BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm very confused, how can characters be pro/against anything? I am confused by your confusement. In the poster that was thrown in the thread, Faith from Mirrors Edge is taking a side. IIRC, EA had Anita Sarkeesian as a creative consultant on how to remodel Faith in Mirror's Edge 2. Yeah certain characters represent something symbolically so even though they aren't real they become a talking point "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Calax Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm very confused, how can characters be pro/against anything? I am confused by your confusement. In the poster that was thrown in the thread, Faith from Mirrors Edge is taking a side. IIRC, EA had Anita Sarkeesian as a creative consultant on how to remodel Faith in Mirror's Edge 2. How did you feel about that on personal level? Do you think Anita is justified in this case or do you think her intentions are misplaced? I realize it's not directed at me, but honestly they should have picked another woman to do it. Anita just screams that they're trying to capitalize on a PR stunt, and a lot of Anita's work is honestly misleading at best. Bring Jane Austen back from the dead, or pick somebody from the industry who feels that there is sexism in the workplace. Not some random outsider who's only known because her views are... controversial to say the least. Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Meshugger Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm very confused, how can characters be pro/against anything? I am confused by your confusement. In the poster that was thrown in the thread, Faith from Mirrors Edge is taking a side. IIRC, EA had Anita Sarkeesian as a creative consultant on how to remodel Faith in Mirror's Edge 2. How did you feel about that on personal level? Do you think Anita is justified in this case or do you think her intentions are misplaced? Don't ever ask a finn about what they feel on a personal level. Not even wives ask their husbands questions like that unless they want to thought of as some kind of f****t. But i'll let this one slide since it was most likely based on ignorance more than anything else. What i think about this is that she was definately misplaced and i feel sorry for the developers having to take cues from a con-artist. "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) I'm very confused, how can characters be pro/against anything? I am confused by your confusement. In the poster that was thrown in the thread, Faith from Mirrors Edge is taking a side. IIRC, EA had Anita Sarkeesian as a creative consultant on how to remodel Faith in Mirror's Edge 2. How did you feel about that on personal level? Do you think Anita is justified in this case or do you think her intentions are misplaced? I realize it's not directed at me, but honestly they should have picked another woman to do it. Anita just screams that they're trying to capitalize on a PR stunt, and a lot of Anita's work is honestly misleading at best. Bring Jane Austen back from the dead, or pick somebody from the industry who feels that there is sexism in the workplace. Not some random outsider who's only known because her views are... controversial to say the least. Sure, I can understand that perspective. I think its unfair to label Anita ( or most person ) a certain way due to past comments or events but the reality is there are people who will automatically dismiss anything she says even if it is valid..yet I can also justify where some of the criticism comes from towards her Edited May 12, 2015 by BruceVC "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Blarghagh Posted May 12, 2015 Author Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) To be fair, it's not like criticism of Anita Sarkeesian started with #GamerGate. She didn't start being controversial then, she was always a controversial figure and was repeatedly accused of being a con artist even before her Tropes vs Video Games video series kickstarter. She just wasn't on the radar of the gaming community before that, which blew her into the mainstream (interesting by itself, she was a fringe figure before video games made her mainstream). People dismissing her won't go away. I try to dismiss based on the things she says rather than herself, because she's made the occassional good point. The other half of Feminist Frequency, on the other hand, has written so much nonsense that I've developed an automatic knee-jerk reaction. If McIntosh would post that murder is bad, I'm sure my brain is already instinctively trained to disagree. He has that effect on people - I'm sure he changes more minds against him than for him. Edited May 12, 2015 by TrueNeutral 2
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 To be fair, it's not like criticism of Anita Sarkeesian started with #GamerGate. She didn't start being controversial then, she was always a controversial figure and was repeatedly accused of being a con artist even before her Tropes vs Video Games video series kickstarter. She just wasn't on the radar of the gaming community before that, which blew her into the mainstream (interesting by itself, she was a fringe figure before video games made her mainstream). People dismissing her won't go away. I try to dismiss based on the things she says rather than herself, because she's made the occassional good point. The other half of Feminist Frequency, on the other hand, has written so much nonsense that I've developed an automatic knee-jerk reaction. If McIntosh would post that murder is bad, I'm sure my brain is already instinctively trained to disagree. He has that effect on people - I'm sure he changes more minds against him than for him. Good points raised TN "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Fighter Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I don't think Anita or any other social activist has any place "advising" on character design. Games are not your mom and not your school teacher. I want the idea of imposing social message responsibility on games and other entertainment to die and never be brought up again.
