|
On August 03 2019 02:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2019 22:25 abuse wrote:On August 02 2019 22:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 02 2019 21:03 deacon.frost wrote:
Except for Jason Schreier, who's the best gaming journalist out there(IMO) In order to get the front line staff and low level managers to leak info he constantly talks about how amazing and incredible they are. That's his built in bias. The BS he pulled with Yongyea was nasty ugly. These misdeeds aside, he is great at getting confidential info leaked. is that something you just made up or has Jason said that anywhere? I see no point in sucking up to devs to talk to them. Reveal pieces he's done are more than enough reason for devs to want to talk to him to shine a light on the shitty proceedings in their company. He has written a tonne of stuff. Do you have an example of him criticizing front line staff? I've never seen it. If you have something though.. post it. OTOH, he does an 80 minute interview with Yongyea and goes on and on about how great all these front line and low level staff members are. Everything wrong with the industry is someone else's fault.. from consumers to corporations. The most 1-sided example of this occurred when he defended that Guild Wars 2 writer who went off on a polite tweet that slightly disagreed with something. The front line and low level management are like any other group of people. Some good.. some average .. some bad. However, I've never seen Schreier critical of that group. He does not want to bite the hand that feeds him.
it's not Schreier who isn't critical of that group it's everyone because frankly there is nothing to criticize.
low level staff have no influence and follow what the bosses say.
They're not the ones making the decisions.
|
On August 03 2019 04:06 abuse wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2019 02:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 02 2019 22:25 abuse wrote:On August 02 2019 22:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On August 02 2019 21:03 deacon.frost wrote:
Except for Jason Schreier, who's the best gaming journalist out there(IMO) In order to get the front line staff and low level managers to leak info he constantly talks about how amazing and incredible they are. That's his built in bias. The BS he pulled with Yongyea was nasty ugly. These misdeeds aside, he is great at getting confidential info leaked. is that something you just made up or has Jason said that anywhere? I see no point in sucking up to devs to talk to them. Reveal pieces he's done are more than enough reason for devs to want to talk to him to shine a light on the shitty proceedings in their company. He has written a tonne of stuff. Do you have an example of him criticizing front line staff? I've never seen it. If you have something though.. post it. OTOH, he does an 80 minute interview with Yongyea and goes on and on about how great all these front line and low level staff members are. Everything wrong with the industry is someone else's fault.. from consumers to corporations. The most 1-sided example of this occurred when he defended that Guild Wars 2 writer who went off on a polite tweet that slightly disagreed with something. The front line and low level management are like any other group of people. Some good.. some average .. some bad. However, I've never seen Schreier critical of that group. He does not want to bite the hand that feeds him. it's not Schreier who isn't critical of that group it's everyone because frankly there is nothing to criticize. low level staff have no influence and follow what the bosses say. They're not the ones making the decisions.
i listed an example of a front line, low level employee acting like an idiot in my response. so ya there are things to criticize. and its not merely a matter of being critical its painting this group as noble martyrs and creators of the 'greatest era of games ever'. Schreier's own words in the YongYea interview.
Then the crap he pulled on Yongyea after that 80 minute interview was dirty, nasty, ugly.
On August 03 2019 04:06 abuse wrote:
low level staff have no influence and follow what the bosses say.
They're not the ones making the decisions.
They decide where they work. A really good RTS guy , imo, is Greg Black. He worked for EA for a long, long time. He knows what they're all about. He left for 6 years and worked for Blizzard. He then returned to EA. Sorry, I have limited sympathy for the guy. He knows very well what EA is all about and chooses to work for them.
|
You listed no example. Why write otherwise?
In anycase, there is nothing to criticise of low level staff. They are not responsible for the direction a game has taken.
|
On August 03 2019 05:46 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You listed no example. Why write otherwise?
incorrect. i will post this a 2nd time.
On August 03 2019 02:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
The most 1-sided example of this occurred when he defended that Guild Wars 2 writer who went off on a polite tweet that slightly disagreed with something.
