Drama in the indy gaming biz ?

[Deadly_Nightshade]

 

 

Moffat hasn't provided that great of material...

 

That's because Moffat isn't a good head writer...

Better than Davies....

 

 

God no, I would take Davies back in a heartbeat over having Moffat stay (but then I'm also not a fan of Sherlock so it could be that I don't like his style). I think that Moffat did his best work when there was someone to tell him 'no, that's stupid - don't do that' and, besides possibly Peter Capaldi, there's not anyone to do that at the moment.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

So I guess whores in games are a thing of the past.

 

There's always The Witcher...

[BruceVC]

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/09/01/saints-row-4-developer-says-anita-sarkeesian-is-right-in-latest-tropes-vs-women-in-videogames-video/

 

 

Interesting, I guess we really should start accepting that there is a problem with the objectification of women in games when the creative director of a game like  Saints Row acknowledges it?

Amazing how easily he's winning over people with just words like that, something to be said for timing. So I guess whores in games are a thing of the past.

 

 

 

Fair enough, you may be right. This could just be opportunistic

 

But  is it also so inconceivable that this is what he really believes and the Zoe\Anita  incident just gave him a platform to voice it?

Edited September 3, 2014 by BruceVC

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

 

Moffat hasn't provided that great of material...

 

That's because Moffat isn't a good head writer...

Better than Davies....

God no, I would take Davies back in a heartbeat over having Moffat stay (but then I'm also not a fan of Sherlock so it could be that I don't like his style). I think that Moffat did his best work when there was someone to tell him 'no, that's stupid - don't do that' and, besides possibly Peter Capaldi, there's not anyone to do that at the moment.

I think after the first season of NewWho Davies had no idea what to do, so injected romance crap into the show. The less sad I about Torchwood the better.

[Malcador]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFSYAn6pPFg

 

Everyone's ranting now

[Deadly_Nightshade]

The less sad I about Torchwood the better.

 

 

Unless we're talking about Children of Earth and then you have to mention it as it's amazing!

And, yes, NewWho did get a bit romance-heavy for a bit, although one could argue that Moffat is worse and you also have Donna, my favorite Companion, to break things up between Rose/Martha and Amy/River (and, while with Matt Smith, Clara). But, even with that, I still preferred the first four seasons, plus Waters of Mars, to the last few seasons (this one has been promising so far though).

 

EDIT:

Back on topic, I've not really been following the ‘news’ and really just have one question – has it actually been confirmed if she slept with people? If not then what’s the fuss about (besides the death threats and other BS that have spawned from the cesspool that can be the Internet)? Her ex accused her of sleeping around, sure, but it wouldn’t be the first time someone was an asshat after a break-up and I’m, honestly, slightly skeptical of his word unless there is some other evidence.

 

Edited September 3, 2014 by Deadly_Nightshade

[BruceVC]

 

Everyone's ranting now

 

That video made me laugh

 

Yeah he is no different to the radical feminists we see with his generalizations around this topic. Not a very helpful commentary. I have seen it all before

[BruceVC]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/9695-Quit-Using-The-Term-Social-Justice-Warriors\

 

Guys I strongly recommend you watch this video. I normally don't support Jim Sterling but he articulates the situation nicely and makes some excellent points

 

I also agree with him when he says certain  people label anyone who has a different opinion than them a SJW. This is often  an exaggeration of someone's view and I see it sometimes on these forums. In other words if I don't condemn Anita and Zoe " I must be a SJW"

 

Anyway watch the video and tell me what you think

[kirottu]

So if someone still thinks that 10 articles in gaming magazines in one day all promoting the idea "gamers are dead" was a coincidence...

https://twitter.com/legobutts/statuses/501855043612848128 

 

These people are using their connections in gaming media to push their own agenda. 

