|
Please don't go calling people racist, misogynists, or any combination therein. Don't start throwing around words like "white Knight" or SJW, these words are at this point used in a derogatory manner regarding this debate. You can discuss that these terms exist, but do not attribute them to any individual user or group of users on this website.
Try to have a serious discussion about the topic at hand without resorting to personal attacks and we will all be the better for it. Breaking this rule will result in an automatic temp ban the length of which will depend on the comment you make.
This thread started not so bad. It is getting worse. If you want to have this discussion on TL be respectful of your fellow users, we all live in the same house.
Effective now: Page 21 October 18th 08:31 KST |
On October 18 2014 14:37 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 14:20 ZeromuS wrote:On October 18 2014 13:18 Xiphos wrote:Here is the main thing about women complaining about sexism in the gaming market: if you want there to be more games featuring all those "strong, embowered women that isn't depending on a man" characters, why don't y'all just make one? stop telling us that, you've got the tools, you've got the hardware, the programs to utilize in order to create that...you don't need us right? No you gotta start complaining instead of doing that. Which further slows down your progress of getting there. You are too lazy to actually put in the work or what? On October 18 2014 13:10 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 18 2014 13:01 Dunnobro wrote:
A damsel in distress is inherently sexist, technically. I think that's why it's important to view each situation to find out if it's good or not, rather than sexist or not. Wouldn't say inherently sexist. Nothing wrong with a female character that needs to be protected or saved. It's all the surrounding environment that makes it a problem. Like, if every female character is useless and can't help themselves, it's a bit of a narrative problem. Or if every male that gets captured can save himself. Or if every male that's captured is expected to just die. The amusing thing is that the Damsel in Distress trope is one that's the most frequently called-out within the story itself, or avoided or twisted in some form, namely because everyone is aware of it and how lazy a storytelling element it is. Even Princess Peach and Zelda, the two most well known examples in games, barely even qualify. With Peach its become a comedy element, and Zelda has been a proactive character for a long while. See this is the perfect examples here. If y'all so want for those two characters to have more "empowered influences" in the games, then why don't you go ahead, work through the ranks as a programmer/writer to steadily getting promoted to a high position enough to dictate the game's story writing team. I think you are oversimplifying the position women who want to make these games hold. Some of these ges do exist just not many and they happen less often due to some publishers believing they won't seel. The story behind the game remember me is a perfect example of this. Getting it published and fully funded was difficult for the developer. That being said you can't invalidate an argument by saying "just do it". Theres more to it than that sadly  Don't know man, why can't there be a woman Steve Job, Zuckerberg, Gates, Newel for females? When they first started, they were getting pushed by jocks. Why can't those women advocating do the same thing? Right now they don't even have any technical restrictions.
I think the point is:
Even if there are no technical restrictions, there are other factors that make this kind of project hard. Socio-economic factors, like "are consumers less likely to spend their money on a game with a complex realistic female lead?" or "do publishers want to risk breaking away from the tropes they know earn money?" or "are women made to feel unwelcome in the video game industry?" This last question can be particularly hard to answer, since it's difficult to know what effect one's language and actions can have on others.
|
On October 18 2014 15:23 plogamer wrote:
To anyone thinking this is about racism, sexism - whether you are for or against:
The real issue is that corporate journalism in gaming is corrupt.
But GG only seems to care if it can tie it to "SJWs" or feminists influencing the press. When you have documented, well-demonstrated cases of large companies influencing gaming websites or content providers, like the Shadows of Mordor thing, #GG is ignoring it because the narrative is inherently, inseparably tied the existence of Anita and Quinn. Even active pro-GG writers like Erik Kain have raised this issue, but the masses of GG supporters have completely ignored it because they don't care.
