Forums / Discussion / General

@Rustic
The problem with the whole "games as a service" method a lot of companies are moving towards is that they are not what gamers want or desire. To use an analogy if you order a steak at a restaurant and they come out with a salad are you going to pay for that? Fuck no.

Western AAA games are for the most part giving paying customers neither what they want nor what they desire nor anything they have any interest in. Any company that does not give paying customers what they want will eventually fail

Aye that is true. Western AAA games are less about what the customer wants and more of how can we get the most money can we suck out of these people.

Although from what I hear, a good amount of Japanese game devs go for artistic desires, as in if there is a game design that they want to do, they will do it their way and will ignore some customer complaints unless it is a really a big problem.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/09/splatoon_2_designer_explains_why_the_maps_rotate_and_salmon_run_is_time-limited

Which of course has its strengths and flaws, Splatoon 2 being the success of it and Star Fox Zero being the failure of it (seriously, who designs a flying game where you have to pay attention to two screens at the same time?).

Rustic said:

I know Jim Sterling is not a universally liked person, but the guy does have some good points about the gaming industry having some huge problems when it comes to publishers.

I'm often surprised that Jim is given so much shit when his ideas are in line with what the #GamerGate movement should be about.
Holding fire to the feet of the game industry's corrupt practices.

Well Jim Sterling doesn't exactly hold fire to the feet of the game industry when it comes to the behaviour of his friends and colleagues.

Case in point look at "Oh What A Lovely Conspiracy" where he flat out excuses the behaviour of corrupt journalists and references their work. It's also rather easy to see most of his work as picking easy targets as opposed to taking an honest stand against industry practices. For example when the games journalists bullied DOA volleyball 3 out of a official western release, he stated it was the developer trying to boost sales as opposed to the developer being bullied out of it. Similarly, instead of pointing out that a literally who was lying about being harassed, he continued to support her in the face of no evidence to the point that the company he was working for the escapist, had to apologise for him.

And of course there's the whole pro-doxxing business that he and adam sessler got caught in. That's like another thing that makes gamergate members hate him. It's a double whammy of being a jackass for wanting mob rule and a hypocrite for standing for known harassers while claiming to protect the weak. While I will admit Jim Sterling makes good points about the industry… we also have to admit his behaviour is inconsistent and his good points are layman level observations.

There definitely is that.

He is as I would say a divisive figure who had his good points like how microtransactions were going to be taken to a terrible degree, indies devs being able to sink lower than AAA devs and publishers sometimes to the point that he got harassed for criticising them, and pointing out how terrible Konami was given the direction they had with Metal Gear Solid and Silent Hill remasters.

While at the same time he has made plenty of mistakes, is pretty strong headed and sometimes can't admit that he fucked up, case in point is how he handled Gamergate and didn't try too hard on seeing where they are coming from. For example that dox thing is debated as being serious or a joke from from what I hear.

There better people for it of course like SidAlpha and Yongyau.

On another note, I wonder what and when the next "Gate" will be after Gamergate and Dorito-gate (not sure if we name the whole lootbox thing lootbox-gate, the Year of Lootboxes sounds like a better name), because of both of these highlighting the evergrowing tension between the Video game industry and its audience that goes all the way back to the days when video games were becoming really popular and making some really good money.

MrKillUltra said:

Case in point look at “Oh What A Lovely Conspiracy” where he flat out excuses the behaviour of corrupt journalists and references their work. It’s also rather easy to see most of his work as picking easy targets as opposed to taking an honest stand against industry practices.

You mean like how he went after BrashGames owner Paul Ryan for besmirching the people who wrote for him?

(Not the only time, I'm sure, but definitely one of the more recent ones)

Jim's been very consistent with how he saw the industry in an ethical tailspin over greedy practices. It doesn't matter if you're Triple-A or Indie; if you fuck around with your customers, he will show no mercy.

Besides: Jim's ad-free now, fully supported by Patreon. That means no corporate strings bringing him down.