On August 03 2019 05:46 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
In anycase, there is nothing to criticise of low level staff. They are not responsible for the direction a game has taken.
i've provided an example where a person low in the management chain deserves criticism. watching the 80 minute YongYea interview Schreier credits the game makers when hte game is great and then blames upper management financial people when the game is bad.
He will not bite the hands that feed him. so he constantly yaps about how great the people are that feed him info.
As an example of good game development: Starcraft2 is one of the longest lasting games in the history of the RTS genre. All Blizzard employees involved in the game deserve some credit. ATVI deserves credit for being willing to put more funding and time into this RTS game than Microsoft and EA and other publishers were willing to put into an RTS game.
Its not just the people who made the software that deserve the credit. Likewise software engineers deserve some credit for a really solid piece of software. The project manager and the financial people funding the project deserve credit as well.
On August 03 2019 05:46 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
In anycase, there is nothing to criticise of low level staff. They are not responsible for the direction a game has taken.
i don't want to hear someone such as Greg Black whine about EA not giving him enough time to make a game. He knows what EA is all about.
|
1) That's not an example, for if that is an example I have literally no idea what you are talking about.
2) Stop talking like I should read your mind. I have no idea who these irrelevant people are you make constant references to, but the fact is, programmers are not responsible for a bad game.
I really don't understand your hatred of random people. It;s really ugly. I don't care whether you have limited sympathy for yet another person or not.
|
On August 03 2019 06:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
1) That's not an example, for if that is an example I have literally no idea what you are talking about.
Here is the example I provided in much greater detail. Schreier backed the employee. I think it is a biased perspective.
+ Show Spoiler +
On August 03 2019 06:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I really don't understand your hatred of random people. It;s really ugly. I don't care whether you have limited sympathy for yet another person or not.
Please, read all my comments about Schreier. To summarize: He provides great inside stories. He is biased.
I don't see how that is hatred. Labeling that as ugly? nah , i don't think its ugly.
2) Stop talking like I should read your mind. I have no idea who these irrelevant people are you make constant references to, but the fact is, programmers are not responsible for a bad game.
In that case, I will provide some greater details.
Greg Black is the lead game designer for C&C Rivals.
Greg Black worked for EA for ~8 years and whined and complained about their short dev cycles. The media ate it up and sided with Mr. Black. He left and worked for Blizzard for 6 years. He returned to EA. I think taking Black's side again should he once again complain about short dev cycles is a bad stance. He knows what he is getting into by working for EA. This is an example of a low level employee who does not make financial decisions who deserves criticism for a bad game. Him blaming EA for short dev cycles doesn't apply. He knew what he was getting into when he took the job.
|
United States12224 Posts
I don't think it's fair to handwave a "that's EA" explanation when so much time has passed. When I worked at EA, they had a waterfall development structure and insane crunch for months was the norm (this was pre-"EA Spouse"). I have a friend who works at EA now and her team (Sims) utilizes the agile development structure, which is designed to be more reactive and update frequently. The passage of time does change things.
|
It seems like a change like this would shorten development cycles even further. Greg Black's complaint was that development cycles were already too short. I don't think he complained about crunch. He eluded to other companies giving 3 to 6 years to make a game. I'd be shocked if it turns out C&C Rivals was even 2 years of development time. I suspect it was another 11 month job. In a few years Black will probably tell us how long EA gave him to make the game.
http://www.cncsaga.de/1469-interview-with-greg-black.htm
And just to balance things out here i'll repeat what i said a few posts earlier. I think Greg Black is a top notch game designer. This doesn't mean I am going to take his side on every issue though.
In this particular case with Red Alert 3 I think the front line development staff did a brilliant job with RA3 considering the resources afforded them. I don't think Greg Black is BS-ing about his complaints his first go round with EA. I love RA3.