You can't call a whole movement about "corruption in gaming journalism" if you only care about very specific instances of it and gloss over the decades-old rotting stench of old Doritos and dried up Mountain Dew that everyone knows is there, but is harder to attack than someone who got on Youtube and said your favorite game was sexist.
|
On October 18 2014 15:41 ShiroKaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 15:23 plogamer wrote:
To anyone thinking this is about racism, sexism - whether you are for or against:
The real issue is that corporate journalism in gaming is corrupt. But GG only seems to care if it can tie it to "SJWs" or feminists influencing the press. When you have documented, well-demonstrated cases of large companies influencing gaming websites or content providers, like the Shadows of Mordor thing, #GG is ignoring it because the narrative is inherently, inseparably tied the existence of Anita and Quinn. Even active pro-GG writers like Erik Kain have raised this issue, but the masses of GG supporters have completely ignored it because they don't care. You can't call a whole movement about "corruption in gaming journalism" if you only care about very specific instances of it and gloss over the decades-old rotting stench of old Doritos and dried up Mountain Dew that everyone knows is there, but is harder to attack than someone who got on Youtube and said your favorite game was sexist.
GG isn't ignoring it. TotalBiscuit was the first one to talk about the Shadows of Mordor thing, and while he was neutral-leaning-pro-GG at the time he's on board now. GG also talked a lot about EA being outed for covering up 40,000 users being hacked.
And for the record, I think a lot of its roots ARE in Mountain Dewritopope controversies and earlier. It's been a prevalent attitude on /v/ for a while now.
|
On October 18 2014 15:41 ShiroKaisen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 15:23 plogamer wrote:
To anyone thinking this is about racism, sexism - whether you are for or against:
The real issue is that corporate journalism in gaming is corrupt. But GG only seems to care if it can tie it to "SJWs" or feminists influencing the press. When you have documented, well-demonstrated cases of large companies influencing gaming websites or content providers, like the Shadows of Mordor thing, #GG is ignoring it because the narrative is inherently, inseparably tied the existence of Anita and Quinn. Even active pro-GG writers like Erik Kain have raised this issue, but the masses of GG supporters have completely ignored it because they don't care. You can't call a whole movement about "corruption in gaming journalism" if you only care about very specific instances of it and gloss over the decades-old rotting stench of old Doritos and dried up Mountain Dew that everyone knows is there, but is harder to attack than someone who got on Youtube and said your favorite game was sexist.
Maybe you should look into "gamergate" a bit more before making assumptions like these. They are simply not true. It might be what is being portrayed all over the place but that doesn't make it, you know, true.
|
On October 18 2014 17:32 HeatEXTEND wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 15:41 ShiroKaisen wrote:On October 18 2014 15:23 plogamer wrote:
To anyone thinking this is about racism, sexism - whether you are for or against:
The real issue is that corporate journalism in gaming is corrupt. But GG only seems to care if it can tie it to "SJWs" or feminists influencing the press. When you have documented, well-demonstrated cases of large companies influencing gaming websites or content providers, like the Shadows of Mordor thing, #GG is ignoring it because the narrative is inherently, inseparably tied the existence of Anita and Quinn. Even active pro-GG writers like Erik Kain have raised this issue, but the masses of GG supporters have completely ignored it because they don't care. You can't call a whole movement about "corruption in gaming journalism" if you only care about very specific instances of it and gloss over the decades-old rotting stench of old Doritos and dried up Mountain Dew that everyone knows is there, but is harder to attack than someone who got on Youtube and said your favorite game was sexist. Maybe you should look into "gamergate" a bit more before making assumptions like these. They are simply not true. It might be what is being portrayed all over the place but that doesn't make it, you know, true.
Would it be fair to say that Gamergate movement needs to take care to direct it's messaging, and how it's message is being handled and perceived?
Might be a bit tin-foil to suggest this, but distracting from the core issues is of the biggest benefit for those who wish to keep the public's eye averted from the sausage-factory that is video-game journalism.
Shirokaisen brings up a very valid notion that Gamergate movement loses some of it's steam when it gets tangled in age-old, hot-button issue (especially for the interwebs) like feminism. See any discussion on feminism online. It's always a quagmire.
If there is a perception being propagated that Gamergate is complaining about feminism in video-game journalism, there needs to be a serious PR effort to correct it.
|
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."
|
Northern Ireland24534 Posts
Agreed Shiro. It's petty as fuck and does smack of disproportionate response, a 'how dare she raise her head above the parapet'
Funnily enough pretty identical to how feminism has become a tradition associated in the minds of many with it's very worst and most unreasonable adherents.
|
On October 18 2014 15:23 plogamer wrote:
To anyone thinking this is about racism, sexism - whether you are for or against:
The real issue is that corporate journalism in gaming is corrupt.