Blarghagh Posted May 12, 2015 Author Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. 2
Keyrock Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I don't have a problem with Anita, or anyone else, critiquing video games. I have a problem with Anita cherry picking, using half-truths, and sometimes going so far as blatantly lying as part of her critiques. RFK Jr 2024 "Any organization created out of fear must create fear to survive." - Bill Hicks
Blarghagh Posted May 12, 2015 Author Posted May 12, 2015 I don't even have a problem with her doing that. I have a problem with media and game developers seemingly ignoring that to promote the message and prevent backlash.
aluminiumtrioxid Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 It helps to approach it keeping in mind that 90% of anything created ever is always going to be ****, and there hasn't yet been anything like that, ever. 2 "Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."
Fighter Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. I certainly don't have a problem with that either. Make your game as preachy as you like. And it's not like I don't enjoy art that can make a good point and still be engaging. What I have a problem with is this creeping push to make "the message" a central criteria. People like that don't just want diversity, they want the entire media environment to project a specific set of philosophies they agree with. They wont be happy if everyone can just find what they are looking for as long as the market dominant kinds of entertainment are the "wrong" kinds. You can't achieve what they want without some form of control, with more taboos and more shaming.
Nonek Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Personally I think such self righteous preaching, based upon Ms Sarkeesian's lies and half truths is a direct consequence of the many years of demonisation consumers have been subject to, with game journalists having grown used to abusing the millions of innocent and mainly apathetic (to their drivel) masses whom play games recreationally, the lies and false narratives were easily embraced and used when actual controversy and wrongdoing reared its head. Now with Ms Sarkeesian's work statistically and scientifically disproven, themselves shown to be the wrongdoers, misogynists and regressive elements in gaming and the consumers actually making a stand against degenerate practises, while self funding games that actually are progressive and innovative, they are outraged as they become increasingly irrelevant. Of course they will still abuse consumers, state they are dead, lie about them being harassers and women haters, or that the truly diverse masses of gamergate wish to stifle diversity, but their lies are ringing more and more hollow, as they become obsolete. They are after all just a group of lying hypocrites whom are no longer relevant, whom oppose diversity of opinion as well as race and gender, and wish to censor and distort the truth to their own ends, morally reprehensible and so desperate as to make bomb threats against a bunch of people just having a party. Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin. Tea for the teapot!
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. So what about a game like Hatred ? Where the developers say they created it because they are tired of everyone being politically correct but in fact the game is just about gratuitous violence and certain people will buy the game just because large sectors of society are appalled by it and criticize it? Are you guys fine with this type of game ? "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Hurlshort Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I think it is a stupid game, I'm not really sure what kind of development team would want to commit years of their life to such a project, but they have every right to create it. 2
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I think it is a stupid game, I'm not really sure what kind of development team would want to commit years of their life to such a project, but they have every right to create it. Yes I am not saying they shouldn't be allowed to create it, I am more interested in what people think about the caliber of this type of game. "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Meshugger Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) I think it is a stupid game, I'm not really sure what kind of development team would want to commit years of their life to such a project, but they have every right to create it. Yes I am not saying they shouldn't be allowed to create it, I am more interested in what people think about the caliber of this type of game. Why are there Horror-movies? Why is there Death Metal? It's a mystery i tell you. Edited May 12, 2015 by Meshugger "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) I think it is a stupid game, I'm not really sure what kind of development team would want to commit years of their life to such a project, but they have every right to create it. Yes I am not saying they shouldn't be allowed to create it, I am more interested in what people think about the caliber of this type of game. Why is there Horror-movies? Why is there Death Metal? It's a mystery i tell you. That's not a bad comparison...and it got me thinking But is a low budget and excessively gory horror movie the same as a game that people produce? They are similar but are they the same thing...I guess the main difference being the game is much more interactive and you get to determine the story as opposed to sitting and watching or listening to something...I'm just not sure if this is relevant ? Edited May 12, 2015 by BruceVC "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Blarghagh Posted May 12, 2015 Author Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. So what about a game like Hatred ? Where the developers say they created it because they are tired of everyone being politically correct but in fact the game is just about gratuitous violence and certain people will buy the game just because large sectors of society are appalled by it and criticize it? Are you guys fine with this type of game ? Yes, if that is the kind of game they want to make. This is how freedom of expression works. They're perfectly fine to express their frustration and we're all completely free to ignore it, hate it, or ridicule it. I've seen films that are far worse and somehow that's fine? 1
