Drama in the indy gaming biz ?

[Longknife]

 

So does anybody else think that these zealots are trying to enforce a politically correct creative checklist for games, with jobs built in for "consultants" (i.e. themselves) and their agendas, in other words to try and censor and control any kind of artistic output according to their own currently fashionable sensibilities?

 

 

 

So does anybody else think that these zealots are trying to enforce a politically correct creative checklist for games, with jobs built in for "consultants" (i.e. themselves) and their agendas, in other words to try and censor and control any kind of artistic output according to their own currently fashionable sensibilities?

 

Did you see my post? they coordinated the 10 articles saying gamers are dead. And this is not new, this has been happening for years. When the first tropes vs women came out, idiots like me complained about it but we don't have a big voice, the media praised her (since now it turns out they are associated with her) and the gaming personalities either praised her or ingored her and remained silent.

Doesn't it seem weird that some personalities that are very vocal (like totalbiscuit or angryjoe) never really talked about it, aside from maybe a small comment here or there? The ones that analyzed and critiqued her videos were people that had NOTHING to do with gaming, like Amazing Atheist (a guy that talks about atheism and other things) and Thunderf00t (a guy that does experiments and debunks creationists) sure those guys are gamers but they were nowhere near close to the "gaming scene"

These people, that talk... more like demand "equality" "diversity" and "representation" in video games are nothing but a small club, a closed circle of 1st world priviliged white guys and girls that are all in bed with eachother and are completely corrupt, they work in journalism, in indie development and in PR and who knows how deep does this go.

And they have to go, and hopefully will, because if what I know is true, these people have commited fraud and this might get legal.

Boys, boys, boys...

 

There is no gaming journalist conspiracy to control the direction around inclusivity in games. Its not real, its in your head. You guys must stop feeding each others ideas with these preposterous suggestions

 

Firstly the idea of a conspiracy theory is that it needs to be done subtlety and surreptitiously in order to have maximum influence . If Elvis acknowledged he wasn't dead ...well it wouldn't be much a mystery would it and the "Elvis Lives" cult would die an early death. If there were 10 articles written the same day in order to influence us poor silly gamers this wouldn't be a very efficient way to get a message across secretly because just look at reaction from you guys? An effective conspiracy would have staggered the articles over a period of time, you don't kill people with a deluge of over information.

 

So logically what does this tell us? All it tells us is that this is a talking point that many people want to support or at least read about. So now you have gaming journalists jumping on the band wagon and giving there opinion or pretending to really care about equality but its just being done to draw people to there websites, but this is no conspiracy theory....its simple self-preservation and a way to increase revenue. The only reason people like Totalbiscuit don't discuss it is because everything that needs to be said about the topic has been said in his view and he isn't prepared to comprise his journalistic integrity with some lame " hey guys I really care about equality " article. I respect this type of stance

 

 

So where do we go from here ? People like me do care about equality and want to see certain changes in games but there is an inordinate amount of attention on this topic now from people who never cared about it in the past. Let the storm of media attention end and we can carry on discussing meaningful changes in games

That's just it and that's exactly WHY this is so sick: because it is not a conspiracy theory.

 

Look, conspiracy theories simply don't happen. You don't secretly plot to make everyone think Elvis or Walt Disney are dead for no apparent reason and then manage to fool billions of people. There's no motivation for it, no motivation for bing secretive about it and the idea of fooling that many people without anyone catching on is insanity.

 

But this isn't a conspiracy. This isn't that they've been trying really hard to keep it a secret, this is just nobody thought to look into their little media group because who does that? What this is, plain and simple and black and white, is Anita and Co deciding that there is a problem with the gaming industry that needs adjusting, and now lo and behold they've all gone out on the same mission and all have a decent amount of sway amongst various journalists and game awards. No one is saying they sat down and said "mwahahahaha let's control gaming journalism to make all games about feminism!" We're merely saying that they're so intent on their little ideology that they don't even think to recognize that some of the connections going on are currently amoral.

 

Likewise, having that amount of sway in the media is unjust. What can happen is, for example, Anita gets that little threatening chain of messages that every single one of us has seen at some time in our lives. She freaks out, tells her friends (who happen to have influence) and they all sympathize by writing articles about how terrible the gaming culture is. Bam, there's five articles. Other journalism websites, not wanting to be left out of the loop or appear behind on the story, also begin covering it. And just like that, she's indirectly controlling and holding a disproportionate amount of sway in the media to what she deserves.