I would even hesitate to call it journalism in the first games. Most of those people are just gamers who got lucky and get to write for a website. Calling them journalists is an insult to the profession.
|
On October 18 2014 15:30 RuiBarbO wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 14:37 Xiphos wrote:On October 18 2014 14:20 ZeromuS wrote:On October 18 2014 13:18 Xiphos wrote:Here is the main thing about women complaining about sexism in the gaming market: if you want there to be more games featuring all those "strong, embowered women that isn't depending on a man" characters, why don't y'all just make one? stop telling us that, you've got the tools, you've got the hardware, the programs to utilize in order to create that...you don't need us right? No you gotta start complaining instead of doing that. Which further slows down your progress of getting there. You are too lazy to actually put in the work or what? On October 18 2014 13:10 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 18 2014 13:01 Dunnobro wrote:
A damsel in distress is inherently sexist, technically. I think that's why it's important to view each situation to find out if it's good or not, rather than sexist or not. Wouldn't say inherently sexist. Nothing wrong with a female character that needs to be protected or saved. It's all the surrounding environment that makes it a problem. Like, if every female character is useless and can't help themselves, it's a bit of a narrative problem. Or if every male that gets captured can save himself. Or if every male that's captured is expected to just die. The amusing thing is that the Damsel in Distress trope is one that's the most frequently called-out within the story itself, or avoided or twisted in some form, namely because everyone is aware of it and how lazy a storytelling element it is. Even Princess Peach and Zelda, the two most well known examples in games, barely even qualify. With Peach its become a comedy element, and Zelda has been a proactive character for a long while. See this is the perfect examples here. If y'all so want for those two characters to have more "empowered influences" in the games, then why don't you go ahead, work through the ranks as a programmer/writer to steadily getting promoted to a high position enough to dictate the game's story writing team. I think you are oversimplifying the position women who want to make these games hold. Some of these ges do exist just not many and they happen less often due to some publishers believing they won't seel. The story behind the game remember me is a perfect example of this. Getting it published and fully funded was difficult for the developer. That being said you can't invalidate an argument by saying "just do it". Theres more to it than that sadly Don't know man, why can't there be a woman Steve Job, Zuckerberg, Gates, Newel for females? When they first started, they were getting pushed by jocks. Why can't those women advocating do the same thing? Right now they don't even have any technical restrictions. I think the point is: Even if there are no technical restrictions, there are other factors that make this kind of project hard. Socio-economic factors, like "are consumers less likely to spend their money on a game with a complex realistic female lead?" or "do publishers want to risk breaking away from the tropes they know earn money?" or "are women made to feel unwelcome in the video game industry?" This last question can be particularly hard to answer, since it's difficult to know what effect one's language and actions can have on others.
So this entire thing boils down to supply and demand as many have said. When the market indicated that more people would enjoy a certain gaming narrative, then there are absolutely no controversy to be had regarding equality.
Its just how capitalism works.
As an addendum, all those guys listed have all taken risks on their part. Perhaps the computer field will just be flash in the bang and/or they will be wasting their time on an short-lived industry. But today, the gaming market is well established already with many examples of a female lead that succeed.
So those women calling sexism in the games should be more productive. With the amount of time they are complaining about it, they could have made couple of games already. Instead they need to get some coding done.
|
On October 18 2014 19:17 Wombat_NI wrote:
Agreed Shiro. It's petty as fuck and does smack of disproportionate response, a 'how dare she raise her head above the parapet'
Funnily enough pretty identical to how feminism has become a tradition associated in the minds of many with it's very worst and most unreasonable adherents.
You could say the same about both sides.
It's unnacceptable from both sides, but there are as always, rotten apples.
|
On October 18 2014 12:52 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 12:21 Dunnobro wrote:Oh wow mercedes pulled advertising from all gawker sites: https://i.imgur.com/gLoJFYw.pngBully was forced to apologize in response to this, but now it comes out the editor in chief who gave him a raise subtly called a concerned parent autistic in an email about it, so i doubt they're out of the water. It's obvious that the Gawker reporter was joking, but he should have known better. And the Publisher should have fired or suspended that guy immediately. It's also funny that GamerGaters have been slandering SJW, but this is exactly the kind of knee-jerk, self-righteous, reactionary-activism that they are pretending to oppose.