ravenshrike Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm very confused, how can characters be pro/against anything? I am confused by your confusement. In the poster that was thrown in the thread, Faith from Mirrors Edge is taking a side. IIRC, EA had Anita Sarkeesian as a creative consultant on how to remodel Faith in Mirror's Edge 2. How did you feel about that on personal level? Do you think Anita is justified in this case or do you think her intentions are misplaced? I realize it's not directed at me, but honestly they should have picked another woman to do it. Anita just screams that they're trying to capitalize on a PR stunt, and a lot of Anita's work is honestly misleading at best. Bring Jane Austen back from the dead, or pick somebody from the industry who feels that there is sexism in the workplace. Not some random outsider who's only known because her views are... controversial to say the least. Sure, I can understand that perspective. I think its unfair to label Anita ( or most person ) a certain way due to past comments or events but the reality is there are people who will automatically dismiss anything she says even if it is valid..yet I can also justify where some of the criticism comes from towards her Anita is correctly labeled a con artist because she has yet to finish even stage one of the youtube videos she was paid six figures to create. She scammed money out of people but because her politics are correct(and here I'm reminded of the old joke about many small blood sucking insects) she gets a complete pass. "You know, there's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it" "If that's what you think, you're DOING IT WRONG."
Oerwinde Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 There's at least one character on the gg side as well, she's there twice. Albeit she is gg's mascot. NuThor is there on aGG too, presumably due to the ethics in blah blah. Characters can take sides even if only due to authorial intent or being designed as a representative. Don't know what Faith is doing there though unless she's meant to be representing DICE or rpatchett or something. Seems a bit strange that GG would have any women as a mascot considering how the movement feels about women and treats them ? I don't understand the question. Why would GG have a woman as a mascot considering its celebration of women in gaming and its support of charities that support female game devs? The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
Malcador Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. So what about a game like Hatred ? Where the developers say they created it because they are tired of everyone being politically correct but in fact the game is just about gratuitous violence and certain people will buy the game just because large sectors of society are appalled by it and criticize it? Are you guys fine with this type of game ? Sure, it's a boring premise, but basically it's what people do in GTA once they've exhausted missions and other content. If they want to bait hand wringers, then they are free to do so. Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
aluminiumtrioxid Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) many years of demonisation consumers have been subject to [citation needed] Now with Ms Sarkeesian's work statistically and scientifically disproven [citation needed] themselves shown to be the (...) misogynists [citation needed] Edited May 12, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid 2 "Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."
BruceVC Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I'm fine with games being designed to do that as long as it is the creator who wants to make that game. Free speech goes both ways, which is something that goes forgotten in a lot of these discussions. So what about a game like Hatred ? Where the developers say they created it because they are tired of everyone being politically correct but in fact the game is just about gratuitous violence and certain people will buy the game just because large sectors of society are appalled by it and criticize it? Are you guys fine with this type of game ? Sure, it's a boring premise, but basically it's what people do in GTA once they've exhausted missions and other content. If they want to bait hand wringers, then they are free to do so. Yeah I suppose you are right, I can't dispute your logic on this matter "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
Fighter Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Yes, if that is the kind of game they want to make. This is how freedom of expression works. They're perfectly fine to express their frustration and we're all completely free to ignore it, hate it, or ridicule it. I've seen films that are far worse and somehow that's fine? It's the massively exaggerated "But you get to do it yourself".
Recommended Posts