|
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 11:38 levelping wrote:
But let's look at gaming generally, and it becomes pretty obvious that games like MGS are pretty rare. More often than not, it is only the female who is presented as a sexual object, and as very real ones.
The rareness of MGS has nothing to do with the games aiming to portray both genders as sexual objects. The uniqueness of this series has more to do with that they try to be very realistic (for the most part). This is what I loved about the series, and it's also kind of why I don't like traditional action games (and movies). There's a lot of sexual undertones in the games for sure, but it's like that in the real world. I don't think there's a good claim for either of the genders being sexualized in that series.
Anyway, this is besides the point. What I really disagree with you with, is your claim that females being presented as sexual objects is a problem. Why do you care what kind of entertainment other ppl enjoys? Why is it your business whether the girls in the games that I play have full clothing as opposed to short skirts, or big unnatural breasts as opposed to medium sized ones? Why do you think either of that is any of your business? It really is none of your business and it is not the business of Anita or other feminists.
All of these discussions about gender representation in games are dumb, because we are supposed to live in a free world, a world where you are allowed to create the games you want to create, without anyone preventing you from releasing them, or trying to censor them or trying to pressure you into making adjustments. And as a consumer we're also free to consum whatever games we want. This is the liberty factor of the debate, and in the end it should be enough to kill this debate completely, and it's sad that it really doesn't. There's so many ppl who want to throw their own moral code upon others, and force them to obey the rules that they created. It's sickening to see so many ppl jumping on this band-wagon.
I'm not going to go into detail about the reasons why men might be inclined to buy games with oversexualized female main characters, but the simplified answer is that we all mostly play games because we want to immerse ourselves in them, and it's more tempting to be immersed in a game that has characters that you find attractive. There are many games where the main character gets romantically involved with a female main character, and there are many games that have incorporated dating-elements as side-elements to their games. Basically with dating-elements I mean you can choose what female main character that the protagonists goes for. Obviously having attractive female characters makes these games more appealing.
If you try to force or even just push and intimidate the gaming industry to change towards less sexualized female characters, then the demand that they meet would be decreased, which would result in decreasing sales. And do you honestly think that less sexy female characters woudl lead to more women being interested in games? I highly doubt that, maybe to a lesser extent, but you would lose a lot more than you would gain. I think you can make a good point in that having more female lead roles would attract more female gamers, but the gaming industry are simply just trying to meet the demands, and if there was a demand for female-led games, then a lot of ppl would have jumped on it already. And this is already happening. The ability to change the gender of the main character is becoming more and more common, and exclusively female leads are also becoming more common. This is a natural occurence of the industry looking to grab the attention of potential buyers, and it's not that games targeting men are decreasing, rather the industry is getting better and better at satisfying the demand of female gamers, and it's expanding the scene.
|
No one is saying you can't create a game with oversexualized female character that are clearly objectified. But be prepared to be called out on it if you do. Its not hard, other art has the same thing going on. There is bad art all over the place and its still getting made. Game developers wouldn't make games if they couldn't take some criticism. Its not bullying, like some people say. She has been doing shit for a while and games are still coming out with boob armor and combat high heels, so not much has changed.
As Anita said, its "ok to like a game with problematic elements." She is not saying these games are evil or you are evil for liking them. But she is saying that there are a lot of female characters that are written like shit in games, which isn't wrong. And maybe in the next batch of games they would write better female characters.
|
On October 19 2014 12:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 11:13 Millitron wrote:On October 19 2014 10:54 Plansix wrote:
Gamergate is the "thanksObama" video games. Its a worthless hash tag that has no meaning and is just used by anyone who wants it. Its not a movement any more that "thanksObama" is. If you search them both via twitter, you will find the same level of discordant non-sense.
Also, many of the people who try to debunk Anita Sarkeesian have never fully watched her work. The majority of people I have interacted with have only watched the "response videos" which are clearly bias and cherry pick from her videos the points they want to make. Its funny, because many of them do the exact same thing they accuse her of.