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
Jeez, everyone is biased. That's how people work. The longer you work with someone the more you are attached to that people. It happens to journalist, it happens to prosecutors, it happens to everybody(except those who can't feel emotions). That's why we need MORE people like Schreier, to get different views and opinions. The issue is that currently Schreier is the only decent journalist in the big picture. Who else? Really, honestly, who else? A reviewer who gives game lower marks because it's not enough politically engaging? (and that was a review I saw on Kotaku, fun time)
I'm not gonna re-view the thing about the aggressive response, but the reality is that the low level stuff is under big pressure and usually not for some big money(they can get better money elsewhere, e.g. Blizzard and the leakage that the staff is payed less because they will get the name Blizzard on their CV which is worth a lot, also "prestige" shit). So some excuse is expected. (I'm talking in general, not just this case) The issue is when the person who done bad thing doesn't understand it was bad, because generally speaking(as I just barely remember the issue) you don't shoot the dog when it does first bad thing. Similarly you don't fire the employee after 1 mistake, because the next employee may do the same mistake, but because now (s)he knows about he consequences, they will try to hide it...
|
On August 05 2019 17:48 deacon.frost wrote:
Jeez, everyone is biased. That's how people work. The longer you work with someone the more you are attached to that people. It happens to journalist, it happens to prosecutors, it happens to everybody(except those who can't feel emotions). That's why we need MORE people like Schreier, to get different views and opinions. The issue is that currently Schreier is the only decent journalist in the big picture. Who else? Really, honestly, who else? A reviewer who gives game lower marks because it's not enough politically engaging? (and that was a review I saw on Kotaku, fun time)
I'm not gonna re-view the thing about the aggressive response, but the reality is that the low level stuff is under big pressure and usually not for some big money(they can get better money elsewhere, e.g. Blizzard and the leakage that the staff is payed less because they will get the name Blizzard on their CV which is worth a lot, also "prestige" shit). So some excuse is expected. (I'm talking in general, not just this case) The issue is when the person who done bad thing doesn't understand it was bad, because generally speaking(as I just barely remember the issue) you don't shoot the dog when it does first bad thing. Similarly you don't fire the employee after 1 mistake, because the next employee may do the same mistake, but because now (s)he knows about he consequences, they will try to hide it...
A reviewer with an opinion you disagree with? The horror! And yes, depending on the game, it being more or less politically engaging is actually a fair point of criticism. Even the CoD series has dabbled with engaging political conundrums, albeit rather hamfisted, and that is the most mainstream of mainstream games.
|
On August 05 2019 19:47 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 17:48 deacon.frost wrote:
Jeez, everyone is biased. That's how people work. The longer you work with someone the more you are attached to that people. It happens to journalist, it happens to prosecutors, it happens to everybody(except those who can't feel emotions). That's why we need MORE people like Schreier, to get different views and opinions. The issue is that currently Schreier is the only decent journalist in the big picture. Who else? Really, honestly, who else? A reviewer who gives game lower marks because it's not enough politically engaging? (and that was a review I saw on Kotaku, fun time)
I'm not gonna re-view the thing about the aggressive response, but the reality is that the low level stuff is under big pressure and usually not for some big money(they can get better money elsewhere, e.g. Blizzard and the leakage that the staff is payed less because they will get the name Blizzard on their CV which is worth a lot, also "prestige" shit). So some excuse is expected. (I'm talking in general, not just this case) The issue is when the person who done bad thing doesn't understand it was bad, because generally speaking(as I just barely remember the issue) you don't shoot the dog when it does first bad thing. Similarly you don't fire the employee after 1 mistake, because the next employee may do the same mistake, but because now (s)he knows about he consequences, they will try to hide it... A reviewer with an opinion you disagree with? The horror! And yes, depending on the game, it being more or less politically engaging is actually a fair point of criticism. Even the CoD series has dabbled with engaging political conundrums, albeit rather hamfisted, and that is the most mainstream of mainstream games.
CoD is a "realistic" shooter aimed at teens/early tweens. It's also a prime example of idealizing warfare for most of their series and really well known, so it's bound to be discussed in terms of politics and being a little bit less "Murricah" between the lines can help avoid this.
