Support NeoGAF

[B-Genius]

I think what Mumei is saying is Sarkeesian's work could be better received if it were clear that her enterprise is (somewhat disinterested) analysis of video games rather than an outright attack on the medium.

I think you (and Mumei) may be right.
Framing the analysis as an attack on lazy game design in general could also work.

Many of the points being made point to weird habits the industry has gotten into, and show how modern games are simply recycling tired methods of eliciting a reaction. Many of these are perfectly good arguments in their own right, and even when we see them fully in context (playing the game, immersed in the world), they can often come across as ham-fisted and ultimately unnecessary.

I think the important thing for people to remember is that all Sarkeesian is doing is pointing out the ones that primarily paint female characters in a negative light (less agency, more vulnerable, only sexualised, etc. etc.).
That's her thing. That's what she set out to do, and now she's doing it.

Sometimes she misses the mark, picks a bad example, or gets too carried away with her "agenda". (Call it that if you want, because that's ultimatley what it is.) But this doesn't make the issues she's pointing out less real. I've come to learn this during the course of watching her videos, and while I really dislike the kneejerk Twitter posts and articles flooding in to jump on the bandwagon of "sex in games is bad", I've started to become sick of the ignorant side as well.

Just try and be aware of the potential problems at hand. That's all people are asking for now.

A lot of people counter with "you could say the same for [such and such] in games".
Of course you could. No one is stopping you, so if it's that easy, go ahead and try it.
People have probably tried before, and there was no doubt a murmur of discussion before it got put to rest because it simply wasn't that big of a deal (at the time). Portrayal of females and equal representation in games is a big deal right now, because more people are noticing how we've accepted a twisted standard. I don't know what this standard is a result of (and I don't really want to trudge through a mess of human societal/psychological history to find out), but I do know that I want to see games attempt to do better.

I've played and loved games where I've strolled through prostitute-filled streets, beat up guys (and gals) who beat up gals (and guys), gone to a strip club/gay bar, and all manner of other things I wouldn't (even necessarily want to) do in real life.
The main question is twofold:

1. Whether you're happy with how these things are portrayed.
2. Whether they're indispensable to your enjoyment of the game proper.

If the answer to either one of those is "not really", then consider that there might be a problem.

 

[Cyrano]

Around half an hour before he posted it, I had been talking to Cyan about how I wished that she had taken out more time to explain how literary criticism works, because I think that gamers (and when I say "gamers," I mean the narrower set of people that self-identifies with that term and makes some sort of emotional identification with the hobby, as opposed to the broader "people who play video games") have a sort of siege mentality due to decades of being blamed for school violence or general corruption of innocence, featuring people like Jack Thompson. And I pointed out that a lot of the arguments presented against her center around this premise: That she is attempting to prove that video games cause gamers to be misogynists, in the same way that Jack Thompson tried to prove that video games cause kids to be violent. There's a fundamental misunderstanding about how literary criticism works since, as this article points out, the work she's doing on how video games as a medium present women looks perfectly ordinary when contrasted with the same sort of criticism of, say, a movie.

Yeah, I was about the come in and post that New Statesman article, and particularly that quote by Pauline Kael, which I feel is relevant to the discussion at hand.

There seems to be an assumption that if you're offended by movie brutality, you are somehow playing into the hands of the people who want censorship. But this would deny those of us who don't believe in censorship the use of the only counterbalance: the freedom of the press to say that there's anything conceivably damaging in these films - the freedom to analyse their implications.

If we don't use this critical freedom, we are implicitly saying that no brutality is too much for us - that only squares and people who believe in censorship are concerned with brutality. Actually, those who believe in censorship are primarily concerned with sex, and they generally worry about violence only when it's eroticized. This means that practically no one raises the issue of the possible cumulative effects of movie brutality. Yet surely, when night after night atrocities are served up to us as entertainment, it's worth some anxiety. We become clockwork oranges if we accept all this pop culture without asking what's in it. How can people go on talking about the dazzling brilliance of movies and not notice that the directors are sucking up to the thugs in the audience?

Criticism seems to be a four letter word to people emotionally self-identifying as gamers and it's actively harmful to a lot of groups, frequently including themselves, whether they acknowledge it or not. A danger here, aside from the literal danger Anita has experienced, is that the people who consume the media collectively tuning out criticism and analysis leads to harmful echo chamber effects that shout down and threaten critique. At the same time, they actively stifle creativity and media evolution.