Anita Sarkeesian begins the majority of her videos with a phrase along the lines of "It is ok to love a game with problematic elements". And with this, all problems should be solved. We can criticize the things we love and its fine. I love the movie Hook, but I know its a terribly made movie and sort of bad(you can see boom mics in several shots and its a hot mess of a film). The same goes for video games, as we grow up with them, we see the problematic elements. Like Street Fight is sort of super racist, but its ok, because it was made in a different era. But that doesn't stop me from realizing that T-hawk is sort of a fuck up character.
The most amusing part about all of this is the only people scream about Anita Sarkeesian are players. The people she is criticizing, game developers, gave her an award for her work and thanked her for it. Many of them talk about how they made her look at how they make their games and how to change it to make them more welcoming to women. Because the people who make games want everyone to play them, because thats why they make games. I don't WANT everyone to play games though. The last time a big group joined gaming was with Call of Duty 4: MW. And with it I saw many of my favorite franchises turned into CoD clones, or otherwise altered to grab the largest demographic, in this case, short attention spans. Red Orchestra 1 was a fairly accurate simulation of WW2 combined arms warfare. Red Orchestra 2 was Red Orchestra: Call of Duty edition. They added levelling up, shortened the ranges to unrealistically close to speed up the action, and made it all about quick reactions and not about being smart. Ace Combat used to be a fun, goofy arcade flight sim. Ace Combat: Assault Horizon threw out everything that made the other AC games fun, and added quick time events and rail shooter sections, to be more like CoD. It was practically Call of Duty: Planes. Red Alert 2 is one of my top 5 games, and is my favorite RTS. EA saw how big the Starcraft audience was, and tried to nab it, and RA3 ended up being a pisspoor Starcraft clone. Every time I've seen a series try to attract a larger demographic, I've seen it alienate the core playerbase. Of course devs thank Sarkeesian. If they do anything but kiss her feet, they'll be the next target of the witch hunt. Gaming is a 70 billion dollar industry, they are making more games, not less. People are coming if you want it or not. Girls are coming and they will have opinions and they may not agree that "boob armor" is super realistic, so we might see a little less of that. And that is totally ok. The games you like are not going to go away. There is away going to be a Red Orchestra, but it might not have that name(also, Red Orchestra was a mod, while 2 was a commercial release where people had to play the bills for health insurance and shit.) They are making more types of games, not less. Of course the hard core game are going to be a smaller market, but people still make them for you. Look at dark souls. And I listen to numerous video games industry podcast with any number of people from all parts of the industry and they all have no problem with her. I have heard her on numerous podcast and she likes board games and does play games, and is no where near the monster out to destroy boy-games as we know it. They have no problem having their games criticized, since many of them are their own biggest critics. There isn't a single game developer that is afraid of her. And I don't know why people think she is going to get rid of specific types of games. The movie industry has proven that any type of movie can be made, including unlimited Saw and Resident Evil movies. People are going to make dumb, weird games with sexist over tones and we will all survive.
The thing is, people like Sarkeesian don't really address what actually draws the female audience into gaming. They talk about sexist elements that drives certain people off.
And meanwhile it's WoW and LoL that have drawn in more female "hardcore" gamers than basically any other products on the market, even with the hyper sexualized female characters with boob plates for all.
As I said somewhere earlier in this thread, as the market grows and the female audience becomes a large demographic in console/PC gaming, I don't think the end result will be the removal of objectified women. It'll be an increase in the objectification of the male characters, specifically marketed towards women.
Sure, there's a small niche of people who will be driven off by fanservicey elements, but there are an overwhelmingly larger portion of consumers that are drawn in by the same things, men and women alike. It's called fanservice for a reason.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
wow, I'm still reading that deadspin article so can't comment just yet but this is crazy so far. Don't understand how people can throw such accusations around without evidence based on an statement of an ex-lover seeing as he can easily be lying (or telling the truth), who knows.
|
On October 19 2014 12:56 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 12:14 Plansix wrote:On October 19 2014 11:13 Millitron wrote:On October 19 2014 10:54 Plansix wrote:
Gamergate is the "thanksObama" video games. Its a worthless hash tag that has no meaning and is just used by anyone who wants it. Its not a movement any more that "thanksObama" is. If you search them both via twitter, you will find the same level of discordant non-sense.
Also, many of the people who try to debunk Anita Sarkeesian have never fully watched her work. The majority of people I have interacted with have only watched the "response videos" which are clearly bias and cherry pick from her videos the points they want to make. Its funny, because many of them do the exact same thing they accuse her of.
