Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Lexx]

 

"It's not sexist when we do it."

Might not be a shooting with guns, but in 2009 there was a girl with 10 molotow cokctails in Bonn:

 

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/vereitelter-amoklauf-von-schuelerin-frauen-koennen-auch-aggressiv-sein-a-624246.html

 

She got stopped by another girl who accidentally ran into her in the ladies restroom. The surprised girl then attacked her with a knife and cut off a thumb while doing so (doc was able to reattach it, luckily).

 

But wait, this probably was a boy who pretended to be a girl. Can't be anything else, no? Or it doesn't count because the worst was prevented?

 

Anita Sarkeesian is a horrible person.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Lexx

[kirottu]

I'm not least bit surprised that Sarkeesian hadn't check her facts, not anymore anyway.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

"It's not sexist when we do it."

 

Anita Sarkeesian is a horrible person.

 

 

Seems like a reasonable claim, but basically impossible to prove. I don't really see your reason for kicking up such a fuss about it?

 

(Re: Depression Quest, I'm fairly sure Longknife's inherent bias has colored his perceptions of the game. Also, decreased interest in sex is a symptom of depression, which, by the way, is an incredibly personal experience anyway, so it's kind of ridiculous to go "well I haven't experienced anything like that, ergo its portrayal of depression is false!4!!")

Edited October 25, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Gorgon]

Replace 'always' with 'nearly always' and it's probably true though.  I don't know why men are more prone to violence, but history does seem to bear this observation out. Making a list of exceptions does not really disprove the point. 

 

And she is troll baiting as usual, this is what she does for a living now, and she's good at it. Got you lot to respond didn't she. 

[Lexx]

Seems like a reasonable claim, but basically impossible to prove. I don't really see your reason for kicking up such a fuss about it?

Cool how you remove everything else from the quote and only point to the end of my post.

 

 

About Depression Quest, I played it before I even heard the name Zoe Quinn, and while it felt interesting in the beginning, it quickly became more and more bad. You were pretty much railroaded into everything and later you had no choices at all. Also the choices you had in this text adventure felt rather narrow / poor / too simple. I am certain this stuff could have been conveyed much better or in more depth.

 

In the end, this stuff just proves to me that these very loudly speaking feminist game developers (exception is probably Zoe Quinn, because I haven't heard anything about her anymore since a while now) really never did much valuable to the gaming scene at all. If we could get some women folks, who worked on and released more than just one tiny game in their lifes, to speak out about this issue, yeah... that would be great.

 

PS: I am not pro or anti GG. I only care about this stuff from a generic / outside point of view.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Lexx

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Seems like a reasonable claim, but basically impossible to prove. I don't really see your reason for kicking up such a fuss about it?

Cool how you remove everything else from the quote and only point to the end of my post.

 

 

It wasn't especially aimed at you, more like at the pages-long outrage going since the original quote. Couldn't really be bothered to manually quote every relevant response, so I went with the latest one.

 

As for the point you raised, basically what Gorgon said. One counter-example doesn't really address the point.

 

About Depression Quest, I played it before I even heard the name Zoe Quinn, and while it felt interesting in the beginning, it quickly became more and more bad. You were pretty much railroaded into everything and later you had no choices at all. Also the choices you had in this text adventure felt rather narrow / poor / too simple.  I am certain this stuff could have been conveyed much better or in more depth.

 

 

...So a game about conveying how depression limits your available life choices is... bad for not offering enough choices? I think you may have missed the point.

 

I agree, it could've been done much better or in more depth, but that would've required, among others, an actually talented writer on the team, and some time and money tossed in their direction. What we've gotten instead is pretty much what I expect from a single developer with the resources available for the project.

[Monte Carlo]

Anita isn't troll-baiting there. She's trolling. I can see why she's descended into misandry, although the irony is obvious.

 

Trawling the net, this is a very American story. Here in Europe we have our fair share of politically-correct nonsense, but the rabid savagery and over-the-top hysteria of this whole saga is a uniquely American take on the Kulturkampf.

 

As so many of the big questions of American political discourse are settled, compared to other parts of the world, America instead sees existential struggle in terms of gun ownership, abortion and now gender issues. I speak as an Americanophile who loves the country and people, and has lived and travelled there. I'm not a hater.

 

But, at the end of the day, GamersGate, Anita, childish threats, intolerable behaviour and the sheer venom exhibited by the combatants is a supremely First World Dilemma. I'm sure in dusty villages on the border with Kurdistan, people threatened with clitorodectomies and beheading are having heated discussions about the depiction of women in first-person shooters.

