Support NeoGAF

[Big-E]

Anyone who thinks there are only two sides is being ignorant.

Right now this thread is pretty much being waged by two sides. There are other sides who understand but they are not engaged in the attack. One side feels that they do not want to pay money for a game which will directly benefit as certain bigot to continue his spread of hate while the other thinks that doing that is retarded because its just his opinion and that won't someone think of poor Chair and all their work. These are the main sides going at it here and one side is ignorant.

 

[Yoritomo]

I haven't purchased that, either, but I've never been a huge P&C adventure fan.

Secret of Monkey Island
Loom
The Dig
Advent Rising
Shadow Complex

I think that's the extent of his involvement in gaming thus far.

 

[jay]

It's 33 pages, and thank you for the warm welcome.



The portion of your proceeds going to Card by buying this game is going to be a lot less than the portion of an investment that would go towards alcohol/tobacco/oil etc. when buying into a managed fund.

Boycotting over a sliver of a penny out of spite when asking for acceptance seems odd to me.

This doesn't work on multiple levels. Firstly a lot of people don't have a managed fund and so it's an irrelevant argument. Secondly, you're assuming all political issues carry equal importance to people.

 

[simpleton]

Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here.

 

[commish]

I couldn't care less.

 

[commish]

Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here.

Alrighty then.

 

[Yoritomo]

Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here.

This stuff will make you a goddamned Sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me.

 

[soldat7]

Only one side is being ignorant.

Rational discourse is futile with topics such as this one.

 

[HiResDes]

Right now this thread is pretty much being waged by two sides. There are other sides who understand but they are not engaged in the attack. One side feels that they do not want to pay money for a game which will directly benefit as certain bigot to continue his spread of hate while the other thinks that doing that is retarded because its just his opinion and that won't someone think of poor Chair and all their work. These are the main sides going at it here and one side is ignorant.

I for one think that both sides pose arguments that are perfectly reasonable, well maybe not the way you just explained them, but overall.

 

[Cheesemeister]

This doesn't work on multiple levels. Firstly a lot of people don't have a managed fund and so it's an irrelevant argument. Secondly, you're assuming all political issues carry equal importance to people.

It was merely an example pointing out that your money goes places you don't intend for it to go. Pardon any generalizations, but... Buying Japanese-made video games? There may be some sexists or xenophobes who worked on them. Watching movies? Those involved in the productions may contribute to other causes you oppose. Shopping at the regular grocery store? It likely carries meat.

If you knew everything about everyone who contributes to commerce, you may wind up boycotting everything.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

It was merely an example pointing out that your money goes places you don't intend for it to go. Pardon any generalizations, but... Buying Japanese-made video games? There may be some sexists or xenophobes who worked on them. Watching movies? Those involved in the productions may contribute to other causes you oppose. Shopping at the regular grocery store? It likely carries meat.

If you knew everything about everyone who contributes to media, you may wind up boycotting everything.

But I know this.

 

[jay]

It was merely an example pointing out that your money goes places you don't intend for it to go. Pardon any generalizations, but... Buying Japanese-made video games? There may be some sexists or xenophobes who worked on them. Watching movies? Those involved in the productions may contribute to other causes you oppose. Shopping at the regular grocery store? It likely carries meat.

If you knew everything about everyone who contributes to media, you may wind up boycotting everything.

Could you please at least read the thread from where you came in to now?

Maybe you did and I'm being a dick. At some point there is an arbitrary line where people are rich enough and famous enough that their opinions focused into political actions become relevant to a given person.

 

[Odrion]

Secret of Monkey Island
Loom
The Dig
Advent Rising
Shadow Complex

I think that's the extent of his involvement in gaming thus far.

That's funny, I want to look for people with Monkey Island avatars who are boycotting this.

 

[soldat7]

If you knew everything about everyone who contributes to commerce, you may wind up boycotting everything.

If you boycott Kevin Bacon, would you then boycott humanity?

 

[Big-E]

I for one think that both sides pose arguments that are perfectly reasonable, well maybe not the way you just explained them, but overall.