From cheesy detective impressions to Rikers prisoner beatdowns, Spider-Man’s uncomplicated approach to crime clashes with the reality of day to day life. [...] Police are an unimpeachable group in Spider-Man. They show no real flaws and make no mistakes. They don’t feel like an integrated part of the the community; they pepper cutscenes and sometimes walk the streets but mostly show up as an allied faction in procedurally generated crime events. [...]Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage.
Spider man on the other hand is a super hero game targeting kids/teens based on a comic book which I've never seen shit on cops where criminals are the perpetual antagonists.
TLDR: It's with a very high probability a controversial opinion to get more views. If this was a side-note on a test, I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games.
And mind you, I don't particularly like my German police and think that the powers US police has are absurd.
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
On August 05 2019 19:47 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 17:48 deacon.frost wrote:
Jeez, everyone is biased. That's how people work. The longer you work with someone the more you are attached to that people. It happens to journalist, it happens to prosecutors, it happens to everybody(except those who can't feel emotions). That's why we need MORE people like Schreier, to get different views and opinions. The issue is that currently Schreier is the only decent journalist in the big picture. Who else? Really, honestly, who else? A reviewer who gives game lower marks because it's not enough politically engaging? (and that was a review I saw on Kotaku, fun time)
I'm not gonna re-view the thing about the aggressive response, but the reality is that the low level stuff is under big pressure and usually not for some big money(they can get better money elsewhere, e.g. Blizzard and the leakage that the staff is payed less because they will get the name Blizzard on their CV which is worth a lot, also "prestige" shit). So some excuse is expected. (I'm talking in general, not just this case) The issue is when the person who done bad thing doesn't understand it was bad, because generally speaking(as I just barely remember the issue) you don't shoot the dog when it does first bad thing. Similarly you don't fire the employee after 1 mistake, because the next employee may do the same mistake, but because now (s)he knows about he consequences, they will try to hide it... A reviewer with an opinion you disagree with? The horror! And yes, depending on the game, it being more or less politically engaging is actually a fair point of criticism. Even the CoD series has dabbled with engaging political conundrums, albeit rather hamfisted, and that is the most mainstream of mainstream games.
If somebody critizes game because it's not political enough while the game tries to stay away from politics as far as possible then it's IMO bigger bias than Schreier has. That was my point. Most of the games try to avoid the politics because you can't win.
|
On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 19:47 Acrofales wrote:On August 05 2019 17:48 deacon.frost wrote:
Jeez, everyone is biased. That's how people work. The longer you work with someone the more you are attached to that people. It happens to journalist, it happens to prosecutors, it happens to everybody(except those who can't feel emotions). That's why we need MORE people like Schreier, to get different views and opinions. The issue is that currently Schreier is the only decent journalist in the big picture. Who else? Really, honestly, who else? A reviewer who gives game lower marks because it's not enough politically engaging? (and that was a review I saw on Kotaku, fun time)
I'm not gonna re-view the thing about the aggressive response, but the reality is that the low level stuff is under big pressure and usually not for some big money(they can get better money elsewhere, e.g. Blizzard and the leakage that the staff is payed less because they will get the name Blizzard on their CV which is worth a lot, also "prestige" shit). So some excuse is expected. (I'm talking in general, not just this case) The issue is when the person who done bad thing doesn't understand it was bad, because generally speaking(as I just barely remember the issue) you don't shoot the dog when it does first bad thing. Similarly you don't fire the employee after 1 mistake, because the next employee may do the same mistake, but because now (s)he knows about he consequences, they will try to hide it... A reviewer with an opinion you disagree with? The horror! And yes, depending on the game, it being more or less politically engaging is actually a fair point of criticism. Even the CoD series has dabbled with engaging political conundrums, albeit rather hamfisted, and that is the most mainstream of mainstream games. CoD is a "realistic" shooter aimed at teens/early tweens. It's also a prime example of idealizing warfare for most of their series and really well known, so it's bound to be discussed in terms of politics and being a little bit less "Murricah" between the lines can help avoid this. Show nested quote +From cheesy detective impressions to Rikers prisoner beatdowns, Spider-Man’s uncomplicated approach to crime clashes with the reality of day to day life. [...] Police are an unimpeachable group in Spider-Man. They show no real flaws and make no mistakes. They don’t feel like an integrated part of the the community; they pepper cutscenes and sometimes walk the streets but mostly show up as an allied faction in procedurally generated crime events. [...]Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage. Spider man on the other hand is a super hero game targeting kids/teens based on a comic book which I've never seen shit on cops where criminals are the perpetual antagonists. TLDR: It's with a very high probability a controversial opinion to get more views. If this was a side-note on a test, I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games. And mind you, I don't particularly like my German police and think that the powers US police has are absurd.