 

[Lime]

A danger here, aside from the literal danger Anita has experienced, is that the people who consume the media collectively tuning out criticism and analysis leads to harmful echo chamber effects that shout down and threaten critique. At the same time, they actively stifle creativity and media evolution.

And I think major powerholders in the games industry are partly responsible of this in terms of being neutral and silent on this issue by not taking a public and visible stand. I.e. what Alexander states with

"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your spaces, you’re responsible for what spawns in the vacuum"

 

[Uncle Rupee]

major powerholders in the games industry are partly responsible of this in terms of being neutral and silent on this issue by not taking a public and visible stand.

No they're not. They're in no way connected to what happened, and many are likely completely unaware of any of the drama that has unfolded over the past couple of weeks. You're essentially blaming men (and women) in the industry for not publicly stating the obvious.

 

[jon bones]

I saw someone make the point that Anita's tweet:

"Not giving the benefit of the doubt to women targeted by harassment is a reaction rooted in sexist ideology. Its called victim blaming."

Should actually state:

"Not giving the benefit of the doubt to a person targeted by harassment is a reaction rooted in sexist ideology. Its called victim blaming."

What do you guys think?

40 pages in and we still have men trying to refocus this to us

 

[Lime]

No they're not. They're in no way connected to what happened, and many are likely completely unaware of any of the drama that has unfolded over the past couple of weeks. You're essentially blaming men (and women) in the industry for not publicly stating the obvious.

They definitely could have an impact if they spoke up, cf. Tim Schaefer. It should be obvious that key figures and companies hold power and cultural significance - so why not utilize this to state their advocacy for equality and non-discriminatory practices and attitudes?

 

[Uncle Rupee]

They definitely could have an impact if they spoke up, cf. Tim Schaefer. It should be obvious that key figures and companies hold power and cultural significance - so why not utilize this to state their advocacy for equality and non-discriminatory practices and attitudes?

There's a difference between saying "they could be making a difference about x" or "why not take a stand against x", and saying "these people are partly to blame for x".

 

[Cyrano]

And I think major powerholders in the games industry are partly responsible of this in terms of being neutral and silent on this issue by not taking a public and visible stand. I.e. what Alexander states with

"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your spaces, you’re responsible for what spawns in the vacuum"

Yeah, this sort of placating effect has created a larger problem that needed to be nipped in the bud a long, long time ago. Unfortunately it's now such a prevalent and recurring issue that we're dealing with a monstrous overgrowth and fixing it requires bringing in a team full of gardeners, so to speak.

 

[FloweryMarston]

They definitely could have an impact if they spoke up, cf. Tim Schaefer. It should be obvious that key figures and companies hold power and cultural significance - so why not utilize this to state their advocacy for equality and non-discriminatory practices and attitudes?

Take a look at this open letter signed by thousands of developers. And this is just from devs that are on twitter right now. And not all of them are aware of this. I think it's great message to have this.

https://medium.com/@andreaszecher/open-letter-to-the-gaming-community-df4511032e8a

 

[Lime]

There's a difference between saying they could be making a difference and "why not" say this or that, and saying "these people are partly to blame for x".

It depends on your viewpoint on moral responsibility of actions and non-actions. E.g. if you saw a guy drowning, it is consensually established in moral philosophy that you have a intuitive moral call to rescue the drowning person. Refusing to do anything could be argued to be complicit in letting the guy drown.

I definitely don't see a lot of the major power holders and figures in the games industry taking a simple stand of condemning misogyny or advocating equality and fair treatment.

Take a look at this open letter signed by thousands of developers. And this is just from devs that are on twitter right now. And not all of them are aware of this. I think it's great message to have this.

https://medium.com/@andreaszecher/open-letter-to-the-gaming-community-df4511032e8a

Yeah I saw this and signed it as well. It's admirable, it's a start, and it's great to see the issue getting recognized and taking a stand. I definitely love this!

It's interesting to note that the people who are familiar with the issue of combating discrimination in the last 10 years are sceptical of this move in terms of effects. It's nice and all, but I feel like each time there's an incident people make something benign to feel like they are helping but there isn't any action behind it - i.e. putting money or direct action where your mouth is will go *even* longer.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

It depends on your viewpoint on moral responsibility of actions and non-actions. E.g. if you saw a guy drowning, it is consensually established in moral philosophy that you have a intuitive moral call to rescue the drowning person. Refusing to do anything could be argued to be complicit in letting the guy drown.

