Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Longknife]

As an aside, seeing alanshu and Longknife get into it would unleash a wall if text upon us that would rival the size of a thesis. If only Lephys would join in.

 

 

Let me at him.

 

I will **** on his rug.

[Keyrock]

Modern art is the thought process, it's the journey as well as the desitination. It has ironic distance to the notion of itself. It's not supposed to look technically impressive, or at least that's not a goal in and off itself. Of course this makes it very easy for it to appear like some giant elaborate hoax to cheat rich people of their money. 

 

If it looks like a duck...

[JadedWolf]

 

Modern art is the thought process, it's the journey as well as the desitination. It has ironic distance to the notion of itself. It's not supposed to look technically impressive, or at least that's not a goal in and off itself. Of course this makes it very easy for it to appear like some giant elaborate hoax to cheat rich people of their money. 

 

If it looks like a duck...

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Modern art is the thought process, it's the journey as well as the desitination. It has ironic distance to the notion of itself. It's not supposed to look technically impressive, or at least that's not a goal in and off itself. Of course this makes it very easy for it to appear like some giant elaborate hoax to cheat rich people of their money. 

 

If it looks like a duck...

Have sex with it?[/biodrone]

[kirottu]

 

As an aside, seeing alanshu and Longknife get into it would unleash a wall if text upon us that would rival the size of a thesis. If only Lephys would join in.

 

 

Let me at him.

 

I will **** on his rug.

 

 

Even if the rug really ties the room together?

[Longknife]

 

 

As an aside, seeing alanshu and Longknife get into it would unleash a wall if text upon us that would rival the size of a thesis. If only Lephys would join in.

 

 

Let me at him.

 

I will **** on his rug.

 

 

Even if the rug really ties the room together?

 

 

 

Yes.

 

 

 

And btw I got this youtube comment notification literally about a minute after Kaine accused me of writing walls of text: http://i.imgur.com/f8G35Kv.png

 

Yes I included the video I was watching solely in the interest of showing you all how valuable my freetime is.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Longknife

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

While I don't disagree with this since I was just asking for clarity, I also want to ask why do you specifically go and visit some obscure minority-voice website no one's ever heard of and go "omg outrageous radical views!!!" Ya no ****?

 

I only ask because the attitude seems akin to when through the course of GGs discussion, people point at statements made by anonymous youtube trolls with minimal upvotes and call it representative of the community.  It seems to have become a discussion where only extremes are discussed rather than the...yknow, objective groups and opinions actually at hand. The furthest I've gone to purposefully explore opinions I disagree with was r/gamerghazi, and that was to just see if I could educate myself on how they feel about things or find anything insightful.

 

 

 

A recap of what happened:

- Some bloke links to a post on an anonymous board by a self-identified "gamer girl" dripping with redpiller terminology and transphobia.

- I point out that said post is dripping with redpiller terminology and transphobia.

- Someone asks what I mean by "redpiller terminology".

- I link to an explanation found on the site most widely associated with the "redpill movement" as far as I'm aware (aside from r/RedPill), in the interest of accurately representing the movement.

- Someone expresses that they find the site to be horrible.

- I point out that the primer I linked was really just the tip of the iceberg.

 

Characterizing me giving an answer to a very specific question as "visiting some obscure minority-voice website no one's ever heard of and going 'omg outrageous radical views!!!'" is an extremely uncharitable reading of what happened.

 

 

 

While that may or may not be true for feminism as a whole, I don't believe that opinion is the type of opinion we're dealing with HERE with GamerGate. Take Bayonetta for example. She's hardly "just eye candy" as she's the main character, the protagonist and the character with more detail and backstory than anyone else in the entire series, and yet she's being given **** for the sexualized outfits. That's my point: the feminism GG is dealing with seems quid pro quo, where yes the women who want knights-in-shining-armor with vaginas would be quite pleased, but the women who consider sex empowering would not be pleased. I would be all for both co-existing, but I do not get the vibe that that's what the people of Polygon, SilverString media and others want to see happen. 

 

 

 

I think you fundamentally misunderstand their point: the problem is that "knights-in-shining-armor with vaginas" (wouldn't it have been easier to just call them "female fighters in reasonable armor"?) are currently not represented in gaming, or at least not nearly to the extent sexualized female characters are.

