Journalism and Bias in the Gaming Industry

[Malcador]

 

Not really sure what the warning was about after watching that, I guess EC's audience is soft ?

 

OT perhaps, but Bruce was on about Hatred before. The comment about denying it a megaphone was pretty funny as well, given this game's coverage by people upset by the murdering or whatever. Does seem that a ban would fix his problem with the game, he does go on about it being sadistic and of no value and that people shouldn't buy or sell it, after all.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Malcador

[ravenshrike]

 

So, in order to point out corruption and con artistry I have to be part of whatever is being criticized? Where does that come in? As for the ton more content, none of the content for FF is relevant to her TvW series. And I notice that you still haven't been able to point out videos 1-5. That was video one.

 

 

 

You are nitpicking.  She has produced a ton of content and her backers are not complaining.  

 

I've seen a number of kickstarters raise more money and produce less.  I'm still waiting on my games from the Space Quest and Quest for Glory people.  Why aren't you railing about Lori and Corey Cole being con artists?  They just started a second kickstarter without even finishing the first game, you'd have a much better argument there.

 

And holy moly, that 75 minutes of video was only covering one topic?  Yikes.  I am glad I don't watch this rubbish.  

 

Possibly con artists. Much more likely idiots who got in WAY over their heads. There is a galaxy of difference in complexity between making a game and making a green-screen youtube video. Whereas Sarkeesian  knew exactly what went on monetary wise when making youtube videos as that was her medium before the kickstarter and there is no appreciable cost difference between her FF videos and TvW videos.

[Hurlshort]

Your definition of a con artist in regards to Kickstarter would seem to label most people as such.  People change size and scope, miss release dates, and even close up shop regularly.  I only see it as a con if they take the funds and run.  There is no evidence of that with Sarkeesian, quite the opposite really, she has clearly used the investment to devote herself fully to the concepts of the kickstarter.  The product does not look the way you want it too, but that doesn't really matter, since you didn't invest in it.  If her investors were unhappy, then you'd have an actual case.  As is, you have no ground to stand on and are just throwing out an unreasonable and unwarranted accusation.  

 

 

I was watching Going Clear last night, and there is a similar argument made about L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology.  He was a delusional madman, sure, but if he was running a con, why would he devote his entire life to it?  Why would he sit in a room with an e-meter for thousands of hours trying to expel thetans?  It doesn't add up.   

[Gorgon]

Umm... The Scientology members get ripped off rather severerly so the chuch can expand it's real estate portpholio. Is that unlike, say, the vatican ?. No. 

 

It's rather extremely controlling and demanding uniformity and conformity of its members though. Ex members who voice opposition get persecuted and character assassinated. 

 

It feeds off weak individuals who require that kind of constant structure and sense of belonging. It very much is exploitative.

 

Do the Scientology higher ups know this ?. Of course they do, they're not idiots. 

[BruceVC]

 

I'm asking for the entire game world to treat the player like a violent sociopath if said player behaves like a violent sociopath. (And by "treating the player like a violent sociopath" I mean "this actually having tangible effects instead of being a cosmetical thing".)

 

I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable expectation.

 

1) It is unreasonable for a game the size and scope of GTA.

 

2) Why? Judge your own actions. Why do you need the author to tell you right from wrong? Why do you need the virtual world to be policed?

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

[Fighter]

Caving in and removing hookers will just become the new controversy.

 

How about they simply put male hookers (in whatever form) into the game.

[BruceVC]

Caving in and removing hookers will just become the new controversy.

 

How about they simply put male hookers (in whatever form) into the game.

 

Yes that would also work..but I am not suggesting we remove anything else...just the hookers 

[Ineth]

 

 

 

 

(minimum-effort recitation of trite feminist dogma with some appropriately cherrypicked/faked gaming examples; completely unsuitable for gaining scientific insight but very suitable for reinforcing feminist identity-building confirmation biases).

 

 

 

This is the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.

 

 

Except that it's true. 

 

 

 

The stupidity stems more from a complete lack of self-awareness ("very suitable for reinforcing feminist identity-building confirmation biases" in a topic that literally only exists to reinforce the participants' anti-feminist confirmation bias caused me to laugh out loud in disbelief) than lack of truthfulness.

 

It sounds like, well, someone trying to imitate how he imagines people much smarter than him talk like, and failing miserably.

 

Or maybe I just hit a nerve?

[Blarghagh]

 

 

I'm asking for the entire game world to treat the player like a violent sociopath if said player behaves like a violent sociopath. (And by "treating the player like a violent sociopath" I mean "this actually having tangible effects instead of being a cosmetical thing".)

 

I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable expectation.

 

1) It is unreasonable for a game the size and scope of GTA.

 

2) Why? Judge your own actions. Why do you need the author to tell you right from wrong? Why do you need the virtual world to be policed?

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

Yes, because this very corner of the internet didn't just explode for a few days simply because of the removal of a poem from a niche game.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

I'm asking for the entire game world to treat the player like a violent sociopath if said player behaves like a violent sociopath. (And by "treating the player like a violent sociopath" I mean "this actually having tangible effects instead of being a cosmetical thing".)

 

I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable expectation.

 

1) It is unreasonable for a game the size and scope of GTA.

 

2) Why? Judge your own actions. Why do you need the author to tell you right from wrong? Why do you need the virtual world to be policed?

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

Yes, because this very corner of the internet didn't just explode for a few days simply because of the removal of a poem from a niche game.