Only one side is attacking a perfectly valid position. Not once has anyone from the so called "boycott" camp has attacked anyone for buying the product. This thread was to inform this forum of a potential conflict and it did that yet somehow some people feel the need to call people who refuse to pay a 15 dollar optional luxury item names.

 

[KHarvey16]

It was merely an example pointing out that your money goes places you don't intend for it to go. Pardon any generalizations, but... Buying Japanese-made video games? There may be some sexists or xenophobes who worked on them. Watching movies? Those involved in the productions may contribute to other causes you oppose. Shopping at the regular grocery store? It likely carries meat.

If you knew everything about everyone who contributes to commerce, you may wind up boycotting everything.

The difference is we know for sure about this one and we can make the decision to not support it. It's fine to not come to that same decision but don't deny that there's reasonable cause to discuss the issue.

 

[minus_273]

Obama doesn't make law; Congress does. Oh, and gay couples in Massachusetts can file their taxes jointly on a state level - so the marriage is certainly very real.

BTW, don't take the clarifications personally. I love we're having this conversation and don't want you to feel as if I'm targeting you.

obama is the president and leader of a party with a super majority in congress. People should be targeting lawmakers not gamemakers.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Christian Nutt at Gamasutra wrote an opinion piece on it (and this thread) today.

I thought it was good of Nutt to do so. I also liked that Peter David, the writer for Shadow Complex, the game, chimed in with an opinion on the article/controversy and that another fellow, Russell Carroll, stepped in to respond with a bit I highly agree with.

Apologies if GAF/Christian Nutt/Russell Carrol/Peter David have a problem with a little bit of cross-posting...I just thought Nutt, Carroll, and David altogether presented the situation in a way I find more useful than just about anything that has occurred in this very thread.

A society that embraces free expression depends on an unimpeded exchange of ideas.

The disconnect comes from those people who believe that boycotts are likewise a form of free expression. They're not. Boycotts are the opposite: They are designed to be punitive. To hurt someone financially. The message it sends is, "I dislike what you have to say and therefore am going to strike back at you in order to punish you for saying it." It has nothing to do with attacking the things the person says; it's about attacking the person.

That is antithetical to the notion of a free society because it promotes a chilling effect. It's the equivalent of Archie Bunker growling, "Stifle yerself," because the message it sends is, "If you say something I don't like, I'm going to find a way to hurt you." Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Boycotts have nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with trying to give the other guy a financial bloody nose.

Do people have a "right" to do it? Of course. No one is saying they don't have that right. What's at issue is whether they SHOULD do something. I CAN wear a Speedo to the community pool; trust me, though, I really shouldn't.

What's the end game here? To try and send a message to as many sources as possible that if they hire Orson Scott Card to work for them, they're going to take a financial hit? To put Card out of business? To make sure that someone is going to face financial ruin because he has opinions that differ from yours?

That is intolerant. It's inelegant. It's cheap and vicious and small-minded.

And also be aware that I've dealt with this any number of times coming from the other direction. If you think I haven't had threats of boycott from people who want to take me down precisely because I've been openly supportive of gay rights, then you are kidding yourself. Gay fans were overjoyed about my portraying Shatterstar and Rictor as an openly gay couple in the Marvel Comics series "X-Factor." But what if I had said to myself, "Hmmm. This is going to piss off a lot of people. I could wind up taking a financial hit over this. Probably it would be best if I just stayed away from such a hot-button issue." For that matter, what if anti-gay forces organized boycotts that hurt Marvel and Marvel management said, "Okay, that's it; no more stories having anything to do with gays or gay rights." Supporters of those causes would likely decry Marvel as being cowardly and knuckling under to financial pressure from the exact same tactics that are being called for here.

So by extension, if Orson Scott Card refuses to knuckle under to scare tactics, then he's brave and noble for holding to his principles.

And you're okay with that?

How is instilling fear of financial ruin conducive to a free society and intellectual progress? Especially when you're supporting an attitude that, when it comes from the other direction, can potentially kneecap support for the very causes you hold dear?