[Orogun01]

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

This has real world relevance how? All throughout the 90's every sitcom diminished the importance of men for comedic purposes (e.g: Married with Children, Friends, The Drew Carey Show, Seinfeld, etc.. ) There was no outrage from men, there were still action movies and a diverse representation of men in different roles. The same is true for women, the media is there you just have too look for it; Anita did and apparently thought they were all misogynistic. There are also a lot of realistic portrayal of women that are being denied simply because it doesn't comfort to their value system, or are we expected to buy that all women are perfect and above fault (I'm reminded how some people defended Charlize Theron role in Monster just on the basis that she was a woman killing men)

Also, how about objectification of men in female targeted media? If men take offense to it will the feminists readily agree to take it down because you know; they're about equality. Or will they just call them MRA.

We had this discussion before and it always turn the same, because somehow you have found a way to believe in modern feminism and live on the real world without massive cognitive dissonance; kudos for that really.

Myself, I don't recognize their value system based on the fact that women are oppressed just because there is content that's offensive to them. Specially since that offensive content has done less to color my attitudes toward women than real women have. I can't take seriously the childish wailing of women who instead of adapting to the world and finding the media that they like; which is there because there is always something for everyone. Instead they choose to try and turn society on its head because apparently there is something wrong with liking women for their bodies. 

Also, you really don't see how instead of a moderate rally for the creation of new media that better represents their values alongside the other kinds differs from the current voicing of the end of objectification and how all media should be inclusive and non offensive. (Even going so far as to begin the concept of triggers) I would also like you to consider the fact that their actions (the few that they've made) haven't been positive. 

As for the misogynistic 4chan, somehow even from the beginning of this whole thing (4 years or so ago) have managed to make the distinction between real feminist; which they taken to calling women's right activist and the new wave feminists. Even going as far as holding one as an example to the other of what they should be.

As a whole I find any positive comment about this kind of feminism disingenuous, even if there are good people in there their actions as a group always leave a lot to be desired and as a said before; 4chan has done more in two weeks for the cause of women in gaming that feminist have done in 2 years. In the end is your actions that are the measure of your character and I've seen the character both parties and I find feminists to be lacking. I wish you could prove me wrong.

[BruceVC]

So if someone still thinks that 10 articles in gaming magazines in one day all promoting the idea "gamers are dead" was a coincidence...

https://twitter.com/legobutts/statuses/501855043612848128 

 

These people are using their connections in gaming media to push their own agenda. 

 

I assume you will be buying one of those wristbands?

 

Its for a good cause after all, all proceeds of sales go to the "kill the gamer campaign " ....

[Volourn]

"Incorrect, the definition of a "gamer" refers to any white, male gamer who refuses to accept that the gaming demographic is changing and is very vociferous and obstructive to any perceived  changes to how games incorporate the entire fanbase."
 

HAHAHAHA!

 

 

"End of the day I'm trying to get you guys to understand this is not an attack on white, male gamers."
 

Yes, it is. Don't lie.

 

 

• "You can continue to intentionally misunderstand what people are saying and create a problem where there isn't one. You can vent and lambast every gaming journalist but that won't change the reality of what is going to be considered acceptable going forward around inclusivity in games
• You can see this change as something positive which doesn't really effect you in any meaningful way. You will still have your entertaining RPG, FPS and you will still have your GTAV  type  experiences. But as far as the major publishers are concerned there will be an expectation from them that there games represent  the fanbase fairly and realistically. Its not complicated or unreasonable"

Totally brainwashed garbage. This is why feminists are evil sexist scumbags.

 

 

"I'll repeat this for the third or fourth time and it will be my last. The word "gamers" in this debate doesn't mean an attack on white, male gamers.