If that is a key point in the review, I agree with you that it is a bit absurd. If, however, it was simply a hot take in a review, and then a separate article was dedicated to the portrayal of police in games, then I don't see the problem. Why don't you link the sources rather than just quote them? I mean, overall I both agree and disagree with that paragraph: the portrayal of the police is clearly not realistic. The question is rather whether that is a single paragraph in a review that otherwise fairly addresses the good and the bad in the Spiderman game, whether that is a paragraph from an article discussing the generally glorification of police (and military) in games, or whether it is a "review" of Spiderman where the reviewer is letting his axe to grind with the police interfering with his job.
As for games going out of their way to be "unpolitical", that is an absurdity that Hollywood is way past and the game industry should take their queue from there. People will find political messages in *everything*, including the criticism of Super Mario being sexist, because all Princess Peach is good for is to get captured and need rescuing, That is, btw, a valid criticism of Super Mario Bros (and most of its many sequels and spin-offs), because they could have replaced Princess Peach with Mario's magic wrench and the rest of the game would be identical. Princess Peach is an object for Mario to go running after. And the trope is getting a bit stale, despite the gameplay of Mario games still being amazing. Here is actually a decent article from Kotaku discussing the whole thing:
https://kotaku.com/how-princess-peachs-story-draws-on-2000-years-of-women-1830342699
Ubisoft can keep clamouring that they don't do political messaging, but either a story is so bland as to not even be a story at all, or someone somewhere will find a political message in it, which they then agree or disagree with... and we're off to the races.
|
On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:Show nested quote +From cheesy detective impressions to Rikers prisoner beatdowns, Spider-Man’s uncomplicated approach to crime clashes with the reality of day to day life. [...] Police are an unimpeachable group in Spider-Man. They show no real flaws and make no mistakes. They don’t feel like an integrated part of the the community; they pepper cutscenes and sometimes walk the streets but mostly show up as an allied faction in procedurally generated crime events. [...]Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage. Spider man on the other hand is a super hero game targeting kids/teens based on a comic book which I've never seen shit on cops where criminals are the perpetual antagonists. TLDR: It's with a very high probability a controversial opinion to get more views. If this was a side-note on a test, I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games. And mind you, I don't particularly like my German police and think that the powers US police has are absurd.
Different areas have different qualities of police forces. In Canada's biggest city, Toronto, the police very often follow all the tiniest required protocols and procedures. In a city of 820,000 people that is right beside Toronto the police kinda do whatever they feel like doing. They are constantly flouting standards and practices.
The difference in the Police Forces in 2 major cities right beside each other is pretty noticeable. So its hard to make sweeping generalizations about police forces between 2 cities much less across an entire country that is 5 or 6 time zones wide.
As far as Spiderman goes...
i'm no Spiderman expert, however, in the 1960s Spiderman the police are incorrectly "against" Spiderman. So that Spiderman is often dodging the police while at the same time trying to stop/catch the criminals. The police are far from perfect in "Spiderman's universe" from the 1960s.
On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:
I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games.
Someone built an entire feminist/angry-rage organization around "Mario is misogynistic". I think Mario fits into the "Damsel in Distress" paradigm in this "woman as victim" perspective. I guess Kotaku is `following the money` in this regard. Thing is Kotaku and others with their off-base, bizarro editorializing of video games drives average hobby-ists to content makers like Angry Joe.
|
Follow-up, as I did some digging myself.