 

 

The only reason this is being likened to a "conspiracy" is because finding it all out required someone to actually sit down and connect some dots. I promise you none of these people involved would actually DENY their connections as their direct intent was never to actually gain more media influence than justified, but rather they simply wanted to express their voice and it's happened in rather amoral ways.

 

 

 

As an analogy? Let's take for example the people who want romance in Pillars of Eternity. As it stands now, they're one voice and opinion on the matter, as it should be. They're free to express their opinion and people are free to provide counter arguments, and ultimately obsidian decides if they wish to include it or not. What that little media circle is doing could be likened to if a group of romance lovers zealously went out of their way to make romance-related topics in the beta forums rather undeniable in frequency, going on a campaign where they run out and tell everyone they know they should go complain about it by convincing them a game without romance will suck. Furthermore, some of those forum members - let's say four - have connections to gaming journalists and they all go complain to them about it and convince them a journalism story about how pillars of eternity and it's lack of romance is a massive dissppointment that could potentially ruin the game. And surely, at least one or two other websites would follow suit and cover a similar story on their own accord out of a belief the story is obviously relevant since it's being covered by others and they don't want to be left behind.

 

See the problem here? Obsidian would suddenly be faced with all sorts of pressure and bad press that they feel COMPELLED to address by caving in and including romance. In reality, the romance camp is the EXACT same size that it already is, but because they're connected they ensure that their voice and their opinion gets broadcasted more. In congress, congress gets corrupted when someone has billions of dollars laying around and then uses that money in bribes to convince politicians that their voice and their vote is somehow worth more than other voters with less money. Here? Here it's simply an illusion that their opinions carry more support and carry more weight than they actually do simply by being connected. I doubt they had ill intent from the get go or that this was even intended, but that doesn't excuse that how it is now is outrageously bias and unacceptable. That little circle is now a minority group with a minority opinion effectively acting as a majority in some circles, such a IGF.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Longknife

[kirottu]

 

No, it is you who is incorrect. Gamer is a person who plays games. That's it. That what it literally is. All that other stuff is bull****. It is makebelieve that people with agenda are forcing down our throats.

 

No male gamer is angry that women are starting play more games. Having a gamer girlfriend is probably a dream for us all.

 

Oh, and go check the definition of "gamer" from a dictionary. That is what you like to do, right?

 

You right, the correct definitions  of words are important to me. But that's why I said to Volo " "gamers is in the context of this debate"

 

So for the sake of the debate you have painted all gamers to be "white, male gamer who refuses to accept that the gaming demographic is changing and is very vociferous and obstructive". Congratulations. You suck at debating.

 

End of the day I'm trying to get you guys to understand this is not an attack on white, male gamers. Its a campaign against people who don't want to accept that things are changing in the gaming industry. Now you really only have  two choices around how you view this change

• 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

I would think you would prefer the second point?

 

No, just no. This is just the newest defence by some people in the SWJ crowd. No one is against more games with more diversity. This whole thing is about journalistic integrity and how some indie devs are sometimes literally in bed with reporters. Since they can't defend the act itself this is what they are doing: Gamers are bad. Gamers are misogynist. Gamers are sexist. Gamers are against change.

 

It's bull****, bull****, bull****.

Edited September 2, 2014 by kirottu

[BruceVC]

 

 

So does anybody else think that these zealots are trying to enforce a politically correct creative checklist for games, with jobs built in for "consultants" (i.e. themselves) and their agendas, in other words to try and censor and control any kind of artistic output according to their own currently fashionable sensibilities?

 

 

So does anybody else think that these zealots are trying to enforce a politically correct creative checklist for games, with jobs built in for "consultants" (i.e. themselves) and their agendas, in other words to try and censor and control any kind of artistic output according to their own currently fashionable sensibilities?

Did you see my post? they coordinated the 10 articles saying gamers are dead. And this is not new, this has been happening for years. When the first tropes vs women came out, idiots like me complained about it but we don't have a big voice, the media praised her (since now it turns out they are associated with her) and the gaming personalities either praised her or ingored her and remained silent.