We don't know what kind of social media policies companies have in place. It's possible that people have been told not to talk about hacking incidents as it could entice hackers to target them.

I definitely don't see a lot of the major power holders and figures in the games industry taking a simple stand of condemning misogyny or advocating equality and fair treatment.

Thankfully in recent years there have been numerous interviews where we've heard responses from many key individuals in the industry, where they've talked about the characters in their games, and who appears on the cover of the box, etc and typically the response has been that they support equality but that games are a business and the market determines that stuff. If the market reality is that games sell worse with a gay character or a woman on the cover (or whatever), guess what, big publishers aren't as likely to go there. It's about money and it's about what sells, and the issue isn't limited to the games industry.

 

[cubicle47b]

What would that accomplish? Nothing. Whom would that convince? No one. Humans react much better to being reasoned with than to being belittled.

Your posts are bizarre.

Agreed. I haven't read gaming news sites in years, but if I did, this attitude would drive me away even though I agree with them. I know it's hard, but if you want to educate people you actually have to try to understand and engage with them.

 

[Carcetti]

Take a look at this open letter signed by thousands of developers. And this is just from devs that are on twitter right now. And not all of them are aware of this. I think it's great message to have this.

https://medium.com/@andreaszecher/open-letter-to-the-gaming-community-df4511032e8a

IMHO that's new thread worthy because it's the first time devs are commenting this en masse.

 

[The Technomancer]

IMHO that's new thread worthy because it's the first time devs are commenting this en masse.

Its amazing how many developers aren't whining about Anita's attempts to "shame" or "censor" them. I mean, if her work and the work of people like her is as oppressive as many people say you'd think there would be more of a developer outcry

 

[Uncle Rupee]

Its amazing how many developers aren't whining about Anita's attempts to "shame" or "censor" them. I mean, if her work and the work of people like her is as oppressive as many people say you'd think there would be more of a developer outcry

Why? It's not like she has any power over them to change how they make games. Most likely the next GTA, Hitman, etc will be just as bad if not worse in regards to some of the stuff she shows in her videos.

 

[The Technomancer]

Why? It's not like she has any power over them to change how they make games. Most likely the next GTA, Hitman, etc will be just as bad if not worse in regards to some of the stuff she shows in her videos.

I'm being sarcastic. It seems like only "fans" are freaking out about how she's going to ruin their hobby

And since we already have devs commenting how her work has helped educate them on things they unthinkingly did I'd say her work is shaping up to be a success. I think this is what people are really worried about: not that she's forcing herself on the industry but that some creators might see her work and *gasp* agree with her

 

[Paskil]

Its amazing how many developers aren't whining about Anita's attempts to "shame" or "censor" them. I mean, if her work and the work of people like her is as oppressive as many people say you'd think there would be more of a developer outcry

They just don't realize that her videos, if allowed to stand unchallenged, herald the end of the industry as we know it. Not long now before the 1984 thought police come along to clean all the filth from their brains so they can make games fit for the masses.

Spoiler

obviously /s

 

[sephi22]

40 pages in and we still have men trying to refocus this to us

It was a girl on twitter who made this point, unless you're talking about me, in which case I'm not trying to refocus anything, just asking opinions on this from people who are more in touch with the situation than I am.

 

[Naminator]

IMHO that's new thread worthy because it's the first time devs are commenting this en masse.

It's about as thread worthy as developers signing a petition for "Peace on Earth".

No one in their right mind is against what the "petition" states, the obvious problem, that of course everyone will ignore is that this is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt at branding all gamers as bigoted, misogynist, harassers that need to be stopped at all costs.

As though we didn't have enough of those articles and discussions popping out lately(all of which are of course fair game and free to be discussed unlike other topics for some odd reason /s)

Its amazing how many developers aren't whining about Anita's attempts to "shame" or "censor" them. I mean, if her work and the work of people like her is as oppressive as many people say you'd think there would be more of a developer outcry

Golly jeee wizzzz, I wonder why that could be.............

 

[DoktorEvil]

Its amazing how many developers aren't whining about Anita's attempts to "shame" or "censor" them. I mean, if her work and the work of people like her is as oppressive as many people say you'd think there would be more of a developer outcry

Because developers have nothing to lose in signing initiatives like this and everything to gain since they aren't obligated to listen to a single word she proposes either. This is nothing more but blowing smoke. Show me that future games do this! Don't say something or sign something that should go without saying.