He was asked about it personally on twitter and continued. It was brought to the attention of his superiors who then glorified the fact and belittled those concerned. There were other Gawker employees making similar comments.
This was not knee-jerk at all. They were given ample time to explain it was a joke yet they continued adding fuel to the fire.
|
On October 18 2014 22:48 Dunnobro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 12:52 Defacer wrote:On October 18 2014 12:21 Dunnobro wrote:Oh wow mercedes pulled advertising from all gawker sites: https://i.imgur.com/gLoJFYw.pngBully was forced to apologize in response to this, but now it comes out the editor in chief who gave him a raise subtly called a concerned parent autistic in an email about it, so i doubt they're out of the water. It's obvious that the Gawker reporter was joking, but he should have known better. And the Publisher should have fired or suspended that guy immediately. It's also funny that GamerGaters have been slandering SJW, but this is exactly the kind of knee-jerk, self-righteous, reactionary-activism that they are pretending to oppose. He was asked about it personally on twitter and continued. It was brought to the attention of his superiors who then glorified the fact and belittled those concerned. This was not knee-jerk at all. They were given ample time to explain it was a joke yet they continued adding fuel to the fire.
Yeah Gawker Media and its affiliate (Kotaku, Jezebel, etc.) have always been the kind of organization that dish out smear pieces to downplay other dissension but when it comes to them, they find themselves unable to take the heat.
|
On October 18 2014 21:41 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 15:30 RuiBarbO wrote:On October 18 2014 14:37 Xiphos wrote:On October 18 2014 14:20 ZeromuS wrote:On October 18 2014 13:18 Xiphos wrote:Here is the main thing about women complaining about sexism in the gaming market: if you want there to be more games featuring all those "strong, embowered women that isn't depending on a man" characters, why don't y'all just make one? stop telling us that, you've got the tools, you've got the hardware, the programs to utilize in order to create that...you don't need us right? No you gotta start complaining instead of doing that. Which further slows down your progress of getting there. You are too lazy to actually put in the work or what? On October 18 2014 13:10 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 18 2014 13:01 Dunnobro wrote:
A damsel in distress is inherently sexist, technically. I think that's why it's important to view each situation to find out if it's good or not, rather than sexist or not. Wouldn't say inherently sexist. Nothing wrong with a female character that needs to be protected or saved. It's all the surrounding environment that makes it a problem. Like, if every female character is useless and can't help themselves, it's a bit of a narrative problem. Or if every male that gets captured can save himself. Or if every male that's captured is expected to just die. The amusing thing is that the Damsel in Distress trope is one that's the most frequently called-out within the story itself, or avoided or twisted in some form, namely because everyone is aware of it and how lazy a storytelling element it is. Even Princess Peach and Zelda, the two most well known examples in games, barely even qualify. With Peach its become a comedy element, and Zelda has been a proactive character for a long while. See this is the perfect examples here. If y'all so want for those two characters to have more "empowered influences" in the games, then why don't you go ahead, work through the ranks as a programmer/writer to steadily getting promoted to a high position enough to dictate the game's story writing team. I think you are oversimplifying the position women who want to make these games hold. Some of these ges do exist just not many and they happen less often due to some publishers believing they won't seel. The story behind the game remember me is a perfect example of this. Getting it published and fully funded was difficult for the developer. That being said you can't invalidate an argument by saying "just do it". Theres more to it than that sadly Don't know man, why can't there be a woman Steve Job, Zuckerberg, Gates, Newel for females? When they first started, they were getting pushed by jocks. Why can't those women advocating do the same thing? Right now they don't even have any technical restrictions. I think the point is: Even if there are no technical restrictions, there are other factors that make this kind of project hard. Socio-economic factors, like "are consumers less likely to spend their money on a game with a complex realistic female lead?" or "do publishers want to risk breaking away from the tropes they know earn money?" or "are women made to feel unwelcome in the video game industry?" This last question can be particularly hard to answer, since it's difficult to know what effect one's language and actions can have on others. So this entire thing boils down to supply and demand as many have said. When the market indicated that more people would enjoy a certain gaming narrative, then there are absolutely no controversy to be had regarding equality. Its just how capitalism works.