[Lexx]

...So a game about conveying how depression limits your available life choices is... bad for not offering enough choices? I think you may have missed the point.

No, this is not what I meaned. It's obvious that maybe somehow the depression will limit the stuff you do on a daily basis. What I meaned is that the text adventure itself takes over at some point- it robbs the player of all choices and actions. I am not 100% sure right now when exactly this happens, but at some point you just read and press a "continue"-like button to advance until you hit the suicide point (I think it was like that when I tried it back in the days). At this point it is not a game anymore and it's not a good text adventure.

 

Imagine you are playing Metal Gear Solid 4 and then suddenly you watch a 1 hour long briefing cutscene, play for 20 minutes and then a 3 hours long endgame cutscene appears. It's not fun, and IMO it's bad game design.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Lexx

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

...So a game about conveying how depression limits your available life choices is... bad for not offering enough choices? I think you may have missed the point.

No, this is not what I meaned. It's obvious that maybe somehow the depression will limit the stuff you do on a daily basis. What I meaned is that the text adventure itself takes over at some point- it robbs the player of all choices and actions. I am not 100% sure right now when exactly this happens, but at some point you just read and press a "continue"-like button to advance until you hit the suicide point (I think it was like that when I tried it back in the days). At this point it is not a game anymore and it's not a good text adventure.

 

 

Ah. Well, untreated depression can lead to suicide. In the game, you have the option to get a psychiatrist to diagnose your condition, then you can seek therapy and get antidepressants, which make your life ****ty in an entirely different way, but at least your options will remain semi-open(ish).

[Longknife]

 

I'll be blunt (as I often am) and say that no, I held no hopes Bryy would ever offer productive discussion.

 

Then you're better off saying nothing, really. If the only reason you're posting is to... make you feel good or stroke your ego or make someone else feel bad- and you admit it- then you should really consider not posting, and if you do don't expect everyone to react well.

 

Also...

 

I've no interest in driving away PRODUCTIVE SJWs[..] But yeah, I'm always open to discussion.

 

Well, no, you aren't. If you're going to decide who is 'productive' and try to run off anyone deemed non productive then you definitely aren't always open to discussion, you're sometimes open but sometimes just want to yell instead- basically, exactly what the loud faction of SJWs love to do by using all the labels you find annoying. I've never had any particular problem with Bryy or aluminumO₃ or Enoch to think that discussing something with them is pointless, even if I accept there's little realistic chance to change minds. If you're overly antagonistic even that small chance is gone.

 

I think everyone understands the impulse to vent unproductively and most people will do so one time or another, but it really isn't a good look.

 

Two things:

 

 

1) When did I say this was about stroking my ego or feeling good about myself? This is about moving forward. This is about discussing things that carry weight and are relevant. You want to make some kind of anti-GG point? Discuss how you feel things relating to Anita's terrible tweets does nothing to stop bad journalism. Discuss how you don't like some of the comments on kotakuinaction or elsewhere suddenly lumping Felicia Day into this broad anti-GG category just because she was on the fence.

Beating the same dead horse about harassment never was and never will be productive from an Anti-GG perspective. As I said before, if you WISH to discuss the harassment....? Provide a viable working plan on how to possibly stop it altogether, THEN you're free to complain all you like that people aren't doing enough.

 

 

 

2) When on earth did I mention aluminum or Enoch? I never did, because I have no problem with those two. This isn't about attacking anti-GG opinions, it's about running off people with no interest in productive debate who've proven themselves to have a clear bias and agenda making them incapable of admitting when they're wrong. And I have no problem with those two because unlike Bryy, they don't come in here and beat the same dead horse before conveniently disappearing when counter arguments are made I've probably linked articles and then later apologized after discovering the info in the article was misleading maybe twice now. Why? Because I don't discuss the topic at hand with an interest in "winning" for the sake of winning, I discuss the topic at hand because I care about the issues.

I'm hardly attacking every person who comes in here. Hell, I've already spoken out to the two people I wanted to, there aren't any others (at least not on the anti-GG side, as stated it seems like needless drama to call out the pro-GG ones since they don't hold the same ability to derail a discussion; unfair yes, but also true). I've got no interest in policing the damned thread or the discussion with my own subjective opinion. Why did I speak up? Because it's GOTTEN to that point of ridiculousness, where I can't imagine anyone in their right mind supporting or defending a guy who blatantly dodges every counter argument or refuses to provide his own argument, but will gladly repeatedly drop by to re-voice the same criticism over and over without ever allowing that criticism to be questioned or scrutinized.