PAD

It seems to me that much of the division we have in the country is because we don't respect people. I'm all for disagreeing on issues and having respectful discussion. However, I'm convinced you cannot have a respectful discussion though if you cannot separate a person from their opinions. If you hate what someone says or does, and thereby hate the person, the only place that can go is to fighting.

Instead of hating people, the key is to care for the people you disagree with (MLK). Caring for the person you disagree with the only way to actually discuss what you disagree about and to progress. We talk about respectful debate and working together, but it cannot happen if you look at what someone does and respond with "because you did that you are evil." In order for human beings to progress the response has to be "though I respect you and your right to act, this action I believe is not right, let's talk about this action/opinion/issue." Not approaching a subject with care and respect for the individual is the foundation of every war that has ever occured.

So what I'm getting at is...boycotting a game because "I hate Orson Scott Card" is not a useful approach. It is demonizing and creating battle lines. It leads to conflict and hatred, and makes the person instead of thier action the issue, it puts the focus on the wrong thing.
Boycotting a game because "I disagree with these actions, and I believe supporting the game is supporting the actions" brings the discussion to where it should be, on the action, on the actual issue, instead of making the person the issue (which is simply a personal assault). While attacking people might make us feel good, and may make for great ratings, it's pulling America apart.

We could use a lot more discussion about actual issues in this country, and we would benefit from spending a lot less time bashing and demonizing people for having opinions we disagree with.

The above quotes come from the comments section below the body of text of the Nutt opinion piece hosted on Gamasutra linked to here.

 

[Odrion]

Also, if you support the Palestinians then you should know that Gabe Newell donates a lot of money to Likud. All of my steam purchases. ;_;

If you boycott Kevin Bacon, would you then boycott humanity?

Jesus, I think you may have found the solution.

 

[jay]

obama is the president and leader of a party with a super majority in congress. People should be targeting lawmakers not gamemakers.

How do you know they aren't? If they are does that mean you grant permission to target other groups as well, or are they only allowed to target lawmakers and not high profile campaigners?

 

[Cheesemeister]

Could you please at least read the thread from where you came in to now?

If you don't want me to state my opinion, please just say so. Far be it for me to repeat something already stated that you don't want to hear.

 

[HiResDes]

I for one think that both sides pose arguments that are perfectly reasonable, well maybe not the way you just explained them, but overall.

Only one side is attacking a perfectly valid position. Not once has anyone from the so called "boycott" camp has attacked anyone for buying the product. This thread was to inform this forum of a potential conflict and it did that yet somehow some people feel the need to call people who refuse to pay a 15 dollar optional luxury item names.

So what side do I fall onto, since you put it like that, the ignorant or informed?

 

[Sneds]

The quote by Peter David seems pretty ridiculous to me. To boycott something is just to choose not to buy something. The way he words it, any non-purchase is therefore a hindrance on free artistic expression.

So am I right in thinking that Peter David would have a problem with someone not buying a t-shirt from a white supremacy rock group because of the band's lyrics? Please tell me if I've misunderstood his position.

 

[jay]

So would Peter David shop at a Whites Only store if it sold good products?

 

[Big-E]

So what side do I fall onto, since you put it like that, the ignorant or informed?

Spoiler

I don't know how about you go get your shine box and shine my shoes? Kidding

I too can see reasons for buying the game and can respect that. What I don't respect is the vocal group here who is attacking decent posters in this thread for a decision which is entirely there's.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Christian Nutt at Gamasutra wrote an opinion piece on it (and this thread) today.

Hey there's no need for name calling...

 

[KHarvey16]

Peter David and Russel Carrol: wrong. Those are laughable.

 

[ZZMitch]

Only one side is attacking a perfectly valid position in my opinion. Not once has anyone from the so called "boycott" camp has attacked anyone for buying the product. This thread was to inform this forum of a potential conflict and it did that yet somehow some people feel the need to call people who refuse to pay a 15 dollar optional luxury item names.

Fixed

 

[commish]

Fixed

Why do people do this... no one believes that everything they type down is a rule of nature. NO SHIT IT'S HIS/HER OPINION.

 

[Big-E]

Fixed

That's awesome. Words I wrote are my own opinion. I am sure no one would have guessed. Please continue to add to this discussion.