 

[Carcetti]

It's about as thread worthy as developers signing a petition for "Peace on Earth".

No one in their right mind is against what the "petition" states, the obvious problem, that of course everyone will ignore is that this is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt at branding all gamers as bigoted, misogynist, harassers that need to be stopped at all costs.

As though we didn't have enough of those articles and discussions popping out lately(all of which are of course fair game and free to be discussed unlike other topics for some odd reason /s)


Golly jeee wizzzz, I wonder why that could be.............

I can't tell if this is a joke post or not, but isn't that a bit paranoid? I mean taking this stance about harassment also means you can't negate people by simply calling them manchildren or neckbeards.

 

[Paskil]

It's about as thread worthy as developers signing a petition for "Peace on Earth".

No one in their right mind is against what the "petition" states, the obvious problem, that of course everyone will ignore is that this is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt at branding all gamers as bigoted, misogynist, harassers that need to be stopped at all costs.

As though we didn't have enough of those articles and discussions popping out lately(all of which are of course fair game and free to be discussed unlike other topics for some odd reason /s)


Golly jeee wizzzz, I wonder why that could be.............

Yeah, except one is relevant to gaming, the other isn't.

There are plenty of people, in this very thread, that stand against the petition. Because it will change their hobby, and stuff.

Don't like the topics? Ignore them.

I'm sure it's because they're afraid that the "feminazi's, SJWs, and White Knights" will lash out at them and ruin their career.

Spoiler

/s

 

[JMargaris]

I can't tell if this is a joke post or not, but isn't that a bit paranoid? I mean taking this stance about harassment also means you can't negate people by simply calling them manchildren or neckbeards.

Except that some of the people who signed that either use that language themselves or follow people who do without calling them out.

All this means is that people get to feel good about doing something that took literally 5 seconds and zero effort that they can immediately forget about.

To be fair I suspect 90%+ of the people signing that are great people, don't use that kind of language and don't hang out with people who do. But the other 10% aren't going to be calling out themselves and their friends.

Think of someone on Twitter who is really obnoxious and dismisses people by calling them nerds, virgins, etc. Those people either signed that list or some of their followers did. And they aren't getting called out.

It's meaningless. Just more "do as I say not as I do" nonsense for people who believe that the problem isn't their behavior, it's the behavior of those other guys. All the people who blab about how basement dwelling virgins are a bunch of losers are represented on that list. Either ton that list themselves or a bunch of their followers (who don't call them out) are. But that's not a problem. It's only the other people who say mean things about them that are the problem.

Boogie (youtube guy) has a similar petition that basically says "hey game devs stop making fun of us pls." How can these two things exist at the same time?

Here's my prediction: people will continue to make fun of dumb old smelly nerds in fedoras and people who signed this letter will still snicker at their jokes.

I'm happy to be proven wrong. Spoiler: that doesn't happen.

Edit: People from Badass Digest are unironically signing that. I mean come on. The mentality here is very clearly "I'm against hateful speech - at least when it's against me."

 

[besada]

No one in their right mind is against what the "petition" states, the obvious problem, that of course everyone will ignore is that this is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt at branding all gamers as bigoted, misogynist, harassers that need to be stopped at all costs.

What are you looking at, exactly? Because the petition I'm seeing isn't any sort of attack on anyone. It's very clear and explicit in what it wants:

We believe that everyone, no matter what gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion or disability has the right to play games, criticize games and make games without getting harassed or threatened. It is the diversity of our community that allows games to flourish.

If you see threats of violence or harm in comments on Steam, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook or reddit, please take a minute to report them on the respective sites.

If you see hateful, harassing speech, take a public stand against it and make the gaming community a more enjoyable space to be in.

Is there some part of that you disagree with?

 

[Fehyd]

There really isn't anything disagreeable with that petition just like there isn't anything disagreeable with the one boogie started

https://www.change.org/p/the-gaming...&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition

Basically pretty simple stuff.

 

[Enosh]

What are you looking at, exactly? Because the petition I'm seeing isn't any sort of attack on anyone. It's very clear and explicit in what it wants:

Is there some part of that you disagree with?

no, but given the events and comments made by devs and journalist on twitter, thumblr and articles I can't stop but wonder if they will actually do what this says or if next month I'll again be called a manchild nerd, a virgin, a neckbeard, a misogynist, a racist, someone worse than ISIS or any of the other insults thrown around the past few days just because I play games, because I'm male, because I'm white or because I don't agree with all their political views

 

[Weltall Zero]

Oh, those 'man-children'. When will they learn, eh?!