 

Its an attack on white, male gamers that refuse to recognise and accept  the necessary change that is coming the gaming industry. I can't be more clear than that"
 

What ignorant spindoctoring.  It's not an attack on white males gamers but it's an attack on white male gamers. LMAO

 

 

"Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference :)"

 

Men are objectivied all the time.  As much as women. The difference is nobody whines about so it's not seen as a big deal. Harlequin exists for a reason. Soaps 9which i actually like) exist for a reason. Plenty of males have gotten careers because girls/women find them attractive. Check out Amerikan idol who has plenty of winners who won because they got voted by women/girls objectifying them. *shrug*  For a guy who goes on about sexy characters in games you shouldn't be talking about 'objectification' or sexual attraction as a bad thing. 'Cause it isn't.

[BruceVC]

 

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

This has real world relevance how? All throughout the 90's every sitcom diminished the importance of men for comedic purposes (e.g: Married with Children, Friends, The Drew Carey Show, Seinfeld, etc.. ) There was no outrage from men, there were still action movies and a diverse representation of men in different roles. The same is true for women, the media is there you just have too look for it; Anita did and apparently thought they were all misogynistic. There are also a lot of realistic portrayal of women that are being denied simply because it doesn't comfort to their value system, or are we expected to buy that all women are perfect and above fault (I'm reminded how some people defended Charlize Theron role in Monster just on the basis that she was a woman killing men)

Also, how about objectification of men in female targeted media? If men take offense to it will the feminists readily agree to take it down because you know; they're about equality. Or will they just call them MRA.

We had this discussion before and it always turn the same, because somehow you have found a way to believe in modern feminism and live on the real world without massive cognitive dissonance; kudos for that really.

Myself, I don't recognize their value system based on the fact that women are oppressed just because there is content that's offensive to them. Specially since that offensive content has done less to color my attitudes toward women than real women have. I can't take seriously the childish wailing of women who instead of adapting to the world and finding the media that they like; which is there because there is always something for everyone. Instead they choose to try and turn society on its head because apparently there is something wrong with liking women for their bodies. 

Also, you really don't see how instead of a moderate rally for the creation of new media that better represents their values alongside the other kinds differs from the current voicing of the end of objectification and how all media should be inclusive and non offensive. (Even going so far as to begin the concept of triggers) I would also like you to consider the fact that their actions (the few that they've made) haven't been positive. 

As for the misogynistic 4chan, somehow even from the beginning of this whole thing (4 years or so ago) have managed to make the distinction between real feminist; which they taken to calling women's right activist and the new wave feminists. Even going as far as holding one as an example to the other of what they should be.

As a whole I find any positive comment about this kind of feminism disingenuous, even if there are good people in there their actions as a group always leave a lot to be desired and as a said before; 4chan has done more in two weeks for the cause of women in gaming that feminist have done in 2 years. In the end is your actions that are the measure of your character and I've seen the character both parties and I find feminists to be lacking. I wish you could prove me wrong.

 

 

As usual you make some good points in a  reasonable way. So in response

 

• We need to separate radical feminism, which don't support, to campaigns around gender equality. I believe you acknowledge this already Even though most movies have reached a happy equilibrium around fair gender representation I don't think games have. But huge advancements have been made. But for example, and this doesn't apply to Indie developers as we discussed in the past, when a company of the size of Ubisoft doesn't have a female protagonist this is obviously a problem for a large part  of the fanbase
• Yes I agree that new media can be a way to address the perception around gender inequality but why should companies like Activision or Ubisoft not take there share of responsibility around this expectation. They are after all making money from female fans? Don't these fans who are spending money also have a right to be fairly represented?
• I also don't believe women are oppressed by offensive comment, but they and others are offended. So this needs to be recognised as relevant
• Finally my issue is always the reaction from some of the detractors of Anita and the Zoe. Even if I don't agree with Anita and Zoe they don't deserve the vitriol and hate speech they receive. This is something that just seems to be ignored. People seem more concerned with what they say but they don't seem that concerned with comments directed towards them like " a good raping will sort them out "

 

But you do make some good points

[Orogun01]