 

If you could provide links with actual quotes - quotes that mean the same thing in the wider context of the source, if possible - where they're asking for all sexualized female depictions to be immediately replaced with chaste nuns/vaginas in a tin can/whatever, I'd be more than happy to admit that I've been proven wrong.

 

 

 

I suggested a pregnant woman completely alone in a wild and hostile environment probably wasn't a good idea, thus some protection is of value. I would cite the same fact of biology as being the cause for most early armies being composed of men: because they are capable of reproducing while remaining strong and physically intimidating.

 

 

 

And as I have pointed out, the theory has a solid foundation in the fact that pregnant women are comparatively vulnerable, but "pregnant women need protection, men won't give protection to pregnant women if they're not absolutely sure that said woman is carrying their genetic material, therefore ****-shaming is biologically determined" is a hypothesis that can't be considered to prove anything not just because it's making a few logical jumps I find questionable, but because there is no way of setting up an experiment where it can be scientifically tested.

 

 

 

As for if you encountered a study debunking that study (or not and you have them confused), I don't see any value in us comparing the two studies 

 

 

 

I don't mean to sound dismissive, but given the fact that, being a lawyer-in-training, you have spent a considerable amount of your life either preparing for law school, or in law school itself, which, I assume, limits one's available free time for simultaneously educating oneself on how statistics and biology works, while I, being a med student, have spent a comparative amount of time and effort studying biology, research related to biological - mostly medical - matters, and how to evaluate the validity of said research, I'd say I might have a skillset better suited to determining whether there is a point in comparing two studies, or whether one of those studies is built on a questionable understanding of how biology, statistics, or even scientific research itself works.

 

Then again, if you were the type to just go around believing every random bloke on random forums who proclaims himself a med student in the vague hope of winning an internet argument, you probably wouldn't really have much of a future in your chosen career, so I assume pointing this fact out was somewhat meaningless.

 

 

(Please do forgive the overall flippant tone, I've just finished reading a detailed account on how politicians in my country are stealing literally all the money, no, I'm not exaggerating, literally all, and am extremely pissed off, which is not conducive to writing responses in a non-flippant manner.)

[Meshugger]

 

I reject the very notion of art anyway. What do I care if academics consider video games art or not? Art is a pointless notion. I recognize craftmanship, creativity, innovation, sentiment, self-expression, beauty and evocativeness as seperate things, both objective and subjective, and I'm not going to devalue any of them by calling them all the same thing as this:

 

 

The notion of art is to all of those things what creationism is to modern science. What do I care that Roger Ebert said games will never be art? The Walking Dead made me tear up, Amnesia made me feel more scared than any horror film, and Octodad made me rage so hard I broke my voice. What do I care who considers those games art or not when they meant something to me, personally? I answer the question of "are games art?" with another question, namely "who the hell cares?"

Modern art is the thought process, it's the journey as well as the desitination. It has ironic distance to the notion of itself. It's not supposed to look technically impressive, or at least that's not a goal in and off itself. Of course this makes it very easy for it to appear like some giant elaborate hoax to cheat rich people of their money. 

 

 

I was at the Leopoldmuzeum in Vienna where most of the modern art was exhibited and....well Gustav Klimt painted incredible works of art about the subconsciousness, but the rest were pretty much pretentious and simple "art" (think of four bathtubs with a pool of blood in one of them hanged on a wall). I can't think of it as though-provoking, meaningful, profound, beautiful or anything really. Just simple things for simple minds. Luckily the museum down the road had Caravaggio's "The crowning of thorns", "The Madonna and the Rosary". Not *that* was something.

 

 

[Meshugger]

My point is that if games wishes to be art, then please try to excel to the classics. Anyone can do anything and call it "modern art".

[Malcador]

My point is that if games wishes to be art, then please try to excel to the classics. Anyone can do anything and call it "modern art".