I've already asked if you think anything would've come from Bryy's posts, the answer was about on par with a resounding "maybe...if the planets align." Sorry, but I don't see purpose in letting EVERYONE have their periodical say just in the interest of appearing nice or open-minded. There's nothing about what I just did that wasn't open-minded; I would've been more than happy to be proven wrong, it just didn't happen. I also think it's a losing battle to try and ignore any frustrations with users like this. Think back: a thread or two ago the entire thread was dog piling another user for also posting unproductive and bias posts while refusing to answer opposition. My involvement? I had none beyond asserting an "I told you so" of sorts as it ended. And back then, again we had people defending the person as the thread turned into "what's ok for us to do."

 

 

And again it's nothing personal. I don't have any personal issue with anyone here, because wtf it's just one discussion on one issue. There's no reason for it to be personal. But in the interest of moving the discussion forward....? Yes, if someone isn't providing jack all towards that, let's tell them. Sometimes the truth hurts, but lying about it or avoiding that fact won't actually change the truth.

 

 

 

Longknife, I realize you probably don't care what I think, but you do realize your tone also drives away people (from the whole movement, not just the thread) who are on the fence or generally pro-GG, but aren't rabidly pro-GG?

I essentially answered this already. I would both doubt the severity to which this occurs (would consider it more of a paranoid worry and "what if" rather than something that happens frequently) while also holding little respect for someone who would read - for example - the discussion between me and Bryy a few pages back and come to the conclusion "well, I'm going to side with anti-GG because this one singular GGer who made claims that turned out to be true and logical had a very mean tone as he made those points!" If that's how you make decisions, I don't exactly consider you a valuable asset to the discussion anyways. I value the people who can do research themselves, who can think objectively and who aren't so easily swayed by emotion. Hell let's be real here: the majority of GGs opposition exists BECAUSE people are swayed by emotion and not by facts. They hear "sexism" and grab their sword and start swinging in every direction rather than asking "where and how?" A question that, were they to ask, they'd find has a rather pathetic answer.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Longknife

[Monte Carlo]

Given the variables in the spectrum of mental health problems encompassed by 'Depression' it's about as useful as a game called 'Cancer Quest.'

 

For example, I was treated for clinical depression some years ago using standard SSRIs and some therapy. I made a full recovery and am fine. I am grateful for my treatment. I suppose my (not very unusual) experience wouldn't make for a great game, then again I'm not a solipsist twenty-something looking to make a name for myself.

[Meshugger]

Gameplay does not fit the narrative of a cultural object.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Gameplay does not fit the narrative of a cultural object.

 

I'm generally pretty good at decoding liberal arts major-speak, but that sentence didn't make any sense to me.

[Meshugger]

That's because you still have some humanity in you.

 

Anyone agreeing with that statement has gone FullMcIntosh.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Oh, look what I've found.

[Shallow]

That's because you still have some humanity in you.

 

Anyone agreeing with that statement has gone FullMcIntosh.

Was that thing an actual quote?

[TrashMan]

Replace 'always' with 'nearly always' and it's probably true though.  I don't know why men are more prone to violence, but history does seem to bear this observation out. Making a list of exceptions does not really disprove the point. 

 

And she is troll baiting as usual, this is what she does for a living now, and she's good at it. Got you lot to respond didn't she. 

 

Men are more prone to direct and instant violence (guns and knives)

 

Women have more patience in that regard and prefer poison and lies as tool of aggression.

[TrashMan]

 

...So a game about conveying how depression limits your available life choices is... bad for not offering enough choices? I think you may have missed the point.

 

That's kinda a poor excuse for a bad game.

 

"This is a game about mental disorder so it's compleltey unplayable and commands are totally random on purpose!"

[Longknife]

 

(Re: Depression Quest, I'm fairly sure Longknife's inherent bias has colored his perceptions of the game. Also, decreased interest in sex is a symptom of depression, which, by the way, is an incredibly personal experience anyway, so it's kind of ridiculous to go "well I haven't experienced anything like that, ergo its portrayal of depression is false!4!!")

As I'm aware. As most people who've been depressed and have looked into it would be.