Doesn't it seem weird that some personalities that are very vocal (like totalbiscuit or angryjoe) never really talked about it, aside from maybe a small comment here or there? The ones that analyzed and critiqued her videos were people that had NOTHING to do with gaming, like Amazing Atheist (a guy that talks about atheism and other things) and Thunderf00t (a guy that does experiments and debunks creationists) sure those guys are gamers but they were nowhere near close to the "gaming scene"

These people, that talk... more like demand "equality" "diversity" and "representation" in video games are nothing but a small club, a closed circle of 1st world priviliged white guys and girls that are all in bed with eachother and are completely corrupt, they work in journalism, in indie development and in PR and who knows how deep does this go.

And they have to go, and hopefully will, because if what I know is true, these people have commited fraud and this might get legal.

Boys, boys, boys...

 

There is no gaming journalist conspiracy to control the direction around inclusivity in games. Its not real, its in your head. You guys must stop feeding each others ideas with these preposterous suggestions

 

Firstly the idea of a conspiracy theory is that it needs to be done subtlety and surreptitiously in order to have maximum influence . If Elvis acknowledged he wasn't dead ...well it wouldn't be much a mystery would it and the "Elvis Lives" cult would die an early death. If there were 10 articles written the same day in order to influence us poor silly gamers this wouldn't be a very efficient way to get a message across secretly because just look at reaction from you guys? An effective conspiracy would have staggered the articles over a period of time, you don't kill people with a deluge of over information.

 

So logically what does this tell us? All it tells us is that this is a talking point that many people want to support or at least read about. So now you have gaming journalists jumping on the band wagon and giving there opinion or pretending to really care about equality but its just being done to draw people to there websites, but this is no conspiracy theory....its simple self-preservation and a way to increase revenue. The only reason people like Totalbiscuit don't discuss it is because everything that needs to be said about the topic has been said in his view and he isn't prepared to comprise his journalistic integrity with some lame " hey guys I really care about equality " article. I respect this type of stance

 

 

So where do we go from here ? People like me do care about equality and want to see certain changes in games but there is an inordinate amount of attention on this topic now from people who never cared about it in the past. Let the storm of media attention end and we can carry on discussing meaningful changes in games

That's just it and that's exactly WHY this is so sick: because it is not a conspiracy theory.

 

Look, conspiracy theories simply don't happen. You don't secretly plot to make everyone think Elvis or Walt Disney are dead for no apparent reason and then manage to fool billions of people. There's no motivation for it, no motivation for bing secretive about it and the idea of fooling that many people without anyone catching on is insanity.

 

But this isn't a conspiracy. This isn't that they've been trying really hard to keep it a secret, this is just nobody thought to look into their little media group because who does that? What this is, plain and simple and black and white, is Anita and Co deciding that there is a problem with the gaming industry that needs adjusting, and now lo and behold they've all gone out on the same mission and all have a decent amount of sway amongst various journalists and game awards. No one is saying they sat down and said "mwahahahaha let's control gaming journalism to make all games about feminism!" We're merely saying that they're so intent on their little ideology that they don't even think to recognize that some of the connections going on are currently amoral.

 

Likewise, having that amount of sway in the media is unjust. What can happen is, for example, Anita gets that little threatening chain of messages that every single one of us has seen at some time in our lives. She freaks out, tells her friends (who happen to have influence) and they all sympathize by writing articles about how terrible the gaming culture is. Bam, there's five articles. Other journalism websites, not wanting to be left out of the loop or appear behind on the story, also begin covering it. And just like that, she's indirectly controlling and holding a disproportionate amount of sway in the media to what she deserves.

 

 

The only reason this is being likened to a "conspiracy" is because finding it all out required someone to actually sit down and connect some dots. I promise you none of these people involved would actually DENY their connections as their direct intent was never to actually gain more media influence than justified, but rather they simply wanted to express their voice and it's happened in rather amoral ways.

 

 

 

As an analogy? Let's take for example the people who want romance in Pillars of Eternity. As it stands now, they're one voice and opinion on the matter, as it should be. They're free to express their opinion and people are free to provide counter arguments, and ultimately obsidian decides if they wish to include it or not. What that little media circle is doing could be likened to if a group of romance lovers zealously went out of their way to make romance-related topics in the beta forums rather undeniable in frequency, going on a campaign where they run out and tell everyone they know they should go complain about it by convincing them a game without romance will suck. Furthermore, some of those forum members - let's say four - have connections to gaming journalists and they all go complain to them about it and convince them a journalism story about how pillars of eternity and it's lack of romance is a massive dissppointment that could potentially ruin the game. And surely, at least one or two other websites would follow suit and cover a similar story on their own accord out of a belief the story is obviously relevant since it's being covered by others and they don't want to be left behind.

