Twitter outrage over the "[spoiler]" quest

[liniger4312]

actually it's about ethics in games journalism *farts*

You mean gamergate? Yeah I think it is for the most part. I see this often, whenever people who are progamergate talk about anything but "ethics in journalism" many who oppose them get this "AHA, GOTCHA!!" reaction.

Why?

I am pretty sure the vast majority of supporters of gamergate are in fact gamers, with a large interest in games outside their involvement in gamergate. Being pro gamergate doesn't mean every opinion or discussion you have is made from that platform. As an example I'm a social democrat, doesn't mean every opinion and conclusion I come to is made with the mantle of social democrat.

Edited April 4, 2015 by liniger4312

[Nixl]

I do not like to make a slippery slope argument, but since Obsidian has already made one change, how is this different? 

[ChipMHazard]

Well it's different in that this might be a hoax or the tweet was removed. No one can find it. 

[Varana]

I sincerely doubt that this gets changed because:

 

A) It's an option in a quest.

B) It's a fairly significant quest.

C) Unlike the backer rewards, the questlines get a little more scrutiny and are weighed with a different scale. If they had a problem with the option of killing a child as part of a quest, they wouldn't have made it an option.

D) The tweet was a quite nice attempt at trolling.

[SG1080]

I love how certain posters in this thread swiftly change from apologism for the initial "complaint" to opining that the reaction to the removing of it is as bad as the initial outrage, depending on who they're replying to and what best suits. Seems pretty craven to my eyes, as if they never had a point that could withstand debate to begin with - beyond "look at these GGers hur hur". 

[Creslin321]

I do not like to make a slippery slope argument, but since Obsidian has already made one change, how is this different? 

 

I think it all hinges on whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just changed something that Josh Sawyer would have removed anyway if he knew it existed.  I'm almost certain that Sawyer didn't look at every backer memorial, there are too many, they probably assigned other employees to do that, so it's feasible he never saw it.

 

And IF he would have removed it if he saw it, then I see no problem, I support the freedom of artists to do whatever they want in their games, regardless of my political opinion.  For example, if Anita Sarkeesian were to make a game, I would fully expect it to be full of radical feminist propaganda, and you know what?  That's her prerogative.  I wouldn't agree with it, but I support her right to create what she wants.

 

So anyway, if we are to guess at whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just removed something that they would rather not have in their game...I'm kind of leaning towards them just removing something they would rather not have.  The mere fact that Sawyer backed Feminist Frequency tells us a lot about his views, and I think removing this line is probably consistent with those views.

 

I, personally, do not agree with it being removed, but it's 100% Sawyer's and Obsidian's prerogative to edit what is in their game.

[thejonvincent]

 

 

If this is patched out or changed in any way I will stop playing this game and will use every possible avenue to get a refund while simultaneously discouraging every possible person in my field of influence (I'm a writer by day, so it's a rather large field) to never touch another Obsidian product. This. Is. Ridiculous. Are people b**ching more about this game than the others...or are we just hearing about it more?

So you are mad at these people spreading lies about the game's content and the only thing you can think of is threatening Obsidian?

I said "if" it's patched out. I'm not threatening anything, I am saying exactly what ill do. If these are lies then my entire comment is irrelevant and I'll just continue to enjoy the game, pretty simple. I'm not mad at anyone.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

I do not like to make a slippery slope argument, but since Obsidian has already made one change, how is this different?

 

 

I think it all hinges on whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just changed something that Josh Sawyer would have removed anyway if he knew it existed.  I'm almost certain that Sawyer didn't look at every backer memorial, there are too many, they probably assigned other employees to do that, so it's feasible he never saw it.

 

And IF he would have removed it if he saw it, then I see no problem, I support the freedom of artists to do whatever they want in their games, regardless of my political opinion.  For example, if Anita Sarkeesian were to make a game, I would fully expect it to be full of radical feminist propaganda, and you know what?  That's her prerogative.  I wouldn't agree with it, but I support her right to create what she wants.

 

So anyway, if we are to guess at whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just removed something that they would rather not have in their game...I'm kind of leaning towards them just removing something they would rather not have.  The mere fact that Sawyer backed Feminist Frequency tells us a lot about his views, and I think removing this line is probably consistent with those views.