As usual you make some good points in a  reasonable way. So in response

• We need to separate radical feminism, which don't support, to campaigns around gender equality. I believe you acknowledge this already Even though most movies have reached a happy equilibrium around fair gender representation I don't think games have. But huge advancements have been made. But for example, and this doesn't apply to Indie developers as we discussed in the past, when a company of the size of Ubisoft doesn't have a female protagonist this is obviously a problem for a large part  of the fanbase
• Yes I agree that new media can be a way to address the perception around gender inequality but why should companies like Activision or Ubisoft not take there share of responsibility around this expectation. They are after all making money from female fans? Don't these fans who are spending money also have a right to be fairly represented?
• I also don't believe women are oppressed by offensive comment, but they and others are offended. So this needs to be recognised as relevant
• Finally my issue is always the reaction from some of the detractors of Anita and the Zoe. Even if I don't agree with Anita and Zoe they don't deserve the vitriol and hate speech they receive. This is something that just seems to be ignored. People seem more concerned with what they say but they don't seem that concerned with comments directed towards them like " a good raping will sort them out "

But you do make some good points

 

I'm going to address your points by numbered instead of bullet...points(is there something you're passively aggressive trying to get across by using bullet points instead of numbers? )

 

1- I agree about representation of women in games but I don't see the problem to be misogyny so much as bad writing, which we have discussed before along with the matter of how production costs affect target demographic and the product. 

 

2-With bloated production costs publishers tend to go after the biggest paying demographic, if you would remember when everyone seemed to be after the CoD demographic that's a good example. Meanwhile they are unwilling to commit the same capital towards other target because of the expected return, they couldn't simply roll back to lower cost because of technology and gamer's expectation. The big companies are going to be making less games in the coming years because of this, if you pay attention to game releases you can compare how the number has declined since 2009 to now were the were no major AAA releases this summer. They don't seem to have an intention of changing their strategy.

 

3- Feelings are very subjective and opinions vary from person to person, tolerance usually means that we agree to everyone having some basic rights even if they don't deserve them or misuse them. You can't legislate feelings (although I'm sure one of our resident lawyers will tell me of some instance or bring up Hate Crimes) so I would argue that they don't have merit since they can't be conductive towards anything other than themselves.

4- They have approached this matter with inflammatory rhetoric, it is no surprise that this starts flame wars. Had they quelled their burning zeal they could have voiced their concerns with care. Both sides seem to be stuck on name calling but the onus of the cause lies on feminism since they are trying to change the status quo and the failure to change the status quo lies with feminism because they are stuck name calling gamers. 4 years since the Tropes vs. Women and what are they still doing?

 

So is really difficult to ascertain what side should the real feminist be; although in my opinion they should oppose those that have tainted their name, but the fact is that this is one of those issues where there are no moderates. Just the people who reasonably try to achieve their goal and those that foam at the mouth while typing. Because of the nature of it and how it has escalated it won't be solved until either gamers back down or game journalists. Gamers have numbers on their side.

 

A special note about the usage of hate speech, while it has been on both sides of the fence the ultimate failure is because of the unwillingness of the moderate voices to sit down and debate. On any polarizing subject you will find extremists but in most subjects attention has been given to those that can voice their platform in an eloquent manner, i.e: the debates between Atheism and Religion on Creationism. None of the parties have made efforts toward such debate on an open forum, I find difficult to believe that there are no representatives in the gaming media that could have taken the opposing argument. I would speculate that it has more to do with feminists censoring dissenting arguments and hiring practices that were influenced by politics. After all, you can't go from having a heterogeneous community to an homogeneous one with out taking out a part of the population. 

 

Edit: News on Gamer Gate, Niche Gamer (a gaming journal) has tweeted a call for game developers to write anonymously their opinions about GamerGate. Hopefully, some brave souls will allow their names to be publicized but I see this more of an attempt from Niche Gamer to become the alternative to corrupt media. 