 

See the problem here? Obsidian would suddenly be faced with all sorts of pressure and bad press that they feel COMPELLED to address by caving in and including romance. In reality, the romance camp is the EXACT same size that it already is, but because they're connected they ensure that their voice and their opinion gets broadcasted more. In congress, congress gets corrupted when someone has billions of dollars laying around and then uses that money in bribes to convince politicians that their voice and their vote is somehow worth more than other voters with less money. Here? Here it's simply an illusion that their opinions carry more support and carry more weight than they actually do simply by being connected. I doubt they had ill intent from the get go or that this was even intended, but that doesn't excuse that how it is now is outrageously bias and unacceptable. That little circle is now a minority group with a minority opinion effectively acting as a majority in some circles, such a IGF.

 

 

I have to say Longknife I appreciate the way you always go to great lengths to explain your point, I may not always agree with you but I respect the fact that  you participate in debates with such detail. So good work

 

I agree with you and that analogy about Romance and promancers using there influence with gaming journalists would be unethical and unreasonable

 

But what you guys keep missing, and I keep trying to explain this but I'm obviously failing, is this furore is no longer about Zoe Quinn sleeping with gaming journalists or  the fact some gaming journalists are unethical. That is actually a separate debate, relevant but separate.

 

This is about the vitriol and hate speech that was directed towards her because of the inexorable changes that are coming to the gaming industry, she started representing something bigger than her sex life. She symbolized the changes that certain people are resistant to.  So you now find the majority of gaming journalists either have the same opinion or refuse to comment. And this is what you would expect because the misogyny we have seen is worse than the fact that her game may have got an undeserved review score. Now you may say

" no the apparent corruption amongst gaming journalists is much worse than misogyny" but I don't think it is. And that's why there is all this attention around her and lines are being drawn

[BruceVC]

 

 

No, it is you who is incorrect. Gamer is a person who plays games. That's it. That what it literally is. All that other stuff is bull****. It is makebelieve that people with agenda are forcing down our throats.

 

No male gamer is angry that women are starting play more games. Having a gamer girlfriend is probably a dream for us all.

 

Oh, and go check the definition of "gamer" from a dictionary. That is what you like to do, right?

 

You right, the correct definitions  of words are important to me. But that's why I said to Volo " "gamers is in the context of this debate"

 

So for the sake of the debate you have painted all gamers to be "white, male gamer who refuses to accept that the gaming demographic is changing and is very vociferous and obstructive". Congratulations. You suck at debating.

 

End of the day I'm trying to get you guys to understand this is not an attack on white, male gamers. Its a campaign against people who don't want to accept that things are changing in the gaming industry. Now you really only have  two choices around how you view this change

• 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

I would think you would prefer the second point?

 

No, just no. This is just the newest defence by some people in the SWJ crowd. No one is against more games with more diversity. This whole thing is about journalistic integrity and how some indie devs are sometimes literally in bed with reporters. Since they can't defend the act itself this is what they are doing: Gamers are bad. Gamers are misogynist. Gamers are sexist. Gamers are against change.

 

It's bull****, bull****, bull****.

 

 

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

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

No, it is you who is incorrect. Gamer is a person who plays games. That's it. That what it literally is. All that other stuff is bull****. It is makebelieve that people with agenda are forcing down our throats.

 

No male gamer is angry that women are starting play more games. Having a gamer girlfriend is probably a dream for us all.

 

Oh, and go check the definition of "gamer" from a dictionary. That is what you like to do, right?

 

You right, the correct definitions  of words are important to me. But that's why I said to Volo " "gamers is in the context of this debate"

 

So for the sake of the debate you have painted all gamers to be "white, male gamer who refuses to accept that the gaming demographic is changing and is very vociferous and obstructive". Congratulations. You suck at debating.

