• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Game Journalist Refuse To Review Shadowrun Attitude because it has a Sexy Woman On The Cover, Gets Mocked By Female Gamers On Twitter

The Chairman

The Chairman

Member
PC Gamer, PocketGamer, and board game reviewer Matt Thrower got triggered hard when he saw the cover of Shadowrun Attitude because it has a sexy woman on the cover and also because there is "no shirtless men on any side of the box", so he threatened to not review it for that reason lol




So female gamers told him what they think about his decision.








At this point i'm convinced that one of the requirements to be a Game Journalist is to be afraid of the female body.
 
Doom85

Doom85

Member
Okay? I mean, I guess it's silly, but the dude isn't saying the game shouldn't be made or anything like that, he just doesn't want to review himself for that. For fuck's sake, is that really even an issue? James Rolfe didn't want to review the Ghostbusters reboot, and while I felt one shouldn't judge a movie until they've actually seen it, I still respect his right to feel that way. Same thing here even if I feel the reviewer is being a bit silly.

Also, if he's admitting that he likely couldn't give a fair review to the game due to this, then wouldn't actually not reviewing the game be the better option over giving a review that will likely be biased against the game from the get-go? You know, just saying.
 
R

Ryllix_

Member
Doom85 said:
Okay? I mean, I guess it's silly, but the dude isn't saying the game shouldn't be made or anything like that, he just doesn't want to review himself for that. For fuck's sake, is that really even an issue? James Rolfe didn't want to review the Ghostbusters reboot, and while I felt one shouldn't judge a movie until they've actually seen it, I still respect his right to feel that way. Same thing here even if I feel the reviewer is being a bit silly.

Also, if he's admitting that he likely couldn't give a fair review to the game due to this, then wouldn't actually not reviewing the game be the better option over giving a review that will likely be biased against the game from the get-go? You know, just saying.
Click to expand...
If he is incapable of being unbiased then he is in the wrong line of business and should find another job.
 
Whitesnake

Whitesnake

Banned
Doom85 said:
Okay? I mean, I guess it's silly, but the dude isn't saying the game shouldn't be made or anything like that, he just doesn't want to review himself for that. For fuck's sake, is that really even an issue? James Rolfe didn't want to review the Ghostbusters reboot, and while I felt one shouldn't judge a movie until they've actually seen it, I still respect his right to feel that way. Same thing here even if I feel the reviewer is being a bit silly.

Also, if he's admitting that he likely couldn't give a fair review to the game due to this, then wouldn't actually not reviewing the game be the better option over giving a review that will likely be biased against the game from the get-go? You know, just saying.
Click to expand...

James Rolfe decided not to watch the Ghostbusters reboot because he kmew from all of the marketing, as well as the fact that they were making a Ghostbusters reboot at all, that it was going be a cynically-made pandering mess that didn’t live up to the original. And he was right.

This guy is refusing to review this because boobs = bad.
 
Doom85

Doom85

Member
Whitesnake said:
James Rolfe decided not to watch the Ghostbusters reboot because he kmew from all of the marketing, as well as the fact that they were making a Ghostbusters reboot at all, that it was going be a cynically-made pandering mess that didn’t live up to the original. And he was right.

This guy is refusing to review this because boobs = bad.
Click to expand...

Judging something you haven't seen is still that. You don't know how something is until you've actually seen it. If one doesn't want to see something, fair enough, but I have zero patience for people who act like they "know" the quality of something they haven't even seen.

Also, "a cynically-made pandering mess that didn’t live up to the original" actually fairly describes how I felt about Ghostbusters 2 and I went into that one expecting to enjoy it, so again don't make assumptions about something you haven't seen.
 
Doom85

Doom85

Member
Abriael_GN said:
Yes, it is.

It's normalizing being an asshole.
Click to expand...