Rustic said:

On another note, I wonder what and when the next “Gate” will be after Gamergate and Dorito-gate (not sure if we name the whole lootbox thing lootbox-gate, the Year of Lootboxes sounds like a better name), because of both of these highlighting the evergrowing tension between the Video game industry and its audience that goes all the way back to the days when video games were becoming really popular and making some really good money.

It will be "Live Services".
That's where the industry is heading.

"You mean like how he went after BrashGames owner Paul Ryan for besmirching the people who wrote for him?"

So describe to me how its a hard task to criticise Paul Ryan who is being dog-piled by multiple people who used to work for him? Is there evidence that Jim Sterling started the trend first? Did Jim Sterling blow the whistle first and do serious original research? Did Jim Sterling do anything that could jeopardize future employment or sponsorship? If the answer to all of these questions is no, then no he didn't do anything that would go above and beyond a layman level observation and therefore he's not really picking a hard target since the work has been done already. Please try to avoid asking leading questions especially when it involves an answer that actually demonstrate the point of the person you are responding to.

Just FYI, on youtube, Jim Sterling was beaten to the punch by "KiriothTV". And on the internet in general, it is a semi-tie between Game revolution and kotaku UK on who broke the story first (with Kotaku UK having a 1 day lead but that doesn't mean much if you assume they spent a few days looking over the story).

"if you fuck around with your customers, he will show no mercy"
Unless of course you are a journalist like Leigh Alexander, a terrible developer like literally who or are his friend then he'll show you all the mercy in the freaking world. But god forbid you care about due process and giving nuance to an issue, he'll call you a madman. I've stated that his philosophy is at odds with the average stance in gamergate and I'm not kidding.
Example: Here is an escapist article
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/gamergate-interviews/12397-Brad-Wardell-GamerGate-Interview
Jim had this response
https://archive.is/rYfAg
Image above: Jim reacts to escapist publishing article that contained interviews from Brad Wardell. Wow such defender of virtue against the hostile journalism industry by calling an ethical games developer a madman /s. I'd also like to note that Brad is an easy target due to previous smear campaigns against him… so that image bolsters the concept that Jim only picks easy targets quite well actually.

"Jim’s ad-free now, fully supported by Patreon, at means no corporate strings bringing him down."
That arguably makes it worse, that means anyone could string him up now. Even the CEO of a company and of course you mustn't forget he now has the bias of his patreons and their political stance that now affects his work.

My stance on Sterling is that, just because he is an unpleasant man who has done really horrible things to further his own agenda, does not mean he can never tell the truth or be right.
2 plus 2 is still 4 even if Zoe Quinn and Randy Harper say 2 plus 2 is 4. EA is causing harm to the industry even if Jim Sterling states so.
Of course I avoid him like the plague and take his words with a pile of salt not unlike that of a shamed COD player, but still when he tells the truth, it is the facts, and not him, that matter.

Twitter is beginning to censor Jews now. Canary Mission is not "controversial". They catalogue hate groups.

The censorship on Twitter was a big part of Gamergate. This is what it has turned into.

Well fuck. I think sjw's are realizing they've lost the culture war. They're trying to push into law schools. It makes sense why they're trying this. If they can't win the hearts of the people or take over mass media they're trying to make laws into what they want.

That has been their tactic for a while. When they can't make people do something, they force them with laws. Then, with their tailored laws, they push te culture war again. Look it up. Many things which were not law before the 1850s were actually tied to the current culture war. I say we should regress all society related laws to their state back then and move on from there.

And if you say "but women would lose the right to vote" yes. I don't care. I actually think no one should get the right to vote just bey reaching the age of 18. Suffrage should be on merit. The current state of affairs is unsustainable in that and many other things.

But that is barely related to GamerGate. On one exception. Since we would regress the law to a point where the limits of free speech were debated, we could therefore start to push for more freedom. Old laws were more flexible in favor of freedom, especially because back then people wanted it more than they wanted security.

A world with more freedom and less state issued security is in fact better for the gaming industry because it is a world where customers make their choices based on entirely non political matters.

@Alarkoz

What the fuck are you on about?

Like nothing you said there barely made any sense to me nor is it even fucking practical.