 

End of the day I'm trying to get you guys to understand this is not an attack on white, male gamers. Its a campaign against people who don't want to accept that things are changing in the gaming industry. Now you really only have  two choices around how you view this change

• 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

I would think you would prefer the second point?

 

No, just no. This is just the newest defence by some people in the SWJ crowd. No one is against more games with more diversity. This whole thing is about journalistic integrity and how some indie devs are sometimes literally in bed with reporters. Since they can't defend the act itself this is what they are doing: Gamers are bad. Gamers are misogynist. Gamers are sexist. Gamers are against change.

 

It's bull****, bull****, bull****.

 

 

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

 

 

Do you realize how generalizing, racist and tyrannical that position is? Instead talking about human beings having a hobby, you use the best collectivistic dialectic that one can find from the finest Frankfurter school of cultural marxism. You are creating an imaginary set of people, apply derogatory langauge and negative associations, and finally add that you have to destroy this culture in the name of change and it should bring "Gesundheit" to the public.

[kirottu]

http://youtu.be/tyscI9wZ8Bk

 

She makes very good points in the latter part of the video.

Edited September 2, 2014 by kirottu

[Chaz]

 

 

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

 

 

You sound like a crazy agenda pushing Ideologue "necessary change that is coming the gaming industry"? What the hell. And also trying to derail the conversation debating if the word conspiracy applies or no? who gives a damn.

 

 

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.  Now these changes are reasonable and are just about inclusivity and equality.

 

This is exactly the kind of racist, sexist bull**** that Gamers are fed up with.

 

 

[Chaz]

http://youtu.be/tyscI9wZ8Bk

 

Nah, dude, she doesn't fit the narrative so nobody in the media will talk about her. But if Anita gets one agry tweet (probably manufactured) you have half a dozen sites running the story (brought to you by silverstring media)

 

But all of this has been disproven, by the tabletop industry...  according to some.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

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

 

You sound like a crazy agenda pushing Ideologue "necessary change that is coming the gaming industry"? What the hell. And also trying to derail the conversation debating if the word conspiracy applies or no? who gives a damn.

 

 

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.  Now these changes are reasonable and are just about inclusivity and equality.

 

This is exactly the kind of racist, sexist bull**** that Gamers are fed up with.

 

 

 

 

Well unfortunately "gamers" will just have to learn to deal with it, because that's the reality of the situation. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just trying to explain the situation

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

No, it is you who is incorrect. Gamer is a person who plays games. That's it. That what it literally is. All that other stuff is bull****. It is makebelieve that people with agenda are forcing down our throats.

 

No male gamer is angry that women are starting play more games. Having a gamer girlfriend is probably a dream for us all.

 

Oh, and go check the definition of "gamer" from a dictionary. That is what you like to do, right?

 

You right, the correct definitions  of words are important to me. But that's why I said to Volo " "gamers is in the context of this debate"

 

So for the sake of the debate you have painted all gamers to be "white, male gamer who refuses to accept that the gaming demographic is changing and is very vociferous and obstructive". Congratulations. You suck at debating.

 

End of the day I'm trying to get you guys to understand this is not an attack on white, male gamers. Its a campaign against people who don't want to accept that things are changing in the gaming industry. Now you really only have  two choices around how you view this change

• 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

I would think you would prefer the second point?

 

No, just no. This is just the newest defence by some people in the SWJ crowd. No one is against more games with more diversity. This whole thing is about journalistic integrity and how some indie devs are sometimes literally in bed with reporters. Since they can't defend the act itself this is what they are doing: Gamers are bad. Gamers are misogynist. Gamers are sexist. Gamers are against change.

 

It's bull****, bull****, bull****.

 

 

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

 

 

Do you realize how generalizing, racist and tyrannical that position is? Instead talking about human beings having a hobby, you use the best collectivistic dialectic that one can find from the finest Frankfurter school of cultural marxism. You are creating an imaginary set of people, apply derogatory langauge and negative associations, and finally add that you have to destroy this culture in the name of change and it should bring "Gesundheit" to the public.

 

 

 

Sorry, I'll try to do better next time

[NWN_babaYaga]

i´m a white male gamer who is a racist bastar*, i like to also kill woman for lols because i have blue eyes and thanks to hollywood a german always is a nazi. So as a white nazi racist bastar* who likes to play games and loves killing and raping females for fun i also hate every gay on planet earth. And when i dont play games i i gather my gamer nazi bastar*s and we think about how to establish our terror cell called white male nazi with bluey eyes being hetero hating everything that is not with us but against us and yes i make sense as you female pink nazis. In the end a nazi is a nazi no matter what he/ she it tells you.