 

Edited September 3, 2014 by Orogun01

[kirottu]

A totally accurate historical documentary of the events so far has been released at youtube.

 

 

Be sure to turn your subtitles on!

 

[Fighter]

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

 

If you see a random pretty person on the street or TV and you go, "Wow." Do you then flog yourself you don't know who they are as a person?

[Oerwinde]

 

Its not just gaming where SJWs are a problem. I don't know how many times I've been attacked as a mysoginist, racist, and genderist, for thinking the next Doctor shouldn't be a woman, casting a black actor to play a white character is bad casting, and admitting to buying girls toys for my daughter. And it doesn't matter what kind of argument I might make in my favor, they just attack and dismiss any rebuttal because my initial opinioin is evidence enough that I'm brain damaged.

I think it depends for me.

 

I think Docotor Who needs a new showrunner. Moffat hasn't provided that great of material after Amy Pond was out of the narrative. I wouldn't care of they cast a woman as the Doctor if the actress was good, but casting a woman to fill a quoata of some sort would be dumb.

 

The Fantastic Four movie has way more problems than Johnny Storm being black, like the creative team trying to make it Chronicle 2. Frankly, I think the FF is pretty dated and should only take place in the 60s. As to other castings, Idris Elba as Heimdall and Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury were good IMO.

 

Buy your daughter the toys she wants. If anyone has a problem with it, tell them to **** off.

 

 

I agree. I preferred Davies, sure his deus ex machina endings were kinda pulled out of nowhere, but they were intense and stirred my emotions. Matt Smith and Karen Gillian's chemistry saved Moffat's Who, with her gone it went downhill. As for the woman Doctor, the way I see it, in universe he's had a male form for over a thousand years, refers to himself as a man, has had two wives and some children. He's a male. Every time lord they have shown regenerate has regenerated into a new body of the same sex. Passing the title over to a female Time Lord would work, but he shouldn't regenerate into a female.

 

The only good thing shown from the new FF so far is the head sculpt for Thing. The recent pictures of Dr Doom looked awful. The animated series from a couple years ago shows the concept isn't out-dated, just needs to be in the hands of someone who gives a crap. Marvel needs the rights back. Even if they don't make any FF movies, Reed should be there when Thanos shows up, and Doom is like the only earth-based villain besides Ultron who can threaten the Avengers. Sam Jackson was fine as Nick Fury because Nick Fury was black in the comics for 10 years before they even started making the movie, and they based him in the Ultimates off of Sam Jackson (though I preferred his first appearance in Ultimate X-Men as more of a James Bond type with more of a Denzel look). I didn't like Idris Elba's casting as Heimdall because I thought it was stupid to cast a black guy as a Norse God, since most of my Thor experience was on JMS and Olivier Copiel's run on Thor, where they were actually the Norse Gods. After finding out they were going with the Lee/Kirby version of cosmic aliens, I didn't mind so much.

 

 

 

Its not just gaming where SJWs are a problem. I don't know how many times I've been attacked as a mysoginist, racist, and genderist, for thinking the next Doctor shouldn't be a woman, casting a black actor to play a white character is bad casting, and admitting to buying girls toys for my daughter. And it doesn't matter what kind of argument I might make in my favor, they just attack and dismiss any rebuttal because my initial opinioin is evidence enough that I'm brain damaged.

 

Sorry I am confused by one of your points. Why is it an issue to buy girls toys for your daughter? What is the objection to this?

 

 

The io9 community has some sort of vendetta against traditional gender roles. If your little girl likes princesses and Barbies then you're a terrible parent who hates women.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Oerwinde

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

This has real world relevance how? All throughout the 90's every sitcom diminished the importance of men for comedic purposes (e.g: Married with Children, Friends, The Drew Carey Show, Seinfeld, etc.. ) There was no outrage from men, there were still action movies and a diverse representation of men in different roles. The same is true for women, the media is there you just have too look for it; Anita did and apparently thought they were all misogynistic. There are also a lot of realistic portrayal of women that are being denied simply because it doesn't comfort to their value system, or are we expected to buy that all women are perfect and above fault (I'm reminded how some people defended Charlize Theron role in Monster just on the basis that she was a woman killing men)

 

Oh please, provide me with 10 examples of good (positive) female characters from popular media in the last 5 years.