These 'I'm going to be totally obnoxious to show you how correct I am' articles really aren't helping anything to my mind. I'm just looking at a battlefield full of arseholes and I don't wish to be associated with either side.

I've seen plenty of obnoxious, name-calling, mud-slinging articles demonstrating how much "holier than thou" their sites are, but this isn't one of them; I felt it was entirely reasonable given the circumstances, and I can't help but agree with everything. It simply sounds as if the writer is sickened (much as I myself am) at those crazy bigots and wants to vent by saying "fuck you and fuck off". I would probably do the same if I had a site.

That said, I AM a bit tired of the "manchildren" insult. While it's totally warranted here, in general it has stopped meaning anything other than "people who don't conform to MY standards of maturity", which is in itself a very immature label to apply. In fact, I find this obsessive quest for the "maturity" holy grail that I've been seeing lately pretty childish in itself.

 

[APF]

IME the more immature you are the more defensive you are about protecting an image of your maturity. Personally I'm pretty confident in myself and where I'm at, I don't give a fuck about people thinking I'm immature because I play games or read comics or watch cartoons--who cares?

 

[FlyinJ]

Take a look at this open letter signed by thousands of developers. And this is just from devs that are on twitter right now. And not all of them are aware of this. I think it's great message to have this.

https://medium.com/@andreaszecher/open-letter-to-the-gaming-community-df4511032e8a

Wow, the MRA's developer blacklist GIF is going to be like 15 gigs soon.

 

[Fehyd]

Wow, the MRA's developer blacklist GIF is going to be like 15 gigs soon.

... really?

 

[besada]

no, but given the events and comments made by devs and journalist on twitter, thumblr and articles I can't stop but wonder if they will actually do what this says or if next month I'll again be called a manchild nerd, a virgin, a neckbeard, a misogynist, a racist, someone worse than ISIS or any of the other insults thrown around the past few days just because I play games, because I'm male, because I'm white or because I don't agree with all their political views

Can you show me where someone has specifically called you these things, or are you just assuming they're talking about you? I have to wonder because I am also cismale and white, and yet I don't feel I've been at all insulted, because I don't engage in the behavior they're discussing. As far as I know, you don't either, so I'm confused as to why you'd think they're talking about you?

 

[Mumei]

There really isn't anything disagreeable with that petition just like there isn't anything disagreeable with the one boogie started

https://www.change.org/p/the-gaming...&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition

Basically pretty simple stuff.

There is one disagreeable thing about it: While fine in the abstract, in context it reads as an attempt to reappropriate the issue of women and minorities being bullied out of gaming (or at least, participation in social spaces around gaming) by reactionaries within those communities into an issue of gamers being victims of bullying who are being labeled "neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots," which frankly isn't what is happening.

 

[Naminator]

What are you looking at, exactly? Because the petition I'm seeing isn't any sort of attack on anyone. It's very clear and explicit in what it wants:



Is there some part of that you disagree with?

Of course I don't disagree with what it states, I don't believe that any reasonable person would disagree. I'm just questioning the motivation behind this petition, but I guess that's just me being paranoid or something.......

I can't tell if this is a joke post or not, but isn't that a bit paranoid? I mean taking this stance about harassment also means you can't negate people by simply calling them manchildren or neckbeards.

I hope so, but I guess time will tell who are the hypocrites that are signing that petition.

Yeah, except one is relevant to gaming, the other isn't.

There are plenty of people, in this very thread, that stand against the petition. Because it will change their hobby, and stuff.

Don't like the topics? Ignore them.

I'm sure it's because they're afraid that the "feminazi's, SJWs, and White Knights" will lash out at them and ruin their career.

Spoiler

/s

Well you can feel free to quote those people, but I don't think they are against the petition due to it's content. More like these people are just simply unable to put themselves and this petition in a vacuum and ignore everything else that has been happening in the gaming world.

no, but given the events and comments made by devs and journalist on twitter, thumblr and articles I can't stop but wonder if they will actually do what this says or if next month I'll again be called a manchild nerd, a virgin, a neckbeard, a misogynist, a racist, someone worse than ISIS or any of the other insults thrown around the past few days just because I play games, because I'm male, because I'm white or because I don't agree with all their political views

^This.

 

[APF]

man i cant believe leigh alexander called my mom a virgin neckbeard thats just wrong how can you agree with that

 

[Delusibeta]

I can't help but feel that everyone involved has handled this brouhaha extremely badly.