No, it does not. It only boils down to supply and demand if you put hardcore laissez faire capitalism above every other aspect of society, which most people don't. What you're saying is that there's a demand for games that may portray women in a sexist way; this is nonsense. The vast majority of people will play games because of the gameplay experience, which a negative or stereotypical portrayal of women adds nothing to - if you go by the supply and demand principle, as long as the gameplay is still the same, there is no reason to have sexism in since its primary function is only as cheap marketing that adds little to the experience except discomfort to a large potential market segment.
As an addendum, all those guys listed have all taken risks on their part. Perhaps the computer field will just be flash in the bang and/or they will be wasting their time on an short-lived industry. But today, the gaming market is well established already with many examples of a female lead that succeed.
So those women calling sexism in the games should be more productive. With the amount of time they are complaining about it, they could have made couple of games already. Instead they need to get some coding done.
So why aren't you making the games you are so afraid these people will stop being made? A customer have a right to complain if they're unhappy with the product being offered as is, and is in their right to attempt to change it into something they rather desire, without having to become part of the industry that offers it. This should be obvious to you as part of the gamer community, since noone is ever happy with how companies develop their games.
|
Northern Ireland24534 Posts
I think you're making an assertion that there's no segment of the market that enjoys material that others will decry as sexist.
It's not really my thing, it's probably not the MAIN reason for purchasing certain games for the vast majority of consumers, but it's probably an added benefit to some.
|
On October 18 2014 23:36 Wombat_NI wrote:
I think you're making an assertion that there's no segment of the market that enjoys material that others will decry as sexist.
It's not really my thing, it's probably not the MAIN reason for purchasing certain games for the vast majority of consumers, but it's probably an added benefit to some.
Enjoys, sure. Essential to gameplay experience? No, not unless it's a purely erotic game.
|
Northern Ireland24534 Posts
And it's essential to a gaming experience to remove certain tropes that are seen as sexist?
|
On October 18 2014 23:31 sushiman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 21:41 Xiphos wrote:On October 18 2014 15:30 RuiBarbO wrote:On October 18 2014 14:37 Xiphos wrote:On October 18 2014 14:20 ZeromuS wrote:On October 18 2014 13:18 Xiphos wrote:Here is the main thing about women complaining about sexism in the gaming market: if you want there to be more games featuring all those "strong, embowered women that isn't depending on a man" characters, why don't y'all just make one? stop telling us that, you've got the tools, you've got the hardware, the programs to utilize in order to create that...you don't need us right? No you gotta start complaining instead of doing that. Which further slows down your progress of getting there. You are too lazy to actually put in the work or what? On October 18 2014 13:10 WolfintheSheep wrote:On October 18 2014 13:01 Dunnobro wrote:
A damsel in distress is inherently sexist, technically. I think that's why it's important to view each situation to find out if it's good or not, rather than sexist or not. Wouldn't say inherently sexist. Nothing wrong with a female character that needs to be protected or saved. It's all the surrounding environment that makes it a problem. Like, if every female character is useless and can't help themselves, it's a bit of a narrative problem. Or if every male that gets captured can save himself. Or if every male that's captured is expected to just die. The amusing thing is that the Damsel in Distress trope is one that's the most frequently called-out within the story itself, or avoided or twisted in some form, namely because everyone is aware of it and how lazy a storytelling element it is. Even Princess Peach and Zelda, the two most well known examples in games, barely even qualify. With Peach its become a comedy element, and Zelda has been a proactive character for a long while. See this is the perfect examples here. If y'all so want for those two characters to have more "empowered influences" in the games, then why don't you go ahead, work through the ranks as a programmer/writer to steadily getting promoted to a high position enough to dictate the game's story writing team. I think you are oversimplifying the position women who want to make these games hold. Some of these ges do exist just not many and they happen less often due to some publishers believing they won't seel. The story behind the game remember me is a perfect example of this. Getting it published and fully funded was difficult for the developer. That being said you can't invalidate an argument by saying "just do it". Theres more to it than that sadly Don't know man, why can't there be a woman Steve Job, Zuckerberg, Gates, Newel for females? When they first started, they were getting pushed by jocks. Why can't those women advocating do the same thing? Right now they don't even have any technical restrictions. I think the point is: Even if there are no technical restrictions, there are other