Anita Sarkeesian begins the majority of her videos with a phrase along the lines of "It is ok to love a game with problematic elements". And with this, all problems should be solved. We can criticize the things we love and its fine. I love the movie Hook, but I know its a terribly made movie and sort of bad(you can see boom mics in several shots and its a hot mess of a film). The same goes for video games, as we grow up with them, we see the problematic elements. Like Street Fight is sort of super racist, but its ok, because it was made in a different era. But that doesn't stop me from realizing that T-hawk is sort of a fuck up character.
The most amusing part about all of this is the only people scream about Anita Sarkeesian are players. The people she is criticizing, game developers, gave her an award for her work and thanked her for it. Many of them talk about how they made her look at how they make their games and how to change it to make them more welcoming to women. Because the people who make games want everyone to play them, because thats why they make games. I don't WANT everyone to play games though. The last time a big group joined gaming was with Call of Duty 4: MW. And with it I saw many of my favorite franchises turned into CoD clones, or otherwise altered to grab the largest demographic, in this case, short attention spans. Red Orchestra 1 was a fairly accurate simulation of WW2 combined arms warfare. Red Orchestra 2 was Red Orchestra: Call of Duty edition. They added levelling up, shortened the ranges to unrealistically close to speed up the action, and made it all about quick reactions and not about being smart. Ace Combat used to be a fun, goofy arcade flight sim. Ace Combat: Assault Horizon threw out everything that made the other AC games fun, and added quick time events and rail shooter sections, to be more like CoD. It was practically Call of Duty: Planes. Red Alert 2 is one of my top 5 games, and is my favorite RTS. EA saw how big the Starcraft audience was, and tried to nab it, and RA3 ended up being a pisspoor Starcraft clone. Every time I've seen a series try to attract a larger demographic, I've seen it alienate the core playerbase. Of course devs thank Sarkeesian. If they do anything but kiss her feet, they'll be the next target of the witch hunt. Gaming is a 70 billion dollar industry, they are making more games, not less. People are coming if you want it or not. Girls are coming and they will have opinions and they may not agree that "boob armor" is super realistic, so we might see a little less of that. And that is totally ok. The games you like are not going to go away. There is away going to be a Red Orchestra, but it might not have that name(also, Red Orchestra was a mod, while 2 was a commercial release where people had to play the bills for health insurance and shit.) They are making more types of games, not less. Of course the hard core game are going to be a smaller market, but people still make them for you. Look at dark souls. And I listen to numerous video games industry podcast with any number of people from all parts of the industry and they all have no problem with her. I have heard her on numerous podcast and she likes board games and does play games, and is no where near the monster out to destroy boy-games as we know it. They have no problem having their games criticized, since many of them are their own biggest critics. There isn't a single game developer that is afraid of her. And I don't know why people think she is going to get rid of specific types of games. The movie industry has proven that any type of movie can be made, including unlimited Saw and Resident Evil movies. People are going to make dumb, weird games with sexist over tones and we will all survive. The thing is, people like Sarkeesian don't really address what actually draws the female audience into gaming. They talk about sexist elements that drives certain people off. And meanwhile it's the WoW and LoL that have drawn in more female "hardcore" gamers than basically any other products on the market, even with the hyper sexualized female characters with boob plates for all. As I said somewhere earlier in this thread, as the market grows and the female audience becomes a large demographic in console/PC gaming, I don't think the end result will be the removal of objectified women. It'll be an increase in the objectification of the male characters, specifically marketed towards women. Sure, there's a small niche of people who will be driven off by fanservicey elements, but there are an overwhelmingly larger portion of consumers that are drawn in by the same things, men and women alike. It's called fanservice for a reason.
I don't particularly agree that it will end up that way, but I see the point. I don't think Anita is asking for fewer attractive, powerful women in games. Shes a huge fan of Buffy the Vampire slayer, which had no shortage of sexy ladies in it and was loved by guys and girls. If anythings, its about balance so all of them are not running around in their underwear that made of metal. Less Boob armor, more jackets like the new Batgirl. Maybe Laura Croft won't spend the entire game running around in a tank top and might find a jacket at some point during the whole thing. Maybe they will remove those creepy death animations.