[BruceVC]

 

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

 

If you see a random pretty person on the street or TV and you go, "Wow." Do you then flog yourself you don't know who they are as a person?

 

 

No I don't flog myself. I often notice attractive women and even try to talk to them if they in a line at a supermarket. I also go to strip clubs and watch porn. But what does your comment about me noticing an attractive women have to do with the objectification of women in games?

[Orogun01]

 

 

This has real world relevance how? All throughout the 90's every sitcom diminished the importance of men for comedic purposes (e.g: Married with Children, Friends, The Drew Carey Show, Seinfeld, etc.. ) There was no outrage from men, there were still action movies and a diverse representation of men in different roles. The same is true for women, the media is there you just have too look for it; Anita did and apparently thought they were all misogynistic. There are also a lot of realistic portrayal of women that are being denied simply because it doesn't comfort to their value system, or are we expected to buy that all women are perfect and above fault (I'm reminded how some people defended Charlize Theron role in Monster just on the basis that she was a woman killing men)

 

Oh please, provide me with 10 examples of good (positive) female characters from popular media in the last 5 years.

 

Fussy indeed; when you say positive: what's the criteria?

[BruceVC]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/9695-Quit-Using-The-Term-Social-Justice-Warriors\

 

Guys I strongly recommend you watch this video. I normally don't support Jim Sterling but he articulates the situation nicely and makes some excellent points

 

I also agree with him when he says certain  people label anyone who has a different opinion than them a SJW. This is often  an exaggeration of someone's view and I see it sometimes on these forums. In other words if I don't condemn Anita and Zoe " I must be a SJW"

 

Anyway watch the video and tell me what you think

 

Guys does no one have a comment about this video?

[Orogun01]

 

 

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

 

If you see a random pretty person on the street or TV and you go, "Wow." Do you then flog yourself you don't know who they are as a person?

 

 

No I don't flog myself. I often notice attractive women and even try to talk to them if they in a line at a supermarket. I also go to strip clubs and watch porn. But what does your comment about me noticing an attractive women have to do with the objectification of women in games?

 

I'm saving this post and showing it to all your SJW friends, they will shun you and you will finally come to the Dark Side. 

[BruceVC]

 

As usual you make some good points in a  reasonable way. So in response

• We need to separate radical feminism, which don't support, to campaigns around gender equality. I believe you acknowledge this already Even though most movies have reached a happy equilibrium around fair gender representation I don't think games have. But huge advancements have been made. But for example, and this doesn't apply to Indie developers as we discussed in the past, when a company of the size of Ubisoft doesn't have a female protagonist this is obviously a problem for a large part  of the fanbase
• Yes I agree that new media can be a way to address the perception around gender inequality but why should companies like Activision or Ubisoft not take there share of responsibility around this expectation. They are after all making money from female fans? Don't these fans who are spending money also have a right to be fairly represented?
• I also don't believe women are oppressed by offensive comment, but they and others are offended. So this needs to be recognised as relevant
• Finally my issue is always the reaction from some of the detractors of Anita and the Zoe. Even if I don't agree with Anita and Zoe they don't deserve the vitriol and hate speech they receive. This is something that just seems to be ignored. People seem more concerned with what they say but they don't seem that concerned with comments directed towards them like " a good raping will sort them out "

But you do make some good points

 

I'm going to address your points by numbered instead of bullet...points(is there something you're passively aggressive trying to get across by using bullet points instead of numbers? )

 

1- I agree about representation of women in games but I don't see the problem to be misogyny so much as bad writing, which we have discussed before along with the matter of how production costs affect target demographic and the product. 