 

My issues with Depression quest basically boil down to the terrible writing. It boils down to how it's not a little statement about how your girlfriend offers you sex, and yet for whatever reason, you just can't get in the mood and that makes you feel awful. No, it's worded as "why would you want to have sex with me? I just can't believe anyone could love a person like me or wanna do that with me....I'm not in the mood anyways." (Seriously, go play it, this is essentially how it was written with the snippet about loving a person like me being directly quoted)

 

 

It's soooooo melodramatic and exaggerated that it feels disingenuine to the issue, which to me, hurts the issue of depression rather than helping it. The entire thing feels like a literal pity party rather than a well-written or decent overview of depression. For example on that note, the way she presents the issue with sex seems to imply it's a constant rather than an on and off thing, as well as implying a person with depression wouldn't want sex because they want to fish for compliments instead; that's hardly easy to sympathize with, nor is it true. A simple "not in the mood" while explaining you've no idea why you're not would've sufficed, but her melodramatic overtones seem to pollute the entire story and turn it into this giant pity party; I reacted pretty funny when I came across the parts with "don't say anything, you don't want to burden them with your problems" cause I hadn't expected something accurate and simple in explanation to the typical tone of hers which would've sounded something like "don't say anything. Horrible people like you don't DESERVE to have their problems talked about."

 

 

 

But yeah, it's really that simple: the writing is terrible. I was expecting....I commonly believe that people are just as logical and capable of reasoning as you are. May sound simple, but people deem their opposition waaaaaay too often; they don't try to imagine themselves in the other person's shoes and instead give lazy labels like "well obviously they're pure evil."

Well, how did I put myself in their shoes....? Up until now, I'd imagined that the anti-GG side might be this avant grade sort of art fanatics club. I was picturing depression quest as a "game" devoid of game mechanics, but strong in narrative. I remember when I first heard it was what the girl was known for, I sympathized, cause I do think depression is something worth writing about.

But I'm sorry, that was pathetic. Pathetic both in the writing quality and in the fact that it isn't in fact a video game. I'm pretty sure I could make a "game" like that, as could any of us.

 

So to see that anti-GG defends stuff like that...? Basically my theory of "oh these guys just value artistic messages over gameplay, that's not so bad but I can see how this has created a rift in the industry" fell through completely. Now it's more "oh these guys are a bunch of children circle-jerking and enjoying decent paying jobs with limited responsibility, and they're coming to her aid and defense not because it's warranted but because she's their friend and their bias is showing."

[Longknife]

It'll be interesting to see what becomes of this: http://i.imgur.com/cm1tfI4.png

[aluminiumtrioxid]

That's kinda a poor excuse for a bad game.

 

"This is a game about mental disorder so it's compleltey unplayable and commands are totally random on purpose!"

 

 

Games don't need to be fun.

 

Also, "being punished for making obviously terrible choices in the game's context" =/= "game's completely unplayable and commands are totally random".

 

 

 

(Re: Depression Quest, I'm fairly sure Longknife's inherent bias has colored his perceptions of the game. Also, decreased interest in sex is a symptom of depression, which, by the way, is an incredibly personal experience anyway, so it's kind of ridiculous to go "well I haven't experienced anything like that, ergo its portrayal of depression is false!4!!")

 

My issues with Depression quest basically boil down to the terrible writing. It boils down to how it's not a little statement about how your girlfriend offers you sex, and yet for whatever reason, you just can't get in the mood and that makes you feel awful. No, it's worded as "why would you want to have sex with me? I just can't believe anyone could love a person like me or wanna do that with me....I'm not in the mood anyways." (Seriously, go play it, this is essentially how it was written with the snippet about loving a person like me being directly quoted)

 

 

It's soooooo melodramatic and exaggerated that it feels disingenuine to the issue, which to me, hurts the issue of depression rather than helping it. The entire thing feels like a literal pity party rather than a well-written or decent overview of depression. For example on that note, the way she presents the issue with sex seems to imply it's a constant rather than an on and off thing, as well as implying a person with depression wouldn't want sex because they want to fish for compliments instead; that's hardly easy to sympathize with, nor is it true. A simple "not in the mood" while explaining you've no idea why you're not would've sufficed, but her melodramatic overtones seem to pollute the entire story and turn it into this giant pity party; I reacted pretty funny when I came across the parts with "don't say anything, you don't want to burden them with your problems" cause I hadn't expected something accurate and simple in explanation to the typical tone of hers which would've sounded something like "don't say anything. Horrible people like you don't DESERVE to have their problems talked about."