 

I, personally, do not agree with it being removed, but it's 100% Sawyer's and Obsidian's prerogative to edit what is in their game.

I think the issue is that it's backer content and not dev content. Of course consulting with the back over what to do with it is a good move and I applaud Obsidian for that.

[Namutree]

 

 

I think it all hinges on whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just changed something that Josh Sawyer would have removed anyway if he knew it existed.  I'm almost certain that Sawyer didn't look at every backer memorial, there are too many, they probably assigned other employees to do that, so it's feasible he never saw it.

 

And IF he would have removed it if he saw it, then I see no problem, I support the freedom of artists to do whatever they want in their games, regardless of my political opinion.  For example, if Anita Sarkeesian were to make a game, I would fully expect it to be full of radical feminist propaganda, and you know what?  That's her prerogative.  I wouldn't agree with it, but I support her right to create what she wants.

 

So anyway, if we are to guess at whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just removed something that they would rather not have in their game...I'm kind of leaning towards them just removing something they would rather not have.  The mere fact that Sawyer backed Feminist Frequency tells us a lot about his views, and I think removing this line is probably consistent with those views.

 

I, personally, do not agree with it being removed, but it's 100% Sawyer's and Obsidian's prerogative to edit what is in their game.

I think the issue is that it's backer content and not dev content. Of course consulting with the back over what to do with it is a good move and I applaud Obsidian for that.

 

That what I was gonna say!

[Creslin321]

 

 

I do not like to make a slippery slope argument, but since Obsidian has already made one change, how is this different?

 

I think it all hinges on whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just changed something that Josh Sawyer would have removed anyway if he knew it existed.  I'm almost certain that Sawyer didn't look at every backer memorial, there are too many, they probably assigned other employees to do that, so it's feasible he never saw it.

 

And IF he would have removed it if he saw it, then I see no problem, I support the freedom of artists to do whatever they want in their games, regardless of my political opinion.  For example, if Anita Sarkeesian were to make a game, I would fully expect it to be full of radical feminist propaganda, and you know what?  That's her prerogative.  I wouldn't agree with it, but I support her right to create what she wants.

 

So anyway, if we are to guess at whether Obsidian "caved to pressure" or whether they just removed something that they would rather not have in their game...I'm kind of leaning towards them just removing something they would rather not have.  The mere fact that Sawyer backed Feminist Frequency tells us a lot about his views, and I think removing this line is probably consistent with those views.

 

I, personally, do not agree with it being removed, but it's 100% Sawyer's and Obsidian's prerogative to edit what is in their game.

I think the issue is that it's backer content and not dev content. Of course consulting with the back over what to do with it is a good move and I applaud Obsidian for that.

 

 

Yeah I see your point that the backer paid to have it in so there should be some respect on his or her wishes.

 

Still though, I'm sure that Obsidian retains the ability to censor backer memorials that it doesn't feel are appropriate.  For example, if someone had a memorial with the N word in it, I am like 99% sure that Obsidian would censor it.

 

So I think this falls in the same territory.  Ultimately, it's Obsidian's game and they can censor or not censor whatever they want.  So long as they aren't bullied or pressured into changing something that they otherwise would not have, I have no issue with it.

 

Once again though, personally I do not feel the joke was offensive, but I can't speak for Obsidian.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Creslin321

[SG1080]

The mere fact that Sawyer backed Feminist Frequency tells us a lot about his views, and I think removing this line is probably consistent with those views.

 

 

Careful with this; I can understand why you'd assume so, but there are plenty of backers who've seen what they've ended up sponsoring and washed their hands of it (one example). Because the series certainly needed exploring, but unfortunately, as is clear by now, not by rabid ideologues impervious to the actual in-game reality.

[liniger4312]

 

Assuming it's fake is one thing (albeit these days, always assume fake until double-checked is my own policy). But the knee-jerk, Obsidian is RUINED reactions in this thread within minutes of the image being posted are quite frankly pathetic. You'd think people would be more level-headed, but nope, just as guilty of being easily outraged as those they denounce.

 

 

For what it's worth, I honestly don't see a lot of actual "Obsidian is RUINED" reactions in here, mostly snark and the usual derailed topic of whether or not SJWs are the coming of the apocalypse or saving the world (hyperbole very much intended).