(1) That isn't Kotaku's review of Spiderman. The review does not go into the political message at all, and simply mentions that you spend a lot of time helping the police without placing a value on that statement. Insofar as I can tell the political engagement had no impact on the score at all.
(2) That isn't by the same person who reviewed Spiderman for Kotaku. So it isn't even something he kept out of the review explicitly, but did influence the score. It's two different people writing about different things...
Review: https://kotaku.com/spider-man-the-kotaku-review-1828796781
Editorial: https://kotaku.com/spider-mans-take-on-police-feels-out-of-touch-1828978785
So it seems a bit strange to confuse "Kotaku's review of spiderman" with an editorial by a different writer, specifically written to discuss the role of the police in the Spiderman game. Moreover, the conclusion from the article explains quite well *why* they pick on Spiderman to make this point (and also mention The Division a few times throughout the article as having a similar problem).
Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage. Comics often speak to what’s happening in the real world. Captain America assumed the role of Nomad in 1974, the same year that Richard Nixon resigned from office in the wake of the Watergate Scandal. The X-Men have a history of allegorical representation of minoritized and persecuted groups. Spider-Man doesn’t seem interested in reacting to the real world. My colleague Tom Ley wrote about this at Deadspin, noting that nearly every side activity involved aiding the police. This stands in contrast to games like Spider-Man 2, where Spider-Man returned as many lost balloons as he webbed up muggers. Instead of being part of the complex life of the city, this latest Spider-Man sees a black-and-white world of cops and robbers. He aids in state surveillance, standing unquestioningly alongside an overly idealized caricature of the police. He’s still friendly, but I don’t know if he’s part of the neighborhood now.
In closing, the article seems to highlight a specific issue, which seems to be a valid talking point, although I would have preferred it if the author had gone a bit further and drawn parallels with other games that idolize the police, and contrasted it with games where the police are not unequivocally the good guys, and had made a broader point about the portrayal of police in videogames. But that doesn't mean the easier-to-write and narrower scope makes for a bad article. Moreover, it's an opinion piece. Of course opinion pieces have a bias, it's their entire raison-d'être!
|
So, ActiBlizz is now being investigated for tax irregularities by 4 different countries and is "vigorously contesting" their claims. They've been slapped with fines for over $1.1b and it's just the beginning since ActiBlizz moved about $5b to offshore tax havens in years 2013-2017.
Here's a full report on that: https://www.taxwatchuk.org/reports/world_of_taxcraft/
|
On August 05 2019 22:03 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:From cheesy detective impressions to Rikers prisoner beatdowns, Spider-Man’s uncomplicated approach to crime clashes with the reality of day to day life. [...] Police are an unimpeachable group in Spider-Man. They show no real flaws and make no mistakes. They don’t feel like an integrated part of the the community; they pepper cutscenes and sometimes walk the streets but mostly show up as an allied faction in procedurally generated crime events. [...]Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage. Spider man on the other hand is a super hero game targeting kids/teens based on a comic book which I've never seen shit on cops where criminals are the perpetual antagonists. TLDR: It's with a very high probability a controversial opinion to get more views. If this was a side-note on a test, I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games. And mind you, I don't particularly like my German police and think that the powers US police has are absurd. Different areas have different qualities of police forces. In Canada's biggest city, Toronto, the police very often follow all the tiniest required protocols and procedures. In a city of 820,000 people that is right beside Toronto the police kinda do whatever they feel like doing. They are constantly flouting standards and practices. The difference in the Police Forces in 2 major cities right beside each other is pretty noticeable. So its hard to make sweeping generalizations about police forces between 2 cities much less across an entire country that is 5 or 6 time zones wide. As far as Spiderman goes... i'm no Spiderman expert, however, in the 1960s Spiderman the police are incorrectly "against" Spiderman. So that Spiderman is often dodging the police while at the same time trying to stop/catch the criminals. The police are far from perfect in "Spiderman's universe" from the 1960s. Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:
I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games.