It will be tiny things, not the death of attractive love interest in the new Dragon Age/Mass Effect. Maybe fewer form fitting jump suits and ass shots.(Mass Effect 2 is a weird game when it comes to one female character's ass).
On October 19 2014 12:59 BigFan wrote:
wow, I'm still reading that deadspin article so can't comment just yet but this is crazy so far. Don't understand how people can throw such accusations around without evidence based on an statement of an ex-lover seeing as he can easily be lying (or telling the truth), who knows.
That article is pretty good and has a good time line and it has some of the more amazingly terrible chat logs. It also appropriately frames the really bad actors as the sub set of gaming culture. Like everything else in the world, there are some really shitty people who like the things we like. And yes, the people who went after Quinn are fucking animals. She may be a shitty person too, but I know a lot of shitty people I would never wish that on.
|
On October 19 2014 12:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 11:13 Millitron wrote:On October 19 2014 10:54 Plansix wrote:
Gamergate is the "thanksObama" video games. Its a worthless hash tag that has no meaning and is just used by anyone who wants it. Its not a movement any more that "thanksObama" is. If you search them both via twitter, you will find the same level of discordant non-sense.
Also, many of the people who try to debunk Anita Sarkeesian have never fully watched her work. The majority of people I have interacted with have only watched the "response videos" which are clearly bias and cherry pick from her videos the points they want to make. Its funny, because many of them do the exact same thing they accuse her of.
Anita Sarkeesian begins the majority of her videos with a phrase along the lines of "It is ok to love a game with problematic elements". And with this, all problems should be solved. We can criticize the things we love and its fine. I love the movie Hook, but I know its a terribly made movie and sort of bad(you can see boom mics in several shots and its a hot mess of a film). The same goes for video games, as we grow up with them, we see the problematic elements. Like Street Fight is sort of super racist, but its ok, because it was made in a different era. But that doesn't stop me from realizing that T-hawk is sort of a fuck up character.
The most amusing part about all of this is the only people scream about Anita Sarkeesian are players. The people she is criticizing, game developers, gave her an award for her work and thanked her for it. Many of them talk about how they made her look at how they make their games and how to change it to make them more welcoming to women. Because the people who make games want everyone to play them, because thats why they make games. I don't WANT everyone to play games though. The last time a big group joined gaming was with Call of Duty 4: MW. And with it I saw many of my favorite franchises turned into CoD clones, or otherwise altered to grab the largest demographic, in this case, short attention spans. Red Orchestra 1 was a fairly accurate simulation of WW2 combined arms warfare. Red Orchestra 2 was Red Orchestra: Call of Duty edition. They added levelling up, shortened the ranges to unrealistically close to speed up the action, and made it all about quick reactions and not about being smart. Ace Combat used to be a fun, goofy arcade flight sim. Ace Combat: Assault Horizon threw out everything that made the other AC games fun, and added quick time events and rail shooter sections, to be more like CoD. It was practically Call of Duty: Planes. Red Alert 2 is one of my top 5 games, and is my favorite RTS. EA saw how big the Starcraft audience was, and tried to nab it, and RA3 ended up being a pisspoor Starcraft clone. Every time I've seen a series try to attract a larger demographic, I've seen it alienate the core playerbase. Of course devs thank Sarkeesian. If they do anything but kiss her feet, they'll be the next target of the witch hunt. Gaming is a 70 billion dollar industry, they are making more games, not less. People are coming if you want it or not. Girls are coming and they will have opinions and they may not agree that "boob armor" is super realistic, so we might see a little less of that. And that is totally ok. The games you like are not going to go away. There is away going to be a Red Orchestra, but it might not have that name(also, Red Orchestra was a mod, while 2 was a commercial release where people had to play the bills for health insurance and shit.) They are making more types of games, not less. Of course the hard core game are going to be a smaller market, but people still make them for you. Look at dark souls. And I listen to numerous video games industry podcast with any number of people from all parts of the industry and they all have no problem with her. I have heard her on numerous podcast and she likes board games and does play games, and is no where near the monster out to destroy boy-games as we know it. They have no problem having their games criticized, since many of them are their own biggest critics. There isn't a single game developer that is afraid of her. And I don't know why people think she is going to get rid of specific types of games. The movie industry has proven that any type of movie can be made, including unlimited Saw and Resident Evil movies. People are going to make dumb, weird games with sexist over tones and we will all survive.