I think this article gets to the nub of the issue. Explaining the concept of privilege to socially unaccepted white males results in logic errors. "Where's my privilege, then?" etc. I can also see how Anita Sarkeesian can turn into Jack Thompson Mk 2 in their eyes, and we all know how that went (rape and death threats aplenty, with a side order of doxxing and harassing phone calls, with the games writing industry being entirely against Thompson). I suppose we're also seeing the effects of social media in action, since back then said rape and death threats would mainly lie around in forums and IRC and would require doxxing the target in order to get them to notice them, whereas these days you just stick the name into Twitter, note the username and then send a Tweet that goes "@[target] [threat]".

On reflection, Leigh Alexander's article and subsequent concurrence by most of the games writing industry was precisely the wrong thing to do, as it's reinforced the "us vs them" narrative. Gamers who aren't the misogynistic neckbeard living in their mothers' basement stereotype peddled by such articles get offended, and we've got a bunch more people wading in.

Ultimately, though, both sides seems to have adopted a siege mentality, and hence I'd expect this to rumble on for at least the rest of this week.

 

[Oersted]

We are asking indie developers, AAA developers, and other folks to stop branding gamers as neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots.

What in the?

 

[Fehyd]

There is one disagreeable thing about it: While fine in the abstract, in context it reads as an attempt to reappropriate the issue of women and minorities being bullied out of gaming (or at least, participation in social spaces around gaming) by reactionaries within those communities into an issue of gamers being victims of bullying who are being labeled "neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots," which frankly isn't what is happening.

I think it's actually addressing a different topic now that I think about it. Namely stuff like the "describe a gamer in four words" stuff that some gaming journalists were taking part of on twitter. To say that women being forced out of gaming is an issue but harassing those who identify as gamers is not are not mutually exclusive.

It's probably less relevant to this thread than I realized, but I don't think it's a misappropriation where there have been some pretty egregious examples in the last few days.

 

[SmokyDave]

I've seen plenty of obnoxious, name-calling, mud-slinging articles demonstrating how much "holier than thou" their sites are, but this isn't one of them; I felt it was entirely reasonable given the circumstances, and I can't help but agree with everything. It simply sounds as if the writer is sickened (much as I myself am) at those crazy bigots and wants to vent by saying "fuck you and fuck off". I would probably do the same if I had a site.

I just feel like it's yet another piece that isn't actually addressing anybody, whilst telling us all about how 'gamers' have been misbehaving like the petulant children we all know they are. I kinda feel like decomposing stereotypes are being dug up and paraded around the town as the 'real face' of gamers.

Still, perhaps that is the case. Perhaps the old stereotypes were true and we shouldn't have buried them in the first place.

That said, I AM a bit tired of the "manchildren" insult. While it's totally warranted here, in general it has stopped meaning anything other than "people who don't conform to MY standards of maturity", which is in itself a very immature label to apply. In fact, I find this obsessive quest for the "maturity" holy grail that I've been seeing lately pretty childish in itself.

I like the existence of 'manchildren' as I feel like it's something of a sincerity-barometer. If someone can use it straight-faced and without a hint of irony, they're probably not as progressive as they think.

 

[Macmanus]

Sadly Anita being a figurehead for progressive social change also turns her into a lightning rod for senseless hate, as is often the case.

Also I feel like maybe I should use this opportunity to change up my avatar of over half a decade.

 

[staticneuron]

You stated yourself that context was irrelevant when it's applied as though these were actual people. But if we're not seeing human representations as anything other that a simulacrum of humanity, or as things, then context really doesn't mean anything. It's just things doing things to other things. It has no value. Narrative as a system only works when there's a component of humanity that the viewer or reader applies to the proceedings. You've argued that shouldn't exist or doesn't matter. And if it doesn't matter, then what you're seeing doesn't matter, so it's all interchangeable with pretty much anything.

Context within the world of the video game would make sense. Applying it to real life doesn't because there is no way alot of these fiction events can happen in real life and there will be now way people would root or be on the side of an assassin. You certainly wouldn't understand or know his motivations and most likely would judge it in passing and with the only perspective that makes sense to you. Your own perspective.

Narrative is only about the progression of the story and given the nature of games being interactive this can simply be defined by the premise and the goals.