I fell for this CBC article, minus the audio for that reason - http://www.cbc.ca/thisisthat/blog/2014/09/23/new-york-artist-creates-art-that-is-invisible/

[Drowsy Emperor]

Its hard to relate to modern art because it has moved away from the notions of beauty that are easier to admire. I understand why it has done so, but I am too, rarely impressed by what I see. However, once you get into the depth of drawing and painting, you come to appreciate how difficult it is to "do more with less". Representing things in as few lines and colors as possible and keeping it all in balance and beautiful is a huge and very difficult juggling act. 

 

As far as games are concerned, they aren't art. A dog biting on your ass will provoke an emotional response, that does not make the act artistic. To be art games need to contribute something valuable to the human condition as in the great works of literature, or be exceedingly beautiful as great works of art, or sometimes both, as film can do (rarely).

 

So far, that hasn't been happening.

 

 

Although the likes of Shadow of the Colossus, Homeworld and Planescape Torment are the ones that I consider having "artistic value".

Edited November 20, 2014 by Drowsy Emperor

[Meshugger]

 

My point is that if games wishes to be art, then please try to excel to the classics. Anyone can do anything and call it "modern art".

I fell for this CBC article, minus the audio for that reason - http://www.cbc.ca/thisisthat/blog/2014/09/23/new-york-artist-creates-art-that-is-invisible/

 

 

First thing that came to mind after reading that link:

 

[Orogun01]

My point is that if games wishes to be art, then please try to excel to the classics. Anyone can do anything and call it "modern art".

I took a massive modern art just yesterday, should had taken pictures before flushing it.

[Ganrich]

God, I miss Carlin.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

God, I miss Carlin.

Besides humorless ****wits, who doesn't?

[Ganrich]

Yeah... I just feel that comedy (at least in America) has a huge void now. Louis CK is good for introspective and social humor, and Lewis Black is good for political, but I miss the master craftsman at language-smithing (who dabbled in nearly every subject). I have his books, and a lot of his HBO specials, and I could always do for a little more. He was the only celebrity (in my adult life) that truly saddened me to hear the news. I am probably not thinking of a comedian or two that I should... I have had a long day of work with around 2 hours sleep. Insomnia is splendid.

 

Also, to chime in on some commentary from the past few pages:

 

Jim Sterling - I periodically would watch the Jimquisition. I liked the "I'm the savior of video games/faux-narcissism" thing he did to an extent. I have a similar sense of humor in real life, but not to that degree. I felt at times he was trying to do right by the consumer, but at others I felt he was ranting for the sake of it. I have no interest in following him anymore. He will have to really earn back my respect, and I don't see him doing it soon.

 

I don't know who said it, but upthread someone said that they rely on The Cynical Brit for reviews at this point. I will second that. It is hard to not be pretty pretty darn objective when commenting on gameplay when you are recording the video at the moment of playing. He is basically showing you a game, and it's systems, and says "If you like/dislike X type of game then this may/may not be for you." He shows setting options for PC which I really like. There are really very few games he rips apart, and they really look pretty pitiful. Basically... He gives you a non-interactive demo with commentary while trying to show as many major systems of the game as he can in the time allowed. We need more solid work like his in the media and on YouTube, IMHO.

[Chilloutman]

 

priceless

[Fighter]

That's awesome.

[TrashMan]

Modern art is the thought process, it's the journey as well as the desitination. It has ironic distance to the notion of itself. It's not supposed to look technically impressive, or at least that's not a goal in and off itself. Of course this makes it very easy for it to appear like some giant elaborate hoax to cheat rich people of their money. 

 

 

 

I couldn't give a rats ass what an artist thought or felt while making a work of "art".

There's no way to tell, prove or quantify any of that.

If at the end the product of his work is a piece of ugly crap, then ti's a piece of ugly crap, regardless of how much "feels" and "emotions" and "anguish" he poured into it.

 

Modern art is garbage, fit only for pompous intellectual circle-jerking.

[TrashMan]

Allow me to put my old man face on, but to be honest I've never really been all that impressed with PC game journalism. When I was a lad, a long time ago, I was really into Amiga and so I read things like Amiga Power, Amiga Format and CU Amiga. Yes, they were incredibly geeky but they were also (mostly) funny and honest. If a game was crap they told it like it is and they gleefully dissected it in such a way that when you were buying one of the magazines you were hoping they'd review some really crap games. I've never, ever come across anything similar for the PC.