Red Orchestra 1 was not a mod. There was a mod for Unreal Tournament 3 called Red Orchestra that won a contest which earned the modders an Unreal Engine 3 license, which they used to make Red Orchestra 1. It got a full commercial release, I have the disc. I never said they were making less games, I said they were making less good games. Back 10 years ago, every big budget game was tough, wasn't 1/3 tutorials, and they were mostly not clones. Now big devs try to attract bigger and bigger audiences, which means easy games, long tutorials, and lots of the same crap. It means leveling up will be shoehorned in where it doesn't belong, because the carrot-on-a-stick method is an effective way to keep fools playing. Yeah, Dark Souls is a challenging game. That doesn't mean that there are as many challenging games being released today as there was 10 years ago.
Please don't tell me you believe that study that said 50% of gamers are female. That counted things like Farmville and Minesweeper. They're hardly videogames. Females are not buying AAA games in huge numbers. Certainly nowhere near 50% of sales go to females.
On October 19 2014 12:59 BigFan wrote:
wow, I'm still reading that deadspin article so can't comment just yet but this is crazy so far. Don't understand how people can throw such accusations around without evidence based on an statement of an ex-lover seeing as he can easily be lying (or telling the truth), who knows.
The fact that it got censored so hard lends some credence to it being true.
|
On October 19 2014 13:06 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 12:14 Plansix wrote:On October 19 2014 11:13 Millitron wrote:On October 19 2014 10:54 Plansix wrote:
Gamergate is the "thanksObama" video games. Its a worthless hash tag that has no meaning and is just used by anyone who wants it. Its not a movement any more that "thanksObama" is. If you search them both via twitter, you will find the same level of discordant non-sense.
Also, many of the people who try to debunk Anita Sarkeesian have never fully watched her work. The majority of people I have interacted with have only watched the "response videos" which are clearly bias and cherry pick from her videos the points they want to make. Its funny, because many of them do the exact same thing they accuse her of.
Anita Sarkeesian begins the majority of her videos with a phrase along the lines of "It is ok to love a game with problematic elements". And with this, all problems should be solved. We can criticize the things we love and its fine. I love the movie Hook, but I know its a terribly made movie and sort of bad(you can see boom mics in several shots and its a hot mess of a film). The same goes for video games, as we grow up with them, we see the problematic elements. Like Street Fight is sort of super racist, but its ok, because it was made in a different era. But that doesn't stop me from realizing that T-hawk is sort of a fuck up character.
The most amusing part about all of this is the only people scream about Anita Sarkeesian are players. The people she is criticizing, game developers, gave her an award for her work and thanked her for it. Many of them talk about how they made her look at how they make their games and how to change it to make them more welcoming to women. Because the people who make games want everyone to play them, because thats why they make games. I don't WANT everyone to play games though. The last time a big group joined gaming was with Call of Duty 4: MW. And with it I saw many of my favorite franchises turned into CoD clones, or otherwise altered to grab the largest demographic, in this case, short attention spans. Red Orchestra 1 was a fairly accurate simulation of WW2 combined arms warfare. Red Orchestra 2 was Red Orchestra: Call of Duty edition. They added levelling up, shortened the ranges to unrealistically close to speed up the action, and made it all about quick reactions and not about being smart. Ace Combat used to be a fun, goofy arcade flight sim. Ace Combat: Assault Horizon threw out everything that made the other AC games fun, and added quick time events and rail shooter sections, to be more like CoD. It was practically Call of Duty: Planes. Red Alert 2 is one of my top 5 games, and is my favorite RTS. EA saw how big the Starcraft audience was, and tried to nab it, and RA3 ended up being a pisspoor Starcraft clone. Every time I've seen a series try to attract a larger demographic, I've seen it alienate the core playerbase. Of course devs thank