Someone built an entire feminist/angry-rage organization around "Mario is misogynistic". I think Mario fits into the "Damsel in Distress" paradigm in this "woman as victim" perspective. I guess Kotaku is `following the money` in this regard. Thing is Kotaku and others with their off-base, bizarro editorializing of video games drives average hobby-ists to content makers like Angry Joe.
My spiderman sources are mostly from the 90s/Peter Parker movie trilogy, but in both the police are side characters without relevance and as such good in nature but helpless alone IIRC. Might be because police violence was less of a media topic back then, so I guess Kotaku might have a point? My impression of spiderman was that it was an early teens comic that's mostly lightweight and doesn't ever try to be a commentary on society. Were cops in the 60s series actually bad/corrupt or just misguided?
@American police: Mostly based on news/articles where they way crossed the line of what I'd consider normal and got away with it. Saw the bodycam of the Arizona case where they broke into a hotel room and shot a crying begging man and from an European standpoint I can't understand that they walked free. My experiences with police in the US have reinforced the impression that deescalation is not on the menu, the strategy seems to be terrifying instead of calming.
That doesn't mean that they all cross lines all the time, 99% of them are normal people living normal lives, but apparently shooting someone as a cop has very little consequence if there is any fault to be found in the suspect's behavior.
And yes I get that this stems from the accessibility of weapons which turns every normal control into a possible bloodbath, but that doesn't make interaction with them any less terrifying.
@Mario: Saw parts of the video by Sarkeesian and it'd be hilarious if it wasn't influential. Was my example of a ridiculous opinion gaining weight for no reason.
On August 05 2019 23:45 Acrofales wrote:Follow-up, as I did some digging myself. (1) That isn't Kotaku's review of Spiderman. The review does not go into the political message at all, and simply mentions that you spend a lot of time helping the police without placing a value on that statement. Insofar as I can tell the political engagement had no impact on the score at all. (2) That isn't by the same person who reviewed Spiderman for Kotaku. So it isn't even something he kept out of the review explicitly, but did influence the score. It's two different people writing about different things... Review: https://kotaku.com/spider-man-the-kotaku-review-1828796781Editorial: https://kotaku.com/spider-mans-take-on-police-feels-out-of-touch-1828978785So it seems a bit strange to confuse "Kotaku's review of spiderman" with an editorial by a different writer, specifically written to discuss the role of the police in the Spiderman game. Moreover, the conclusion from the article explains quite well *why* they pick on Spiderman to make this point (and also mention The Division a few times throughout the article as having a similar problem). Show nested quote +
Spider-Man’s portrayal of policing feels divorced from reality, to the point that it feels out of line with Spidey’s comic book heritage. Comics often speak to what’s happening in the real world. Captain America assumed the role of Nomad in 1974, the same year that Richard Nixon resigned from office in the wake of the Watergate Scandal. The X-Men have a history of allegorical representation of minoritized and persecuted groups. Spider-Man doesn’t seem interested in reacting to the real world. My colleague Tom Ley wrote about this at Deadspin, noting that nearly every side activity involved aiding the police. This stands in contrast to games like Spider-Man 2, where Spider-Man returned as many lost balloons as he webbed up muggers. Instead of being part of the complex life of the city, this latest Spider-Man sees a black-and-white world of cops and robbers. He aids in state surveillance, standing unquestioningly alongside an overly idealized caricature of the police. He’s still friendly, but I don’t know if he’s part of the neighborhood now.
In closing, the article seems to highlight a specific issue, which seems to be a valid talking point, although I would have preferred it if the author had gone a bit further and drawn parallels with other games that idolize the police, and contrasted it with games where the police are not unequivocally the good guys, and had made a broader point about the portrayal of police in videogames. But that doesn't mean the easier-to-write and narrower scope makes for a bad article. Moreover, it's an opinion piece. Of course opinion pieces have a bias, it's their entire raison-d'être!