 

 

Yeah there would be a level of outrage but it would be misplaced like the limerick event 

 

Besides companies are allowed to make changes to gaming formulas if they feel it is relevant  

[ravenshrike]

Your definition of a con artist in regards to Kickstarter would seem to label most people as such.  People change size and scope, miss release dates, and even close up shop regularly.  I only see it as a con if they take the funds and run.  There is no evidence of that with Sarkeesian, quite the opposite really, she has clearly used the investment to devote herself fully to the concepts of the kickstarter.  The product does not look the way you want it too, but that doesn't really matter, since you didn't invest in it.  If her investors were unhappy, then you'd have an actual case.  As is, you have no ground to stand on and are just throwing out an unreasonable and unwarranted accusation.  

 

 

I was watching Going Clear last night, and there is a similar argument made about L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology.  He was a delusional madman, sure, but if he was running a con, why would he devote his entire life to it?  Why would he sit in a room with an e-meter for thousands of hours trying to expel thetans?  It doesn't add up.   

Because he was a Sci-Fi author and he WON THE BET dammit! Also, perhaps a bit of a messiah complex at that point. Play a role long enough and you become it.

 

As for considering most KSs cons, unless most KSs are mild venue changes with little to no change in scope, how exactly does Sarkeesian's situation apply to them. I said POSSIBLY a con. I then said it was much more likely they got in over their heads.

 

 

Also, see my Producers reference above. The lack of contention among the investors does not in any way/shape/or form negate the con.

Edited May 13, 2015 by ravenshrike

[Hurlshort]

If a bunch of people give me money to do something, and they are happy with my progress on that thing, how is that a con?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

What the hell are you people talking about?

[Hurlshort]

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

Whether Sarkeesian is a con artist or not.  Try to keep up KP.  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

 

Whether Sarkeesian is a con artist or not.  Try to keep up KP.  

What does that have to do with hookers in GTA?

[Volourn]

"Yes that would also work..but I am not suggesting we remove anything else...just the hookers"
 

So remove the hookers but keep the violence? L0L Sex is bad. of coruse, that comes from a guy who brags about    spending money on strippers in real life... but wants them banned from a game?

 

WHAT THE ILLOGIC.

[kgambit]

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

[BruceVC]

"Yes that would also work..but I am not suggesting we remove anything else...just the hookers"

 

So remove the hookers but keep the violence? L0L Sex is bad. of coruse, that comes from a guy who brags about    spending money on strippers in real life... but wants them banned from a game?

 

WHAT THE ILLOGIC.

Who said I want to remove hookers from  GTAV because I dont like what they do in RL? As I have said several times I have no issue with sex workers or strippers

 

And no sex is not bad but thats not the point  

[BruceVC]

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

[kgambit]

 

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

 

 

It was you who first suggested that course Bruce, not me.  

Edited May 13, 2015 by kgambit

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

 

 

It was you who first suggested that course Bruce, not me.  

 

 

Just remind me of the context?

[kgambit]

 

 

 

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

 

 

It was you who first suggested that course Bruce, not me.  

 

 

Just remind me of the context?

 

 

 

here's your quote from this thread:  Mature discussion on LGBT/Feminists who want to censor games.

 

Sure I agree, which is why companies like Bioware are clear on what there games contain and if you don't like that or feel uncomfortable with there design decisions then you don't have to play there games

 

 

Since I know you don't advocate piracy, I simply took the logical leap that playing and buying were synonomous

Edited May 15, 2015 by kgambit

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

 

 

It was you who first suggested that course Bruce, not me.  

 

 

Just remind me of the context?

 

 

 

here's your quote from this thread:  Mature discussion on LGBT/Feminists who want to censor games.

 

Sure I agree, which is why companies like Bioware are clear on what there games contain and if you don't like that or feel uncomfortable with there design decisions then you don't have to play there games

 

 

Since I know you don't advocate piracy, I simply took the logical leap that paying and buying were synonomous

 

 

Yes ...but I see now contradiction in what I said ?

 

My point is absolutely valid, if a person doesn't like game design decisions then don't buy the game but for me having hookers in GTAV  is not such an egregious decision that I feel I need to now not buy the game. If I felt strongly enough about a design feature then I would boycott a game, like Hatred  

[kgambit]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am loving GTAV but they should just remove hookers completely from the game, it will  have a negligible impact on the overall game play but reduce the controversy 

 

 

 

How about following your own earlier advice and not buy the game in the first place if you don't like the game design decisions?   

 

 

Thats a strange point from someone of your reasonable nature and intelligence 

 

My issue with having hookers in GTAV  is not serious enough that I would not buy the game...thats just silly

 

Hookers must represent about 1-3 % of the overall game 

 

 

It was you who first suggested that course Bruce, not me.  

 

 

Just remind me of the context?

 

 

 

here's your quote from this thread:  Mature discussion on LGBT/Feminists who want to censor games.

 

Sure I agree, which is why companies like Bioware are clear on what there games contain and if you don't like that or feel uncomfortable with there design decisions then you don't have to play there games

 

 

Since I know you don't advocate piracy, I simply took the logical leap that paying and buying were synonomous

 

 

Yes ...but I see now contradiction in what I said ?

 

My point is absolutely valid, if a person doesn't like game design decisions then don't buy the game but for me having hookers in GTAV  is not such an egregious decision that I feel I need to now not buy the game. If I felt strongly enough about a design feature then I would boycott a game, like Hatred  

 

 

Fair enough. although it seemed it egregious enough for you to raise the issue in the first place.   No matter. 

Edited May 14, 2015 by kgambit

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Why do hookers need to be removed from GTA?