No, it's not. It's about the fundamental difference of sexualized women used as killable or already dead set-dressing being the equivalent of enemies you kill. One is intrinsic to gameplay of that genre, one is not, so they are unequal. And then we got into how set-dressing is all equal regardless of its representation of people or object. Which it's not, or such representations of people in that manner wouldn't be used at all.

The game itself and/or the scene in question was just a jumping off point, not the focus of the discussion itself.

Yes, you could argue that. And I actually made that point in an earlier post. 2 similar but different wrongs don't make a right.


In Absolution, the only non-sexualized women I recall are Jade Nguyen and the little girl Victoria. So until this cook and gardener are running around in revealing thongs or skimpy PVC catsuits, I don't think "equal" is the word you wanna go for in a discussion regarding the needless sexualization of NPCs that don't drive plot being equal to a functional non-sexualized gameplay element, even if it's just perpetuating another troubling game trend that has been talked up by PLENTY of people.

Yes... so the strippers located in the strip club are dressed in thongs. And the Cops in police uniforms and the chef in a... I really don't need to continue do I? Context is important. And the people you kill and what they are wearing directly correlates to their job and what they are doing at the time.

If your question is about the "Saints" Then it is also boiled down to what they are and who they represent. The are agents of the ICA hence the church similarities and chances they are wearing catsuits because a Nuns frock might be a little bit to restrictive in movement. Given the type of assassins they are it wouldn't make sense for them to be in armor either, similar to the main character that you play.

It's sometimes not a conscious choice. I'm shit at these games (mostly from lack of playing them) and would probably shoot one of them totally by accident. And if I did, that scene compels me to treat it as though nothing happened and move on out of necessity, sometimes with her body in my direct field of vision. At best, I feel bad about a hit to my score, not the actual impact of what happened. When that's not going to be my reaction whatsoever.

Again, one of many reasons I don't play these games as a general rule.

You are in the roles of a killer. You don't fail the game when you kill other innocent males so why would you expect something different if they were females? And the game is very slow and methodical, I doubt even if you were crap at the game that you would accidentally "shoot" somebody. The actions you do in the game are with purpose. So if you have an issue with killings a particular person then... "don't". Kill someone by accident? Then restart the level until you can find a way to not kill the person. Hitman Absolution was all about choice. And your actions reflect you as a gamer.

Can you show me where someone has specifically called you these things, or are you just assuming they're talking about you? I have to wonder because I am also cismale and white, and yet I don't feel I've been at all insulted, because I don't engage in the behavior they're discussing. As far as I know, you don't either, so I'm confused as to why you'd think they're talking about you?

There is one disagreeable thing about it: While fine in the abstract, in context it reads as an attempt to reappropriate the issue of women and minorities being bullied out of gaming (or at least, participation in social spaces around gaming) by reactionaries within those communities into an issue of gamers being victims of bullying who are being labeled "neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots," which frankly isn't what is happening.

I am not sure you guys have noticed but there were a ton of articles released around the same time (including the Leigh Alexander thread that was just shut down) that had very sweeping generalizations of gamers as a whole. And a few devs chimed in on Twitter. This was all in response to that Zoe quinn nonsense, which frankly, I didn't care and thought that these gamers needed something better to do..... but giving the timing of the articles and the complaints about these conspiracy theories it made me take another look. It was kinda hard to miss.

I just feel like it's yet another piece that isn't actually addressing anybody, whilst telling us all about how 'gamers' have been misbehaving like the petulant children we all know they are. I kinda feel like decomposing stereotypes are being dug up and paraded around the town as the 'real face' of gamers.

Still, perhaps that is the case. Perhaps the old stereotypes were true and we shouldn't have buried them in the first place.


I like the existence of 'manchildren' as I feel like it's something of a sincerity-barometer. If someone can use it straight-faced and without a hint of irony, they're probably not as progressive as they think.

I actually like these blanket generalizations. It helps me attach very specific names to jurno's that hold this belief which makes them easier to ignore. The real world is depressing enough, I don't find the need to read and hear all this negativity when I just want to get information on games.

 

[Terrell]

I just feel like it's yet another piece that isn't actually addressing anybody, whilst telling us all about how 'gamers' have been misbehaving like the petulant children we all know they are. I kinda feel like decomposing stereotypes are being dug up and paraded around the town as the 'real face' of gamers.

Still, perhaps that is the case. Perhaps the old stereotypes were true and we shouldn't have buried them in the first place.