 

The difference between the "real" nazis and the pink nazis is the real nazis did the killing themself and dont pretended to be anything else. They were at least honest about their intention and didnt talked so much BS like many today. So yes i think the real nazis had at least some sense of self awareness. When you compare what the pink nazis say and what they do or what the result of their action is you should know by now that they always lie and hide their true face.

 

to cover the true intentions is so old but yet people do fall for it again and again. But you pink nazis will not succed in gaming! I swear that!

And in fact... you will just die out because mother nature doesnt know anything about mercy or illusions at all.

Edited September 2, 2014 by NWN_babaYaga

[Bos_hybrid]

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

 

aka The imaginary boogie boogie man.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

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

 

You sound like a crazy agenda pushing Ideologue "necessary change that is coming the gaming industry"? What the hell. And also trying to derail the conversation debating if the word conspiracy applies or no? who gives a damn.

 

 

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.  Now these changes are reasonable and are just about inclusivity and equality.

 

This is exactly the kind of racist, sexist bull**** that Gamers are fed up with.

 

 

 

 

Well unfortunately "gamers" will just have to learn to deal with it, because that's the reality of the situation. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just trying to explain the situation

 

 

How are they going to do that unless by infiltration and subterfuge? MS, Sony, Nintendo, Valve, Activision and so on sure are not paying attention. Where is the money, where is increased revenue?

[Fighter]

The gaming media is basically been made into this unified voice by making it essentially taboo and risky to have a different opinion on the matters of social issues. You risk being branded a bigot, losing your job or have no chance of being hired into this industry in the first place if your opinion doesn't fall in line. At best you can be quiet. And this has nothing to do with objective market trends but with a vocal minority that has a monopoly on right and wrong. 

 

They have cleansed the gaming media and now they want to do the same with the content of games which they've decided needs policing like the real world to create the "right" teaching environment (since that's what they seem to want to do) for the mindless apes -- that apparently can't handle entertainment without the correct moral message -- they see people as. This is the "conspiracy". Obviously it's not some feminist illuminati ordering people around behind the scenes but there are facts that show how all these people are cooking in the same pot. How they all have the same advisers and meet up to discuss the same subjects and ideas as a group. Then they all come out with the same kind of content like this latest rebranding of gamers. Groupthink kinda thing.

 

Like I said before, it's not about diversity. They think everything you do even as an adult and even as escapist entertainment should be like your mom, teaching you the good lessons. At some point we've stopped viewing people as rational human beings who know fiction from reality by default, who are allowed to explore in entertainment the things they would never do otherwise, be it violent or shallow or whatever without the SJW voice in you tale reminding you about the right way of seeing the world like you're a moron.

 

They've decided that there is no such thing as "it's just a game". And you have to express your real world morality in a world that's not real even when you specifically want to explore something other than. Because it hurts no one, it is just a game, it's all imaginary -- and policing the imaginary makes you the thought police.

 

When they are finished with matters of representation -- or rather when they are "done" with masculinity -- they will go the Jack Thompson route and declare that games make you violent. There are already hints to this direction. Call it silly but they really would like Gone Home to be the standard.

[Elerond]

 

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

 

aka The imaginary boogie boogie man.

 

 

aka same situation than many have with terms feminism and feminist

[aluminiumtrioxid]

But all of this has been disproven, by the tabletop industry...  according to some.

 

Nicely woven strawman, I really admire the craftsmanship.

[Malcador]

 

What Bruce means is that people who have "gamer" as a core pillar of their self-identity are generally white, male and reasonably well-off.

 

 

Why not just say that then ? You lot always go on on how large the segment of gamers is that consist of non-white and non-male people.   Pretty sure well off is a requirement to be a gamer, well either that or really misplaced priorities in life.  SJW folk seem to have some fetish for labelling people, I suppose it makes it easy to be victimized and/or rail against people once they are in boxes of your making.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

What Bruce means is that people who have "gamer" as a core pillar of their self-identity are generally white, male and reasonably well-off.