 

2-With bloated production costs publishers tend to go after the biggest paying demographic, if you would remember when everyone seemed to be after the CoD demographic that's a good example. Meanwhile they are unwilling to commit the same capital towards other target because of the expected return, they couldn't simply roll back to lower cost because of technology and gamer's expectation. The big companies are going to be making less games in the coming years because of this, if you pay attention to game releases you can compare how the number has declined since 2009 to now were the were no major AAA releases this summer. They don't seem to have an intention of changing their strategy.

 

3- Feelings are very subjective and opinions vary from person to person, tolerance usually means that we agree to everyone having some basic rights even if they don't deserve them or misuse them. You can't legislate feelings (although I'm sure one of our resident lawyers will tell me of some instance or bring up Hate Crimes) so I would argue that they don't have merit since they can't be conductive towards anything other than themselves.

4- They have approached this matter with inflammatory rhetoric, it is no surprise that this starts flame wars. Had they quelled their burning zeal they could have voiced their concerns with care. Both sides seem to be stuck on name calling but the onus of the cause lies on feminism since they are trying to change the status quo and the failure to change the status quo lies with feminism because they are stuck name calling gamers. 4 years since the Tropes vs. Women and what are they still doing?

 

So is really difficult to ascertain what side should the real feminist be; although in my opinion they should oppose those that have tainted their name, but the fact is that this is one of those issues where there are no moderates. Just the people who reasonably try to achieve their goal and those that foam at the mouth while typing. Because of the nature of it and how it has escalated it won't be solved until either gamers back down or game journalists. Gamers have numbers on their side.

 

A special note about the usage of hate speech, while it has been on both sides of the fence the ultimate failure is because of the unwillingness of the moderate voices to sit down and debate. On any polarizing subject you will find extremists but in most subjects attention has been given to those that can voice their platform in an eloquent manner, i.e: the debates between Atheism and Religion on Creationism. None of the parties have made efforts toward such debate on an open forum, I find difficult to believe that there are no representatives in the gaming media that could have taken the opposing argument. I would speculate that it has more to do with feminists censoring dissenting arguments and hiring practices that were influenced by politics. After all, you can't go from having a heterogeneous community to an homogeneous one with out taking out a part of the population. 

 

Edit: News on Gamer Gate, Niche Gamer (a gaming journal) has tweeted a call for game developers to write anonymously their opinions about GamerGate. Hopefully, some brave souls will allow their names to be publicized but I see this more of an attempt from Niche Gamer to become the alternative to corrupt media. 

 

 

 

I'll respond in detail later to this. I am at a customer now and can only make quick comments

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Let me explain, objectification of genders is bad for exactly the reason you mentioned, it diminishes the role and relevance of a particular gender. The gender being objectified, and its normally women,  are basically demeaned by being objectified. Its not a realistic portrayal of them. I hear you about the escapism aspect but we can still have escapism and entertainment without objectification of women. Also what people are expecting is not a system that is more favourable to them, but rather a system that isn't offensive to them, Big difference

 

If you see a random pretty person on the street or TV and you go, "Wow." Do you then flog yourself you don't know who they are as a person?

 

 

No I don't flog myself. I often notice attractive women and even try to talk to them if they in a line at a supermarket. I also go to strip clubs and watch porn. But what does your comment about me noticing an attractive women have to do with the objectification of women in games?

 

I'm saving this post and showing it to all your SJW friends, they will shun you and you will finally come to the Dark Side. 

 

 

I don't like certain definitions and labels. For example I don't see why I can't I go to strip clubs but also care about gender equality. I don't see how they are related ?

 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Fussy indeed; when you say positive: what's the criteria?

 

 

Competent, independent, heroic(-ish, Female Han Solo would be okay). Bonus points if non-sexualized, but not an absolute requirement.