 

At any rate, fake or deleted is irrelevant for the purpose of this thread. Nothing will happen and I agree this should be closed.

[Isi1dur]

SJW's can sod off as far as i am concerned, if Obsidian caves to the outcry of twitter lunatics once more and anything else gets removed from this game i am done with it.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I don't know about anyone else but as someone who enjoys video games, comics etc I'm kind of sick of all these internet fights. 

If everyone just let stuff go when they peek into other communities rather than shouting at each other over opinions the world would be a better place. 

As an example I obviously don't agree with the WBC but I don't go over to their forums or follow them on twitter to see what they are chatting about and then get all offended and annoyed they don't like things I like or agree with my world view. Being a 'sjw' or a 'gamergater' must be bloody tiring. 

Either side needs to chill out. 

Edited April 4, 2015 by Moonlight Butterfly

[Namutree]

SJW's can sod off as far as i am concerned, if Obsidian caves to the outcry of twitter lunatics once more and anything else gets removed from this game i am done with it.

Why?

[Arouet]

Seeing this thread is the first time any outrage has been pointed out to me because noone in the SJW circles gives a **** about that quest.

 

Don't let that stop the teeth gnashing though.

[Fuz]

While i agree with the statement that children should have special protection in video games

 

I don't.

[AlterKnacker]

Seeing this thread is the first time any outrage has been pointed out to me because noone in the SJW circles gives a **** about that quest.

 

Don't let that stop the teeth gnashing though.

Do you have insider informations from SJW circles? Tumblr and other social media where they usually operate?

[Arouet]

 

Seeing this thread is the first time any outrage has been pointed out to me because noone in the SJW circles gives a **** about that quest.

 

Don't let that stop the teeth gnashing though.

Do you have insider informations from SJW circles? Tumblr and other social media where they usually operate?

 

Noone who circulated any outrage to the limerick has said anything about this.

 

Really, nobody cares.

[KingNee]

 

 

Seeing this thread is the first time any outrage has been pointed out to me because noone in the SJW circles gives a **** about that quest.

 

Don't let that stop the teeth gnashing though.

Do you have insider informations from SJW circles? Tumblr and other social media where they usually operate?

 

Noone who circulated any outrage to the limerick has said anything about this.

 

Really, nobody cares.

 

 

Tell me about your friends, the warriors. I want to learn more about their ways. They matter. 

[Akos]

People go out of their way to be offended by things. The fun thing about our incredibly politically correct society is that nobody has to bother with personal maturation; they can just proclaim that people are causing them emotional stress and demand that everyone has to alter what they're doing to compensate for their lack of mental development. Not quite unlike a small child screaming for candy in a market. 

[Arouet]

When they do crazy ivans, they always go to starboard in the bottom half of the hour.

[Valsuelm]

'Twitter outrage' over anything really shouldn't be given any serious consideration. Folks who use Twitter as a primary way to communicate are generally not mentally well adjusted people, or grounded all that much in reality.

[Stun]

No sale, Ms. tweeter. I have no respect for 'gamers' who don't bother doing research. One of Obsidian's primary sales pitches for the PE kickstarter was that since there's no publisher, there'd be no content shackles. They promised us, over and over again, during the game's development, that the game *would* explore controversial issues and other taboos that Publisher-controlled games wouldn't normally be able to explore.

 

Yet here we are today, barely a week after the game's release, and already Obsidian is being hounded, by people who were apparently unaware of the type of game they bought, to address the very content they promised to deliver and did deliver.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Stun

[Luj1]

Guess that's the next thing they'll secretly patch out since twitter now dictates what content goes in a game.

 

 

Obsidian and Josh opened that can of worms by indulging that disturbed creature on twitter.

 

Yes, I know Firedorn changed it (not Obsidian), but they asked him to so they would not go through that PR hell themselves

 

Soo its all the same, it turns out as if they changed it themselves to indulge that person (its how its perceived regardless)

 

 

GJ obsidian and Josh, you opened the Pandoras box and let twitter into your game (coz now people on twitter saw that guy Erik/Erika and think they can change stuff too !! - Its how it works in democracy )

Edited April 4, 2015 by Luj1