(1) To quote myself: On August 05 2019 20:34 Archeon wrote:
TLDR: It's with a very high probability a controversial opinion to get more views. If this was a side-note on a test, I'd consider it silly but minor. But there's an entire article written about just this and the opinion is almost as silly as "Super Mario is misogynistic", so I can't help but ask myself if Kotaku is more about promoting political opinions than testing games.
Never claimed it was in the test, just that Kotaku apparently made articles about imo fairly silly opinions. But I agree that I should have cited a source directly and mentioned the opinion piece and I can see how my post in response to the part about it being part of the test was misleading.
That doesn't change that it's imo very silly. Just because X-Men and Captain America are political doesn't mean spider man needs to be, that's like saying that Ducktales should be political because House of Cards is and they are both TV-shows. Or to be precise it's saying that every current interpretation of spider man needs to address cop corruption and violence because some comics were/are political. It's ridiculous.
I'm not against talking about general depiction of police and police corruption in games where it makes sense, f.e. Mass Effect has a scene where you can punch a journalist and I would have liked to see that have negative influences and be more explored. Deus Ex is another series where addressing cop corruption makes sense. But doing so in the context of a spider man game seems like a very artificial discussion.
Also I definitely disagree that every game should be political. Games are entertainment and distraction and their main goal is to be fun and explorable and a political message can definitely lessen the fun if it doesn't fit the game's mechanics. I'm not against political messages when they make sense, it's one of the things I enjoyed the most in my Deus Ex play f.e. where the game is a dread vision of a hypercapitalist future. But the majority of games are highly apolitical and in difference to Hollywood movies they are interactive and give the players different choices, so forcing a certain narrative lessens the amount of imagination the player can play through. There's a reason many Hollywood movies atm feel like I've seen them already.
And imo you can't get much more apolitical than Mario and if there weren't some money grabbing feminists trying to promote themselves by bashing popular titles nobody would even notice. Mario has been repeating the same story since the 80s, mainly because story doesn't play a role in Mario and repetition means you can cut it short. I wouldn't mind if a Mario RPG does more than an ironic take on it, but on the flipside I don't mind that Lara and Samus are walking battle tanks for most of their series. I'm used to games without a story focus following patterns and that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
|
|
|
Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft have announced an initiative that will require publishers to disclose drop rate odds for all games that include loot boxes to get them released on consoles.
The new measures were initially announced earlier today by the Entertainment Software Association's chief counsel of tech policy Michael Warnecke (as reported by GamesIndustry.biz), during a Federal Trade Commission workshop intended to "examine consumer protection issues related to video game loot boxes".
Since then, the ESA (which represents the video games industry in the US) has released a full statement on the matter, confirming that Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony "will require paid loot boxes in games developed for their platforms to disclose information on the relative rarity or probability of obtaining randomised virtual items."
Additionally, the new measures, which are expected to be implemented next year, will apply to all games that add loot boxes in a post-launch update.
According to the ESA, a number of publishers - specifically, Activision Blizzard, Bandai Namco, Bethesda, Bungie, Electronic Arts, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Warner Bros, and Wizards of the Coast - have all agreed to disclose the "relative rarity or probability of obtaining in-game virtual items from purchased loot boxes" in their own titles, and "in a manner that is understandable and easily accessed". This will occur "no later than the end of 2020".
Loot boxes, and their potentially harmful effects, have become an increasing concern among politicians and legislators in recent times.
In May, US Senator Josh Hawley proposed legislation that would prohibit loot boxes, pay-to-win mechanics, and other "manipulative design" in games targeted toward children, while several European countries have already taken more definitive measures.
Last year, for instance, Belgium and the Netherlands both declared loot boxes to be a form of gambling, and therefore illegal, resulting in publishers removing the monetisation method from a number of games, including FIFA, Overwatch, and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive.
At present, it's unclear whether any of the measures announced by the ESA today will be applicable to territories beyond the US, but Eurogamer has contacted Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft for clarification and further details.
Source
|
Does that mean it will be public knowledge or will it only be disclosed to the respective console manufacturer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i2.wp.com/www.taxwatchuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/AB-Group-of-companies-e1564864592268.png?resize=631%2C1024&ssl=1)