Sarkeesian. If they do anything but kiss her feet, they'll be the next target of the witch hunt. Gaming is a 70 billion dollar industry, they are making more games, not less. People are coming if you want it or not. Girls are coming and they will have opinions and they may not agree that "boob armor" is super realistic, so we might see a little less of that. And that is totally ok. The games you like are not going to go away. There is away going to be a Red Orchestra, but it might not have that name(also, Red Orchestra was a mod, while 2 was a commercial release where people had to play the bills for health insurance and shit.) They are making more types of games, not less. Of course the hard core game are going to be a smaller market, but people still make them for you. Look at dark souls. And I listen to numerous video games industry podcast with any number of people from all parts of the industry and they all have no problem with her. I have heard her on numerous podcast and she likes board games and does play games, and is no where near the monster out to destroy boy-games as we know it. They have no problem having their games criticized, since many of them are their own biggest critics. There isn't a single game developer that is afraid of her. And I don't know why people think she is going to get rid of specific types of games. The movie industry has proven that any type of movie can be made, including unlimited Saw and Resident Evil movies. People are going to make dumb, weird games with sexist over tones and we will all survive. Red Orchestra 1 was not a mod. There was a mod for Unreal Tournament 3 called Red Orchestra that won a contest which earned the modders an Unreal Engine 3 license, which they used to make Red Orchestra 1. It got a full commercial release, I have the disc. I never said they were making less games, I said they were making less good games. Back 10 years ago, every big budget game was tough, wasn't 1/3 tutorials, and they were mostly not clones. Now big devs try to attract bigger and bigger audiences, which means easy games, long tutorials, and lots of the same crap. It means leveling up will be shoehorned in where it doesn't belong, because the carrot-on-a-stick method is an effective way to keep fools playing. Yeah, Dark Souls is a challenging game. That doesn't mean that there are as many challenging games being released today as there was 10 years ago. Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 12:59 BigFan wrote:
wow, I'm still reading that deadspin article so can't comment just yet but this is crazy so far. Don't understand how people can throw such accusations around without evidence based on an statement of an ex-lover seeing as he can easily be lying (or telling the truth), who knows. The fact that it got censored so hard lends some credence to it being true.
This is really a different discussion for a different thread. People are coming to games and there is nothing any of us can do to stop it. There will be games out there for you, because there are more games. Just hunt for them, they are out there.
|
On October 19 2014 13:06 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 12:14 Plansix wrote:On October 19 2014 11:13 Millitron wrote:On October 19 2014 10:54 Plansix wrote:
Gamergate is the "thanksObama" video games. Its a worthless hash tag that has no meaning and is just used by anyone who wants it. Its not a movement any more that "thanksObama" is. If you search them both via twitter, you will find the same level of discordant non-sense.
Also, many of the people who try to debunk Anita Sarkeesian have never fully watched her work. The majority of people I have interacted with have only watched the "response videos" which are clearly bias and cherry pick from her videos the points they want to make. Its funny, because many of them do the exact same thing they accuse her of.
Anita Sarkeesian begins the majority of her videos with a phrase along the lines of "It is ok to love a game with problematic elements". And with this, all problems should be solved. We can criticize the things we love and its fine. I love the movie Hook, but I know its a terribly made movie and sort of bad(you can see boom mics in several shots and its a hot mess of a film). The same goes for video games, as we grow up with them, we see the problematic elements. Like Street Fight is sort of super racist, but its ok, because it was made in a different era. But that doesn't stop me from realizing that T-hawk is sort of a fuck up character.