 

 

 

But yeah, it's really that simple: the writing is terrible. I was expecting....I commonly believe that people are just as logical and capable of reasoning as you are. May sound simple, but people deem their opposition waaaaaay too often; they don't try to imagine themselves in the other person's shoes and instead give lazy labels like "well obviously they're pure evil."

Well, how did I put myself in their shoes....? Up until now, I'd imagined that the anti-GG side might be this avant grade sort of art fanatics club. I was picturing depression quest as a "game" devoid of game mechanics, but strong in narrative. I remember when I first heard it was what the girl was known for, I sympathized, cause I do think depression is something worth writing about.

But I'm sorry, that was pathetic. Pathetic both in the writing quality and in the fact that it isn't in fact a video game. I'm pretty sure I could make a "game" like that, as could any of us.

 

So to see that anti-GG defends stuff like that...? Basically my theory of "oh these guys just value artistic messages over gameplay, that's not so bad but I can see how this has created a rift in the industry" fell through completely. Now it's more "oh these guys are a bunch of children circle-jerking and enjoying decent paying jobs with limited responsibility, and they're coming to her aid and defense not because it's warranted but because she's their friend and their bias is showing."

 

 

Dude, the stuff you're criticizing pretty much maps to exact quotes I've heard from multiple friends being treated with depression. I mean, it's okay to voice criticism, but what you're doing now is denying their experiences as invalid.

 

Which brings us to the question: if the writing accurately depicts how some people who suffer from depression think, is it horrible for being melodramatic? Depressed people sometimes tend to be melodramatic. I was pretty melodramatic when I was a depressed teen (although I suppose that had more to do with me being a teen than with the depression). (On the other hand, my friends in question are in their 20s-30s, so depression might have had something to do with it. It's a mystery!)

[Longknife]

 

That's kinda a poor excuse for a bad game.

 

"This is a game about mental disorder so it's compleltey unplayable and commands are totally random on purpose!"

 

 

Games don't need to be fun.

 

Also, "being punished for making obviously terrible choices in the game's context" =/= "game's completely unplayable and commands are totally random".

 

 

(Re: Depression Quest, I'm fairly sure Longknife's inherent bias has colored his perceptions of the game. Also, decreased interest in sex is a symptom of depression, which, by the way, is an incredibly personal experience anyway, so it's kind of ridiculous to go "well I haven't experienced anything like that, ergo its portrayal of depression is false!4!!")

 

My issues with Depression quest basically boil down to the terrible writing. It boils down to how it's not a little statement about how your girlfriend offers you sex, and yet for whatever reason, you just can't get in the mood and that makes you feel awful. No, it's worded as "why would you want to have sex with me? I just can't believe anyone could love a person like me or wanna do that with me....I'm not in the mood anyways." (Seriously, go play it, this is essentially how it was written with the snippet about loving a person like me being directly quoted)

It's soooooo melodramatic and exaggerated that it feels disingenuine to the issue, which to me, hurts the issue of depression rather than helping it. The entire thing feels like a literal pity party rather than a well-written or decent overview of depression. For example on that note, the way she presents the issue with sex seems to imply it's a constant rather than an on and off thing, as well as implying a person with depression wouldn't want sex because they want to fish for compliments instead; that's hardly easy to sympathize with, nor is it true. A simple "not in the mood" while explaining you've no idea why you're not would've sufficed, but her melodramatic overtones seem to pollute the entire story and turn it into this giant pity party; I reacted pretty funny when I came across the parts with "don't say anything, you don't want to burden them with your problems" cause I hadn't expected something accurate and simple in explanation to the typical tone of hers which would've sounded something like "don't say anything. Horrible people like you don't DESERVE to have their problems talked about."

But yeah, it's really that simple: the writing is terrible. I was expecting....I commonly believe that people are just as logical and capable of reasoning as you are. May sound simple, but people deem their opposition waaaaaay too often; they don't try to imagine themselves in the other person's shoes and instead give lazy labels like "well obviously they're pure evil."

Well, how did I put myself in their shoes....? Up until now, I'd imagined that the anti-GG side might be this avant grade sort of art fanatics club. I was picturing depression quest as a "game" devoid of game mechanics, but strong in narrative. I remember when I first heard it was what the girl was known for, I sympathized, cause I do think depression is something worth writing about.

But I'm sorry, that was pathetic. Pathetic both in the writing quality and in the fact that it isn't in fact a video game. I'm pretty sure I could make a "game" like that, as could any of us.