 

 

Why not just say that then ? You lot always go on on how large the segment of gamers is that consist of non-white and non-male people.   Pretty sure well off is a requirement to be a gamer, well either that or really misplaced priorities in life.  SJW folk seem to have some fetish for labelling people, I suppose it makes it easy to be victimized and/or rail against people once they are in boxes of your making.

 

 

...I'm not sure what your point is? 

[Malcador]

 

 

 

What Bruce means is that people who have "gamer" as a core pillar of their self-identity are generally white, male and reasonably well-off.

 

 

Why not just say that then ? You lot always go on on how large the segment of gamers is that consist of non-white and non-male people.   Pretty sure well off is a requirement to be a gamer, well either that or really misplaced priorities in life.  SJW folk seem to have some fetish for labelling people, I suppose it makes it easy to be victimized and/or rail against people once they are in boxes of your making.

 

 

...I'm not sure what your point is? 

 

 

The term being used is ridiculous, expected though, but ridiculous. So just say white males, it's what you mean, no ?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

The term being used is ridiculous, expected though, but ridiculous. So just say white males, it's what you mean, no ?

 

I'm still not getting why am I being interrogated for Bruce's missteps in communicating his ideas clearly; as much as I'd prefer the world to turn into a giant telepathically connected hivemind of feminist thought, like the evil commie I am, it's still far from reality.

 

One day, though. One day.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

What Bruce means is that people who have "gamer" as a core pillar of their self-identity are generally white, male and reasonably well-off.

 

 

Why not just say that then ? You lot always go on on how large the segment of gamers is that consist of non-white and non-male people.   Pretty sure well off is a requirement to be a gamer, well either that or really misplaced priorities in life.  SJW folk seem to have some fetish for labelling people, I suppose it makes it easy to be victimized and/or rail against people once they are in boxes of your making.

 

 

...I'm not sure what your point is? 

 

 

The term being used is ridiculous, expected though, but ridiculous. So just say white males, it's what you mean, no ?

 

 

I'm confused, I have said several times what the term "gamer"  means? It refers to white, male gamers who are objecting to changes in the industry. But this is not my own personal definition. This is what gaming journalists mean when they say "the gamer is dead"

 

Here is the link that I posted earlier, its makes the case in a reasonable way

 

http://dangolding.tumblr.com/post/95985875943/the-end-of-gamers

[Shallow]

 

Well unfortunately "gamers" will just have to learn to deal with it, because that's the reality of the situation. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just trying to explain the situation

 

You provide 100% no proof that it is the reality of the situation, ironically an article you linked with a feminist complaining about there being boy and girl isles in toystores shows that it isn't. The market will continue to grow, everyone believes so, so far the vast majority of content has been focused on a white male demographic, however when the market becomes more diverse the white male money doesn't get smaller, there's just more cash in things other things as well. Just like the toy industry, when you want all boys and girls buying toys from you, you can't exclusively sell either action figures, nor can you exclusively sell dolls, that doesn't mean all girls will want dolls, nor does it mean that all boys will want action figures, nor does it mean both groups won't also buy various things that are pretty neutral like standard board games. The change that will happen is that when groups that want things that are currently produced low budget will get more sales and thus a bigger budget and more of that style games, those games will be built out of the revenue made from said games, not by killing off the current styles of games, for there will be just as much money in them, despite the fact that their popularity probably won't grow as quickly as that of the currently small minority markets. Your feminist article, like you, insisted on breaking down the isles, and forcing everyone to purchase the same kinda toy, when no one stopped them from purchasing said toy (if she got over the isle being entitled "boys"), and when it would only serve to alianate people, or create a watered down, crappy, kind of toy that everyone can "sorta" accept, even though they'd rather have the specialised toys that suit their interests.

 

What we then have here is a bunch of **** (SJWs) insisting that the market must stay mostly centered and that the center must simply move, that's silly, entertainment markets have always naturally branched out, and essentially everyone (besides SJWs) are okay with that, simple proof of that is that no one is desperately trying to sow of the tiny branches of the current minority markets, no one is crying about the various games that currently exists aimed towards girls, or the even smaller one aimed towards women. What we don't like is this insistance that when more money is pouring in, the money must all go to the same place, trying to please your agendas, when it should be going out to pleasing everyone whose money will continue pouring in provided they are pleased. What we also don't like is your side using its media influence to try and pretend they're in the majority.