 

[seat]

Only one side is attacking a perfectly valid position. Not once has anyone from the so called "boycott" camp has attacked anyone for buying the product. This thread was to inform this forum of a potential conflict and it did that yet somehow some people feel the need to call people who refuse to pay a 15 dollar optional luxury item names.

I think, in part, we have a poorly-worded OP to thank for some of the ignorance in this thread. The OP fails to bring up that OSC campaigns against gay rights, and instead implies that the author just writes crazy rantings about his thoughts on homosexuality. The OP also implies the collective "we"should boycott the game. That wording does more than just draw attention to certain information.

OP was well-intended, just... poorly executed.

 

[Ogrekiller]

The quote by Peter David seems pretty ridiculous to me. To boycott something is just to choose not to buy something. The way he words it, any non-purchase is therefore a hindrance on free artistic expression.

So am I right in thinking that Peter David would have a problem with someone not buying a t-shirt from a white supremacy rock group because of the band's lyrics? Please tell me if I've misunderstood his position.

He's having a problem is because people are boycotting his goods because of Card.

In this case he would be the small shipping company who is shipping those shirts because they happened to be good friends with one of the band members.

Then people stop using his shipping service because he shipped those shirts.

Then people start boycotting the shipping company's parent company because the shipping company shipped those shirts.

 

[Yackie]

Peter David and Russell Carroll quotes

These are not good arguments, its not about causing financial ruin. Its about not supporting bigotry.

 

[water_wendi]

Fixed in my opinion

Fixed in my opinion.

 

[Vinci]

Why do people do this... no one believes that everything they type down is a rule of nature. NO SHIT IT'S HIS/HER OPINION.

I notice how often I put 'IMO' in posts as some sort of fail-safe these days. Seems ridiculous that anyone should have to.

 

[commish]

I notice how often I put 'IMO' in posts as some sort of fail-safe these days. Seems ridiculous that anyone should have to.

Sometimes I do it too, but I really don't know why I do it.

 

[Odrion]

Do we really need to use analogies? Is the situation that abstract?

 

[woodypop]

The quote by Peter David seems pretty ridiculous to me. To boycott something is just to choose not to buy something. The way he words it, any non-purchase is therefore a hindrance on free artistic expression.

Yeah, I'm a little puzzled by some of his logic, too.

Also, I don't believe giving a guy a "financial bloody nose" is necessarily a bad thing, especially if those finances were going toward a detrimental goal (regardless of whether or not it's Card).

 

[Coins]

Thats an excellent article at Gamasutra. Of course Peter David is going to say what he said. He wrote the story! He is entitled to his opinion as well. I dont agree, but thats alright. Ill even keep buying his awesome comic books.

 

[Sneds]

He's having a problem is because people are boycotting his goods because of Card.

In this case he would be the small shipping company who is shipping those shirts because they happened to be good friends with one of the band members.

Then people stop using his shipping service because he shipped those shirts.

Then people start boycotting the shipping company's parent company because the shipping company shipped those shirts.

Does your analogy work though? Because if I continued to use the shipping company, the money isn't going to the racist band. Whereas if I buy Shadow Complex, the money is going to Card and therefore, the financing of anti-gay campaigns.

Edit: I don't really want to derail the thread with my obscure analogy.

 

[HiResDes]

Spoiler

I don't know how about you go get your shine box and shine my shoes? Kidding

I just wanted to say that this genuinely made me lol...sorry for not having anything else to contribute to the thread at this time.

 

[SlasherJPC]

I really don't think there is any clear cut answer here. There is no right nor wrong. If you want to support the game makers for making a game based off this guys works, go for it. If it opposes or offends you to the point where you think you shouldn't buy the game nor support it. Power to you on that as well.

It just sorta kills me seeing how much people get on each others throats in this thread. Its becoming less and less about the actually topic at hand and more shit shoveling, groveling, name calling, pun cracking banter of "I'm right, your wrong" bullshit.

Interesting to see Gamesutra write up a peice on it though.