So to see that anti-GG defends stuff like that...? Basically my theory of "oh these guys just value artistic messages over gameplay, that's not so bad but I can see how this has created a rift in the industry" fell through completely. Now it's more "oh these guys are a bunch of children circle-jerking and enjoying decent paying jobs with limited responsibility, and they're coming to her aid and defense not because it's warranted but because she's their friend and their bias is showing."

 

Dude, the stuff you're criticizing pretty much maps to exact quotes I've heard from multiple friends being treated with depression. I mean, it's okay to voice criticism, but what you're doing now is denying their experiences as invalid.

 

Which brings us to the question: if the writing accurately depicts how some people who suffer from depression think, is it horrible for being melodramatic? Depressed people sometimes tend to be melodramatic. I was pretty melodramatic when I was a depressed teen (although I suppose that had more to do with me being a teen than with the depression). (On the other hand, my friends in question are in their 20s-30s, so depression might have had something to do with it. It's a mystery!)

 

 

How did I know this claim of "you can't invalidate their experience" was coming?

 

 

Let's try to discuss this another way since I fear that would lead to a "no I'm not - yes you are" discussion:

 

Would you consider that game to be a great work of art or exceptionally well written? I wouldn't, because the writing is still very weak, completely devoid of character development or other basic aspects, and many of the details often end up feeling irrelevant in the big picture of things. You might rebuttal that that's just my opinion and not law or fact, but what I'm trying to argue is that I find it exceedingly unlikely that anyone just LOVED this "game" and felt it deserved a name drop, yet it got some, conveniently from friends of hers in the industry.

Likewise, would you consider this a video game? I wouldn't, because as I stated, this kind of thing has long qualified as a book. He'll come to think of it, do you happen to know the youtuber Jerma985? Does team fortress 2 videos. He did a video titled "so I'm writing a book" and the type of book he's writing? Choose your own adventure. What Zoe made would hardly be considered a "video game" rather than a book according to society.

 

 

And yet despite those two points, she's advertised as a game developer and her game got some name drops from gaming journalists. That to me screams bias. That's my point. At the end of the day I don't care if you think it's well written or poorly written. My point is I was expecting something worth writing home about, and it doesn't seem to qualify as such even if you liked it. And even if it does, it still hardly qualifies as a video game.

[TrashMan]

 

That's kinda a poor excuse for a bad game.

 

"This is a game about mental disorder so it's compleltey unplayable and commands are totally random on purpose!"

 

 

Games don't need to be fun.

 

Also, "being punished for making obviously terrible choices in the game's context" =/= "game's completely unplayable and commands are totally random".

 

A s*** game is a s*** game.  Period.

Trying to come up with artistic explanations for it's s***inies as if that somehow makes it's irrelevant is silly. Not to mention pretentious.

 

No real gameplay.

No real fun.

 

That's not a game anymore. Don't label it as such then. Call it "interactive experience".

[Meshugger]

 

That's because you still have some humanity in you.

 

Anyone agreeing with that statement has gone FullMcIntosh.

Was that thing an actual quote?

 

 

Nope, i made it up. But i like that it still managed to give people a benefit of doubt.

 

//EDIT: Are people trying to attack the self-employed lawyer guy? How dumb can you be? The guy is clearly riding on the GG-thing with his own agenda and they still fall for it? Oh well, time to bring the popcorn then.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Meshugger

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

How did I know this claim of "you can't invalidate their experience" was coming?

 

 

If I had to guess, it's because you've probably felt how utterly ridiculous the stance "I've experienced depression in a way that doesn't map to the game's depiction, therefore the game's depiction is wrong" is

 

Mind you, there is nothing wrong with the first part of the statement - depression is a multi-faceted thing, and I'm pretty sure no two people experience it in completely the same way -, but when you're concluding that everybody else who doesn't feel the same isn't really depressed, it comes across as pretty damn arrogant.

 

 

 

Would you consider that game to be a great work of art or exceptionally well written?

 

 

Nope, but as someone who sometimes translates stuff for a living, I can tell you with supreme confidence that I've seen worse writing even from published authors, so I guess it's fit for the purpose of a video game.

 

 

Likewise, would you consider this a video game?

 

 

Yes, I would. Partially because video games as an artistic medium are (or should be) all about communicating their message through game mechanics, which is something Depression Quest does, and partially because it's essentially a "choose your adventure"-thingy, a genre which had a renaissance on handheld consoles a few years ago or something like that - if those are (were?) being sold as games, why shouldn't this be?