Fuck sake, your idea, if it includes all laws and not just freedom of speech ones along with voting, of turning back laws to old ones means that laws like the Square Deal, Hepburn Act, Meat Inspection Act, Pure Food and Drug Act get tossed out.

And even some old laws were shit when it came to freedom of speech like the Alien and Sedition Acts which was abused like fuck and that was a major issue in 1800s. Then there's the Fugitive Slave Act, the Indian Removal Act, and the Black Codes.

And all of that is just the US alone. There are other countries where you'd be throwing quite likely many good laws out for the sake of some bad ones or a very rose-tinted view of the past. Hell, in Ireland the average Irish Catholic, who were the majority, at that time before 1850s had to keep fighting and struggling against the Protestant minority and the British government with a lot of power to beat the Penal Laws which is a fucking real example of religious discrimination as well as cultural one since Irish customs were not encouraged much either.

And we're fucking seeing how the gaming industry is working with a lot of freedom today. They are amoral about the politics, it is just another tool to get people to buy their shit, and even if you remove that they will still find ways to scam you out of your money.

Seriously, don't be like some Lefties I see who talk out of their asses about the government and economy as if getting rid of the rich people will fix it or some people I know personally who believe that sending everyone back to their races and nationalities' home origin will fix everything wrong with the world and is easy to do.

Edit: Sorry if I come off as abrasive, but come on buddy, I expected you to be better at thinking about what statements and arguments you say rather than something that would get you laughed at by the average person on the street nevermind online.

"Twitter sanctions two 'pro-Israel' accounts".
How could we be sure if being "pro-Israel" was the only reason why these two accounts were sanctioned?

That's probably the sensationalism going through. While the accounts were pro-israel, the stated ban reason was the use of the yellow star of david which is a symbol that was used to identify Jews in public in certain societies (Nazi germany being one of them). Why is it offensive? I don't know. But my best guess is that this is one of those mass report situations where twitter didn't even check and just let mob rule happen.

I will try to be more clear. My idea is to remove all laws that have been pushed by busibodies since the past two centuries and regress most, if not all specifically social laws. Laws based on facts such as environmental and medical laws are unaffected.
Once we have done so and effectively removed most laws forced upon people despite the harm they cause, we could, from there, look at which modern laws have not been a complete failure and implemente then back.

Thank you for being clear about that.

I am not sure if it would be that simple as people for their own reasons will try to screw with laws involving such things as the environmental and medical since facts are often debated among the average person and experts and businesses, politicians and whatever other groups have no problem funding false studies to support their products and ideas.

However, there are some laws I would definitely be for reforming, like self-defence and rape laws which the former if you are in an abusive household you can defend yourself and not be charged for murder in self-defense due to you not being the owner of the house and the latter which is too narrow for the definition of what rape can be for both men and women. I'd also prefer if countries did the same-sex marriage vote like Ireland where it was the people who voted, which sadly isn't ideal for probably many countries say the US as large as it is but I feel is the fairest and bonding experience for a nation.

It still isn't possible to flip the table and start over with a clean slate, not without causing massive chaos and costs to do it as well people will fight and debate what laws are harmful to get rid of and it will likely be mixed for most cases, and even then it will take ages to get somewhere during debates with people countering efforts of the other since everyone doesn't trust each other to be fair about sharing the pie so to speak and will likely try every dirty trick in the book to not end up with the shitty piece of it.

Besides, getting back to the original post that started this whole thing, I don't feel like SJWs are a threat if they go to Law schools and try to change things.

Why?

Because a good amount of SJWs like Anita and Zoe are not competent at proving their points or really much of anything. Just look at the UN event where even Zoe was disappointed with how badly that went. Like the reason that SJWs from what I can tell can be considered a threat is due to them having political and financial backing from people who some of them work with for their own personal gains while paying lip service to ideas (Anita and Zoe) or who use SJWs as little puppets or pawns for whatever reason (EA). That and rabid fans or followers who take actions and words into their own hands without their idols' involvement.