Okay, you can think he's silly or even dumb, but an asshole? The dude doesn't directly attack the developers or people who are enjoying the game. He, DEAR GOD, doesn't want to play this sort of game. Big whoop. The one poster who says maybe he should switch jobs, okay fair enough although game reviewers don't usually review all video game releases anyway since there's really not a realistic way to do so (hence for example why game magazines have quite a few reviewers on staff), but calling him an asshole is kinda ridiculous.
 
Hero Of Gallowmere

Hero Of Gallowmere

Member
Oh boy another amazing opportunity to post this


Cs2swxq.jpg
 
DESTROYA

DESTROYA

Member
Even if you do have that attitude why bother posting in Twitter anyway...virtue signal much.
Isn’t this game like 7-8 years old? Why review in now.
 
Nymphae

Nymphae

Banned
What I find funny is that it's apparently not even about the objectification with this idiot, because it would have been fine if there was a shirtless guy as well on a side of the box (he checked them all)

Tempted just to bypass that one completely, not give it any oxygen. But I guess that's not really doing my job as a reviewer
Click to expand...

Depends on how you look at it these days I guess.
 
Abriael_GN

Abriael_GN

RSI Employee of the Year
Doom85 said:
Okay, you can think he's silly or even dumb, but an asshole? The dude doesn't directly attack the developers or people who are enjoying the game.
Click to expand...

One: Yes, it's a direct attack on the developer AND on those who enjoy that kind of imagery. If you can't see it, the joke is on you.

Two: It's a normalization of the idea that a display of cleavage is somehow bad unless immediately accompanied by a display of male chest, which is as disingenuous and damaging as it can be to artistic expression. Art isn't and shouldn't be about checking boxes to please everyone.

Three: the fact that he felt the need to use his platform (luckily very limited since this is actually some "Mr. No One Relevant with an excessively high opinion of his own importance") to try and publicly shame the developers and artists nails the definition of "asshole" pretty much to a T.
 
Last edited:
Whitesnake

Whitesnake

Banned
Doom85 said:
Judging something you haven't seen is still that. You don't know how something is until you've actually seen it. If one doesn't want to see something, fair enough, but I have zero patience for people who act like they "know" the quality of something they haven't even seen.

Also, "a cynically-made pandering mess that didn’t live up to the original" actually fairly describes how I felt about Ghostbusters 2 and I went into that one expecting to enjoy it, so again don't make assumptions about something you haven't seen.
Click to expand...

What is your point?

You’re saying that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but you also want to post apologia for a man who quite literally judged this tabletop game by its cover.

There was a logical reasoning to James Rolfe’s opinion on Ghostbusters 2016. Even if you outright disagree with him, he makes his points and views clear enough that you can understand why he wouldn’t want to watch it. He didn’t try to say that it was going to be bad or that he already he hated it, and reiterated multiple times that he could be wrong. He just gave a multitude of reasons as to why he personally didn’t want to go see it.

I have no idea why this person hates boobs so much. He seems to be under the impression that boobs on a cover is inherently a bad thing, and that the view that bokbs are bad is a moral truth that everyone should understand. He is basing his entire view of the game on that specific premise, and not any other factor. He seems to be quite hostile toward the game because it has boobs on it.

Do not pretend these situation are analogous.
 
Havoc2049

Havoc2049

Member
DESTROYA said:
Even if you do have that attitude why bother posting in Twitter anyway...virtue signal much.
Isn’t this game like 7-8 years old? Why review in now.
Click to expand...
Ya, this an expansion for the 4th Edition Shadowrun rule set, released in 2011. The 6th Edition rule set was just released this year. The dude really is a bad games journalist and isn’t doing his job as a reviewer. 🤣
 
A

Acidizer

Banned
Oh dear, how pathetic though I suspect this has more to do with attention seeking than actual scruples.

Reminds me of politicians who just say/do whatever it takes to stay relevant and gain brownie points in whatever way it takes.

Wonder what "sexy" games he has hypocritically reviewed in the past.

"not give it any oxygen" heh. Imbecile.
 