 

[Ogrekiller]

Does your analogy work though? Because if I continued to use the shipping company, the money isn't going to the racist band. Whereas if I buy Shadow Complex, the money is going to Card and therefore, the financing of anti-gay campaigns.

Yeah, but we don't know that for sure. The Empire franchise is owned by chair, not Card. They may have paid him to write the book, but shadow complex may have nothing to do with Card at all. At best he may have just been in an unpaid consulting role. We don't know for sure, yet people are blindly boycotting the game before the full story is known, which was why the thread was locked in the first place.

Of course if you just boycotted if Card was involved , then by all means do so. But those who boycott because they think they're contributing to the homo hate moneypool should wait for the full story.

An analogy would be a small car company. They hire a controversial engineer to design the latest model in their brand of motorcycles. They then decide to make a line of cars in the same brand. This engineer may or may not have contributed design input, may or may not have been paid for his work- we don't know. People then boycott the cars because the engineer was involved in the brand. One guy even smashes his car by the small car company's parent company.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

I think, in part, we have a poorly-worded OP to thank for some of the ignorance in this thread. The OP fails to bring up that OSC campaigns against gay rights, and instead implies that the author just writes crazy rantings about his thoughts on homosexuality. The OP also implies the collective "we"should boycott the game. That wording does more than just draw attention to certain information.

OP was well-intended, just... poorly executed.

THIS

 

[seat]

Do we really need to use analogies? Is the situation that abstract?

The analogies are making my head hurt. They seem to try to define where the line is drawn for "guilt by association". Godwin's Law was made apparent many pages ago, possibly multiple times. A little of both sides have gotten pretty irrational in this thread.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

The analogies are making my head hurt. They seem to try to define where the line is drawn for "guilt by association". Godwin's Law was made apparent many pages ago, possibly multiple times. A little of both sides have gotten pretty irrational in this thread.

Though surprisingly Godwin's Law was invoked by the opposite side from whom I'd have expected it.

 

[Divvy]

Yeah, but we don't know that for sure. The Empire franchise is owned by chair, not Card. They may have paid him to write the book, but shadow complex may have nothing to do with Card at all. At best he may have just been in an unpaid consulting role. We don't know for sure, yet people are blindly boycotting the game before the full story is known, which was why the thread was locked in the first place.

Of course if you just boycotted if Card was involved , then by all means do so. But those who boycott because they think they're contributing to the homo hate moneypool should wait for the full story.

Card has given tons of interviews, including video interviews with GiantBomb where he talks about helping to create the world of Shadow Complex and tieing it into the overall Empire story. It seems likely to me that he has a vested interest in the game's success.

 

[Woo-Fu]

This thread has convinced me, convinced me to buy two copies of Shadow Complex.

Not because I wish to support bigotry, but because I wish to support great games, particularly in the face of people trying to make them the poster child for a completely unrelated cause.

 

[Ogrekiller]

Card has given tons of interviews, including video interviews with GiantBomb where he talks about helping to create the world of Shadow Complex and tieing it into the overall Empire story. It seems likely to me that he has a vested interest in the game's success.

Not really, he probably gets paid too little, if at all. He wants to hype up the next book in the franchise. That's what he's invested into.

An analogy would be a small car company. They hire a controversial engineer to design the latest model in their brand of motorcycles. They then decide to make a line of cars in the same brand. This engineer may or may not have contributed design input, may or may not have been paid for his work- we don't know. People then boycott the cars because the engineer was involved in the brand. One guy even smashes his car by the small car company's parent company.

To continue the analogy, said engineer is contracted to produce model 09 and 10 in the motorcycle line. Of course he wants to sweet talk the car line because it helps raise awareness for the motorcycle line.

 

[dark10x]

You know, I never realized that the Mustard brothers were also involved in the creation of Advent Rising. I always wondered what had happened to those creators...

At least we know that demi is on our side with this one.

Card has given tons of interviews, including video interviews with GiantBomb where he talks about helping to create the world of Shadow Complex and tieing it into the overall Empire story.

He didn't create the "universe" on which Empire was based, by the way.

Furthermore, any PR he may be doing for the game is likely designed to help push his next book.

So who all decided to boycott the game?