage. ...incidentally, stuff like this is what Obsidian really should advertise more, because it's awesome even if you don't know anything about animation and rendering). 

 

I'm pretty sure that the actual flame animations also have "tints" that follow the lighting theme, or flame colour in outside and inside areas as well. That even if they have different flame animations and effects, that there's possibly some dynamic element of it that decides whether the flame looks yellow in the middle - instead of searing red and black, like it does in the trap.

 

But instead of me randomly making guesses about something I really wouldn't know - click your heels together a few times and wish for Josh to answer it instead...?

 

Yeah, I'd guessed as much already - more or less. Makes me wonder about those purpley purple things, and also laptop frame rate.