Last edited:
G

Gargus

Banned
Sounds like he is just trying to score points is all by acting high and mighty. But it isnt his fault, the hot and trendy thing to do in our society right now is use adjectives like "strong, powerful, independent" when referring to women. You want upvotes and likes then you go way out of your way to praise women and treat them as if they are special, unique, snowflakes oh and dont forget strong. You're not allowed to mention a woman without saying she is strong. This guy is just a dipshit trying to cash in on a popular societal trend is all.

Dont get me wrong, I like women but I'll never prop one up and heaps praise on her just for having a vagina, that wouldn't be very equal of me. I base things on what a person does, not their tits or lack thereof.

But there is nothing wrong with looking sexified. That's what people want. Men want to see and or play as a sexy chic because they like them and they want the tough awesome to play as because they want to be one. Women want to see and play as a sexy chic because they want to be one, and want a tough and cool guy to look at. We play games to escape reality and in reality I am not a sexy guy and sexy chics dont want me. I dont want to play a game where everyone I see in the game looks like the people I see at aldi when I go grocery shopping. It's the same reason I want to see aliens and kill monsters, because that stuff doesn't happen to me.

Everyone is sexualized somehow and it isnt a bad thing. I say sexualize women more, and men and trans people. Let all be equals instead of saying we want to be equal but expect special treatment and considerations and be upset when are treated "just like everyone else" (I'm looking at you most black people, gays, and women). Men and women are sexualized and its ok.
 
Bkdk

Bkdk

Member
This idiot simply don’t understand that many female gamers are actually hoping for a lot more sexualized female characters so the can gain fame by cosplaying them, male gamers aren’t the only group who like physically attractive girl characters.
 
daveonezero

daveonezero

Banned
It's like they need inanimate art women to consent to being put on the cover. No consent then its rape.
On top of that these people are probably using porn in high quantities.
 
D

Deleted member 471617

Unconfirmed Member
Just commented on this idiot on Twitter. Seriously, nudity, sex, being attracted to the opposite sex is how we all got here. Matt isn't being professional whatsoever and doesn't deserve the job that he has. To not review a game based on the cover is plain and simple, fucking bullshit. People need to grow the fuck up.
 
Fbh

Fbh

Member
Dude is entitled to his opinion but IMO this is the sort of stuff that should make any publication that wants to appear profesional and unbiased consider cutting ties with him

Doom85 said:
Okay? I mean, I guess it's silly, but the dude isn't saying the game shouldn't be made or anything like that, he just doesn't want to review himself for that. For fuck's sake, is that really even an issue? James Rolfe didn't want to review the Ghostbusters reboot, and while I felt one shouldn't judge a movie until they've actually seen it, I still respect his right to feel that way. Same thing here even if I feel the reviewer is being a bit silly.

Also, if he's admitting that he likely couldn't give a fair review to the game due to this, then wouldn't actually not reviewing the game be the better option over giving a review that will likely be biased against the game from the get-go? You know, just saying.
Click to expand...

Going back to what I said above I think the key difference is that James Rolfe uploads his content to his own channel where people go specifically to watch his content or hear his personal take on stuff.

IMO if you are writing for a publication you should try to act more professional and unbiased. Same way I act differently when selling something on my own as a private individual than how I acted when I worked in retail and was interacting with a customer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Rolling Stone: They Fought for Diversity in Gaming. Then the Abuse Began
2 3
142
8K
AeonGaidenRaiden replied
The all encompassing character looks discussion thread....
39
4K
Vaelka replied
The negative stigma of video gaming in pop culture and culture in general ... Gamer, A.K.A. the ‘loser’.
2
89
6K
jono51 replied
UO Writer:"Women dont call themselves "gamer" because its sexist, Women constantly stalked by men epidemic, Women should lead gaming communities."
2 3 4
160
10K
Raven117 replied
  • Locked
Cheesy Opinion : Gaming is seen as for children because we still act and operate in an immature manner
2
64
5K
subsmoke replied
Top Bottom