The most amusing part about all of this is the only people scream about Anita Sarkeesian are players. The people she is criticizing, game developers, gave her an award for her work and thanked her for it. Many of them talk about how they made her look at how they make their games and how to change it to make them more welcoming to women. Because the people who make games want everyone to play them, because thats why they make games. I don't WANT everyone to play games though. The last time a big group joined gaming was with Call of Duty 4: MW. And with it I saw many of my favorite franchises turned into CoD clones, or otherwise altered to grab the largest demographic, in this case, short attention spans. Red Orchestra 1 was a fairly accurate simulation of WW2 combined arms warfare. Red Orchestra 2 was Red Orchestra: Call of Duty edition. They added levelling up, shortened the ranges to unrealistically close to speed up the action, and made it all about quick reactions and not about being smart. Ace Combat used to be a fun, goofy arcade flight sim. Ace Combat: Assault Horizon threw out everything that made the other AC games fun, and added quick time events and rail shooter sections, to be more like CoD. It was practically Call of Duty: Planes. Red Alert 2 is one of my top 5 games, and is my favorite RTS. EA saw how big the Starcraft audience was, and tried to nab it, and RA3 ended up being a pisspoor Starcraft clone. Every time I've seen a series try to attract a larger demographic, I've seen it alienate the core playerbase. Of course devs thank Sarkeesian. If they do anything but kiss her feet, they'll be the next target of the witch hunt. Gaming is a 70 billion dollar industry, they are making more games, not less. People are coming if you want it or not. Girls are coming and they will have opinions and they may not agree that "boob armor" is super realistic, so we might see a little less of that. And that is totally ok. The games you like are not going to go away. There is away going to be a Red Orchestra, but it might not have that name(also, Red Orchestra was a mod, while 2 was a commercial release where people had to play the bills for health insurance and shit.) They are making more types of games, not less. Of course the hard core game are going to be a smaller market, but people still make them for you. Look at dark souls. And I listen to numerous video games industry podcast with any number of people from all parts of the industry and they all have no problem with her. I have heard her on numerous podcast and she likes board games and does play games, and is no where near the monster out to destroy boy-games as we know it. They have no problem having their games criticized, since many of them are their own biggest critics. There isn't a single game developer that is afraid of her. And I don't know why people think she is going to get rid of specific types of games. The movie industry has proven that any type of movie can be made, including unlimited Saw and Resident Evil movies. People are going to make dumb, weird games with sexist over tones and we will all survive. Red Orchestra 1 was not a mod. There was a mod for Unreal Tournament 3 called Red Orchestra that won a contest which earned the modders an Unreal Engine 3 license, which they used to make Red Orchestra 1. It got a full commercial release, I have the disc. I never said they were making less games, I said they were making less good games. Back 10 years ago, every big budget game was tough, wasn't 1/3 tutorials, and they were mostly not clones. Now big devs try to attract bigger and bigger audiences, which means easy games, long tutorials, and lots of the same crap. It means leveling up will be shoehorned in where it doesn't belong, because the carrot-on-a-stick method is an effective way to keep fools playing. Yeah, Dark Souls is a challenging game. That doesn't mean that there are as many challenging games being released today as there was 10 years ago. Show nested quote +On October 19 2014 12:59 BigFan wrote:
wow, I'm still reading that deadspin article so can't comment just yet but this is crazy so far. Don't understand how people can throw such accusations around without evidence based on an statement of an ex-lover seeing as he can easily be lying (or telling the truth), who knows. The fact that it got censored so hard lends some credence to it being true.
I don't understand you're first argument. so apparently video games need to not appeal to more people because that would make games different from how you like them? The point of a company is to make money and they make money by making what appeals to more people. Just because you don't like something doesn't meant they shouldn't do it. Widening your audience is a key part of most companies and bands. There's still games out there that will fit your criteria the big companies just don't make them as much because they don't make as much money. It's how capitalism works.
and yeah as Plansix said this is really something for a different thread as it has gone off topic.
as to your second point.I'm sorry but how is stopping unfound accusations an implication that their true? If people started making threads about how your the worst person ever based on rantings of an ex would you be fine with leaving those threads up? It's kind of the same reason TL closes threads that accuse people of hacking without any significant evidence.
|
Canada13378 Posts
The purpose of this thread was to discuss game journalism and the ethics surrounding it.
The issue of feminism and the like is a part of this discussion because the impetus to the whole gamergate thing is a result of allegations associated with a female developer.
The issues surrounding games, gender, and journalism were all from one place. At its core though, gamergate as a topic of discussion is not about gender.
Alongside gamergate, and using gamergate individuals bring up issues of gender in gaming and a part of the whole debate online has taken on some aspects which are unrelated.
This thread began to get derailed, we should have put a stop to it immediately, but we thought TL could have honest mature discussions about the topic and get back to the topic at hand. Since often large topics get off topic for a bit and get back.
This was not the case here. This thread is falling apart, and the original intention is long gone. We don't think its possible to really discuss this on TL without the thread becoming low in quality and people just getting into circular debates.
For this reason we have decided its time to close this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