Not addressing anyone? Reread the first 3 paragraphs, it rather clearly delineated who is being addressed. That you took it to mean gamers in general is... well, telling.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

We are asking indie developers, AAA developers, and other folks to stop branding gamers as neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots.

If you've never posted a hateful, sexist, or LGBT-bashing tirade for the sake of keeping gaming a good ole boys club, this insult does not apply to you. I don't see how I can be personally offended by a string of insults directed at people engaging in very specific kind of behavior. If you find yourself frequently sending harassing tweets to other people and are then mortified that your integrity is called into question, perhaps pulling your head out of your ass would be more useful than a petition.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

If you've never posted a hateful, sexist, or LGBT-bashing tirade for the sake of keeping gaming a good ole boys club, this insult does not apply to you. I don't see how I can be personally offended by a string of insults directed at people engaging in very specific kind of behavior. If you find yourself frequently sending harassing tweets to other people and are then mortified that your integrity is called into question, perhaps pulling your head out of your ass would be more useful than a petition.

People don't tend to feel that the insults are directed at people engaging in a very specific kind of behavior. That's the problem with these insults. Go read the Leigh Alexander article again. Go look at the gamers in four words hashtag.

 

[besada]

People don't tend to feel that the insults are directed at people engaging in a very specific kind of behavior. That's the problem with these insults. Go read the Leigh Alexander article again. Go look at the gamers in four words hashtag.

I read the Alexander article and it was pretty clear to me she wasn't talking about me, because I fit none of her descriptors.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I read the Alexander article and it was pretty clear to me she wasn't talking about me, because I fit none of her descriptors.

I don't fit her descriptors either. Except for the fact that I'm a gamer. Which is what the article was about.

It's like an article about how Muslims are violent terrorists. Well this article certainly isn't about me, says the Muslim reading it, because I'm not a violent terrorist. Except no Muslim is going to read the article and have that reaction.

 

[The Technomancer]

I read the Alexander article and it was pretty clear to me she wasn't talking about me, because I fit none of her descriptors.

Yeah a lot of people read that she was criticizing a subset of "gamers" gaming culture and lost their shit because they self-identified as a gamer and thought she was talking about them. Which is on her head for being unclear, really, the article was screwed up in that respect, but also on a lot of the readers for not understanding the content, which I didn't find extroardinarily difficult or anything, like you describe

 

[antigoon]

I can't help but feel that everyone involved has handled this brouhaha extremely badly.

I think this article gets to the nub of the issue. Explaining the concept of privilege to socially unaccepted white males results in logic errors. "Where's my privilege, then?" etc. I can also see how Anita Sarkeesian can turn into Jack Thompson Mk 2 in their eyes, and we all know how that went (rape and death threats aplenty, with a side order of doxxing and harassing phone calls, with the games writing industry being entirely against Thompson). I suppose we're also seeing the effects of social media in action, since back then said rape and death threats would mainly lie around in forums and IRC and would require doxxing the target in order to get them to notice them, whereas these days you just stick the name into Twitter, note the username and then send a Tweet that goes "@[target] [threat]".

On reflection, Leigh Alexander's article and subsequent concurrence by most of the games writing industry was precisely the wrong thing to do, as it's reinforced the "us vs them" narrative. Gamers who aren't the misogynistic neckbeard living in their mothers' basement stereotype peddled by such articles get offended, and we've got a bunch more people wading in.

Ultimately, though, both sides seems to have adopted a siege mentality, and hence I'd expect this to rumble on for at least the rest of this week.

While I think Leigh Alexander's article is completely valid (and I don't take offense to it because she clearly wasn't talking about me or people like me), the post you linked is pretty interesting and I think it gets to the root of a lot of these angry people's issues.

 

[Kelthink]

I don't fit her descriptors either. Except for the fact that I'm a gamer. Which is what the article was about.

Can't you just be somebody who likes video games?

 

[The Technomancer]

While I think Leigh Alexander's article is completely valid (and I don't take offense to it because she clearly wasn't talking about me or people like me), the post you linked is pretty interesting and I think it gets to the root of a lot of these angry people's issues.

The actual points of Alexander's article I found myself either agreeing with or at least acknowledging, but the rhetoric was downright awful from an educational perspective.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Can't you just be somebody who likes video games?

That's what a gamer is. That's why Leigh Alexander's article was so goddamn stupid: she's either using the word in the way that most people use it, in which case her article is insulting, or she's using the word in a totally idiosyncratic way that she doesn't bother to explain, in which case her article is needlessly provocative.