 

Now excuse me, I think it's time for my nap.

 

I remember the olden, golden days.

I used to buy magazines that were like that. They even had a section "trash of the month" with the worst games and the reviews were hillarious.

 

I remember some doom-like clone called "Gore Galore" and a Contra rip-off that had spastic movement controls, and the character controlled like "a headless robot chicken struck by lighting, panicking and running in all directions at once"

[Meshugger]

Topical: http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/

 

 

Safety from physical assault is one thing — but safety from words, ideas, Zionists, lads, pop music, Nietzsche? We seem to have nurtured a new generation that believes its self-esteem is more important than everyone else’s liberty.

 

The pop song in question is "Blurred lines" by Robin Thicke. I wonder how they feel about songs like this:

 

 

I mean the lyrics are downright frightning!

 

 

Driving compulsion morbid thoughts come to mind
Sexual release buried deep inside
Complete control of a prized possession
To touch and fondle with no objection
Lonely souls an emptiness fullfilled
Physical pleasure and addictive thrill
An object of perverted reality
An obsession beyond your wildest dreams

Death loves final embrace
Your cool tenderness
Memories keep love alive
Memories will never die

The excitement of dissection is sweet
My skin crawls with orgasmic speed
A lifeless object for my subjection
An obsession beyond your imagination
Primitive instinct a passion for flesh
Primal feeding on the multitudes of death
Sadistic acts a love so true
Absorbingly masticating a part of you

Death loves final embrace
Your cool tenderness
Memories keep love alive
Memories will never die

I need a freind
Please be my companion
I don't want to be
Left alone with my sanity

Erotic sensations tingle my spine
A dead body lying next to mine
Smooth blue black lips
I start salivating as we kiss
Mine forever this sweet death
I cannot forget your soft breaths
Panting excitedly with my hands around your neck

Shades are drawn
No one can see
What I've done
What's become of me
Here I stand
Above all that's been true
How I love
How I love to kill you

[Blarghagh]

Its hard to relate to modern art because it has moved away from the notions of beauty that are easier to admire. I understand why it has done so, but I am too, rarely impressed by what I see. However, once you get into the depth of drawing and painting, you come to appreciate how difficult it is to "do more with less". Representing things in as few lines and colors as possible and keeping it all in balance and beautiful is a huge and very difficult juggling act. 

 

As far as games are concerned, they aren't art. A dog biting on your ass will provoke an emotional response, that does not make the act artistic. To be art games need to contribute something valuable to the human condition as in the great works of literature, or be exceedingly beautiful as great works of art, or sometimes both, as film can do (rarely).

 

So far, that hasn't been happening.

 

 

Although the likes of Shadow of the Colossus, Homeworld and Planescape Torment are the ones that I consider having "artistic value".

 

Interesting definition. How would you quantify "contributed something to the human condition"? Because that sounds like a bunch of floaty mumbo jumbo to me (no offense, I really am interested in how you quantify it). I suppose I could add "cultural impact" to my list of things I recognize over "art", but it's hard to gouge and a lot of things that aren't "art" have cultural impact. As for modern art that actually does such things as you describe, that can fall under craftmanship or self-expression. Like I said, you can recognize what people call the amorphous blob "art" as different things and remove the debate because art has become a silly word with no meaning anyway, a dumb emotional construct. If people would appreciate craftmanship or evocativeness or any of the other things I mentioned in my post rather than dumping it all into "art" it would be a lot easier. I mean, look at what Wikipedia has to say about Art: "Art is a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities." It's bloody nonsense, that's what it is. As a game designer, I recognize a lot of craftmanship goes into video games. There's no debate to be had there, so why are we debating whether it falls under "the products of a diverse range of human activities".

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Interesting definition. How would you quantify "contributed something to the human condition"? 

 

 

I'm guessing "resonates with a lot of people in some way throughout the ages".

[Meshugger]

*derp* forgot i posted this already. Ignore

Edited November 21, 2014 by Meshugger

[kirottu]

Still the best art piece from this whole thing. Everyone gets a voice by Vinnythecake.