factors that make this kind of project hard. Socio-economic factors, like "are consumers less likely to spend their money on a game with a complex realistic female lead?" or "do publishers want to risk breaking away from the tropes they know earn money?" or "are women made to feel unwelcome in the video game industry?" This last question can be particularly hard to answer, since it's difficult to know what effect one's language and actions can have on others. So this entire thing boils down to supply and demand as many have said. When the market indicated that more people would enjoy a certain gaming narrative, then there are absolutely no controversy to be had regarding equality. Its just how capitalism works. No, it does not. It only boils down to supply and demand if you put hardcore laissez faire capitalism above every other aspect of society, which most people don't. What you're saying is that there's a demand for games that may portray women in a sexist way; this is nonsense. The vast majority of people will play games because of the gameplay experience, which a negative or stereotypical portrayal of women adds nothing to - if you go by the supply and demand principle, as long as the gameplay is still the same, there is no reason to have sexism in since its primary function is only as cheap marketing that adds little to the experience except discomfort to a large potential market segment. Show nested quote +As an addendum, all those guys listed have all taken risks on their part. Perhaps the computer field will just be flash in the bang and/or they will be wasting their time on an short-lived industry. But today, the gaming market is well established already with many examples of a female lead that succeed.
So those women calling sexism in the games should be more productive. With the amount of time they are complaining about it, they could have made couple of games already. Instead they need to get some coding done. So why aren't you making the games you are so afraid these people will stop being made? A customer have a right to complain if they're unhappy with the product being offered as is, and is in their right to attempt to change it into something they rather desire, without having to become part of the industry that offers it. This should be obvious to you as part of the gamer community, since noone is ever happy with how companies develop their games.
Two things:
1.
It does boil down to supply and demand. These women are complaining about not having "enough" strong female lead. If that was true, then that means the current market's climate/demand dictated that way. You think that those game devs are stupid. No, they are smart, if they feel that there will be more money to be made for a certain type of game, of course they will produce more of it.
Again that's assuming that there ARE really unequal sexism in video games as Anita puts it.
2.
Based upon number 1, I'm not afraid of them stopping making those "type of games" (which by the way you should elaborate). If the market is there, then absolutely no reason for them to not produce them.
And for your information, that's what exactly I am doing. I major in computer science and in my free time, I make games that I WANT to play. Not necessarily to sell. Because if I learned that bitching is counter-productive and know that you have to put in the work to actually get what you want instead of being lazy about it.
|
I believe there's too much focus on "stop doing this" and not enough focus on finding out what to do instead. People are not only assuming what women don't want, or like, but they're not even catering to them or fixing the issue. They're just hurting the ability to cater to men.
And the fact is, women aren't really complaining en masse about sexism in video games. Not the ones who actually play games and would buy them if you actually "fixed" the issue anyway. That's why i think what TFYC was doing is so important, proper content creation and not content critique.
If we ended sexism/objectification in gaming RIGHT THIS SECOND, what's next? What really is next? Do you think women will magically start buying games? Do you think sex appeal couldn't have been used to appeal to them?
Focusing too much on what some want and others don't instead of the demand that's actually there is a silly way to go about developing a market.
|
Northern Ireland24534 Posts
Incidentally I'm for better, more relatable female and male characters across the board. The narrative side of things in the industry is still developing, indeed in the mainstream I don't see much improvement as a whole since I started gaming as a hobby.
|
On October 18 2014 23:48 Dunnobro wrote:
I believe there's too much focus on "stop doing this" and not enough focus on finding out what to do instead. People are not only assuming what women don't want, or like, but they're not even catering to them or fixing the issue. They're just hurting the ability to cater to men.
And the fact is, women aren't really complaining en masse about sexism in video games. Not the ones who actually play games and would buy them if you actually "fixed" the issue anyway. That's why i think what TFYC was doing is so important, proper content creation and not content critique.
Ofc they aren't.
Only a small minority are complaining.
The rest don't care that much. And that's why the demand isn't there.
Here is the thing though, they are unwilling to actually code the games they want to play for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