 

Edit:

I'm confused, I have said several times what the term "gamer"  means? It refers to white, male gamers who are objecting to changes in the industry. But this is not my own personal definition. This is what gaming journalists mean when they say "the gamer is dead"

 

Here is the link that I posted earlier, its makes the case in a reasonable way

 

http://dangolding.tumblr.com/post/95985875943/the-end-of-gamers

 

This is particularly ironic seeing how you feel about how some people label feminists as being pro female and not pro equality, despite what your dictionary says.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Shallow

[Nonek]

 

Boys, boys, boys...

 

There is no gaming journalist conspiracy to control the direction around inclusivity in games. Its not real, its in your head. You guys must stop feeding each others ideas with these preposterous suggestions

 

You see this is a perfect example a young man, so self righteous and fixated on his role as a mouthpiece that he attacks moderates who are discussing the matter reasonably, and tries to belittle them as children. I wish I was a child, but having seen half a century I certainly cannot say that I am.

 

The fact that ten articles are published on the same day, on the same matter and by the same demographic as have been caught up in this scandal of corruption, nepotism, lack of objectivity and impartiality, basic failings of integrity and ethics, and hate mongering, is fairly clear evidence that this is an attack against people who play games recreationally and wish to continue doing so.

 

It was innovative in its approach to storytelling, not in gameplay.

 

As for "enforced political correctness taking over games"... the tabletop RPG industry proves that to be kind of bollocks. You can see the trend: the new edition of D&D talks about how your character may not fit into the gender binary - at its core, however, it's still a game about murderhobos killing monsters and taking their stuff, except said murderhobos may now be genderqueer. Pathfinder has a trans signature character, a potion of gender change, and one of their APs features a lesbian paladin NPC. They still do Standard Adventurer Stuff. Exalted 3E's example characters (all five of them) are, without an exception, people of color, with a trans man among them. Regardless, it's still a game about shiny superheroes doing all kinds of wuxia ****, not about minority rights.

 

 

Not particularly innovative in my view, and certainly not worth the massive trade off of removing almost every other feature.

 

Why is there transexual material in D&D? One can be the gender one wishes to be, there is no point in having a transitory point when a low level spell can change ones gender in an instant, and a moderate level spell can do so permanently, as well as a myriad of items in the game. One could do this when AD&D was first introduced, this is nothing new. There have always been different races of humanity, species (their races) and a vast variety of difference and diversity in gameworlds, this is not a new thing again. This sounds like just blatant and clumsy pandering that personally i'd be insulted by, one can do all this in every edition, and it was not remarked upon as something new and innovative, it simply was accepted as sexuality and race should be.

 

***

 

At the end of the day as a free thinking moderate (or subhuman in game journalist parlance) I am not willing to stand aside for these corrupt and self interested untalented and unethical people, they are fanatics, equally as comfortable with hate speech and demeaning their audience as the opposition whom (allegedly) send death and rape threats. They are seeking to diminish the industry with their toxic opinions and agendas, and force blunt, clumsy and preachy sermonising into every game. They are a force of censorship and constraint, and should be opposed for that reason alone. Gaming is already massively inclusive, anybody can and does play, to say any different is a simple lie. Stats prove this.

 

Gamers (those who play games recreationally) are on the whole not bad people, they are witty, thoughtful and moral. They shouldn't stand for this continued assault on them, their likening to those who (allegedly) send death and rape threats or being portrayed as immoral, corrupt, sexist, violent or racist. They are being accused of such things by those who are liars, corrupt, guilty of nepotism, lack integrity, lack ethics and are a perfect example of what they are supposedly preaching against. This is simple ugly hate mongering by the unethical.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Nonek

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

So apparently games no longer need the people who play them. I don't quite follow the logic, but I suppose that is because there is none.

[Nonek]

So apparently games no longer need the people who play them. I don't quite follow the logic, but I suppose that is because there is none.

 

They're frantically trying to backpeddle now, and state that when they said "gamer" they meant only that miniscule minority who were (allegedly) sending death and rape threats, but it was a basic misstep. They revealed their true contempt for the hobby and the players themselves, who are just normal people like everybody else. Like you say Mr Parker it is basically illogical hate mongering and demonisation, mainly to lionise themselves.