Although maybe I might be wrong, but I have noticed how many people are just tired of their shit and want to do what SJWs claim they want to do their own ways.

The concern is not that they are capable of changing legislation through intellectual discourse, but that they are extremely corrupt. In fact it is their tendency to use underhanded tactics that led to their involvement in GamerGate.

People are certainly tired, but so were they tired of the Temperance Movement back then, and we still see ripples and echoes of their puritanical views in modern society.

That is true. The whole thing would not have become so bad if it was not for them constantly blocking or getting rid of comments or allowing the other side to speak. I was initially pretty neutral SJW about the whole gamergate thing and thought that both sides had pretty valid points, and while pro-gamergate did have plenty of its own rotten snakes trying to seep their own poison into that side, anti-gamergate I found had a vastly larger amount and the abuse of power was so rampant and venomous to neutral and dissidents that I rethought about how I behaved in talks and my beliefs about some stuff.

And that is certainly true. Although it seems like the SJWs along with their allies and opponents will likely change in response to infighting and changing surroundings. Anita, for example, is fading into the background with the only big thing being that she visited BioWare and some in there that are not happy that she came:

On the anti-sjw side, the skeptics as late from what I hear are moving from SJWs to the alt-right as well as each other since they feel like it is beating a dead horse with SJWs, and if kiwifarms is anything to go by, it's a mess for em. Hell, Sargon has been accused of knowingly letting Kruat and Tea dox someone named CPR.

Edit: Like if there is one thing I am taking from this year is that schisms are everywhere at the moment. To the point that enemies of opposing sides barely need to do anything about the other side since that side is already infighting. Although in America conservative and liberal friends have pointed out that it has been on the rise for quite some time, especially the conservative parties long before the liberal ones.

The thing about puritannicals they never really died out, they just keep merging with other puritannical groups and making a frankenstein of a monster of a ideology. Now that I think about it no wonder why they're so stupid, cause when you get down to it there isn't one sjw movement, it's a collection of hundreds of groups that everyone thinks is dumb and rather than bettering themselves they formed a mob.

It'd be like if in highschool the kids that people made fun of for saying stupid shit like "vaccines cause autism" or such formed a gang and beat the shit out of everyone making fun of them.

Mostly I compare that sort of anarchic and chaotic groups dynamic, especially when they infight to be like a massive organic anarchic mess of webs where billions of spiders add or get rid of webs in all directions while trying to get more resources for themselves and others like eating other spiders and taking their part of the web as well as their own.

Someone stole a time machine because KQED ( a member of Public broadcasting and funded by viewers like you) claims that Gamergate existed before hackivists,trolls and bots

If thats true then Gamergate existed before Apple, Physical Bridges and Simple Machines.

Hyperbole:
In the beginning there was gamergate…

Seen the tweet for the play Non-player Character by them.

I find that the play is sad because it could've been about all sorts of people who get stalked, doxxed, cyberbullied, swatted and hacked online or who might doing the same or both when it comes to video games. Or actually, depict an expy ex-couple of the two people who started the whole Gamergate thing and show them as flawed human beings.

But nope, we get a story that sounds lazy sounding.

Thats great, i don't see how it adds to the discussion on events related to GG. But your what if is enlightening, since it believes in a publicly funded tv station serving the public and not special interests.

So ethics in broadcasting I guess.

Speaking of ethics!

Damore and the victory memo in detail!

Or if you don't have the 20 minutes to spare:

Damore filed a complaint to the national labor relations board before being fired. This was turned down because his facts that women and men are biologically different and have different preferences in masse which could be the reason why there aren't as many females in tech jobs, was viewed as hate speech. And was addressed in relation to his firing which wasn't part of the initial complaint.

However, this complaint was removed before the reason was given and was still published. Causing the media to state that this reasoning is a loss for Damore.

TLDR; Lawsuits still going on with Google and Damore might be winning.

Thats great, i don’t see how it adds to the discussion on events related to GG. But your what if is enlightening, since it believes in a publicly funded tv station serving the public and not special interests.

So ethics in broadcasting I guess.

Alright fine, I'll add what makes it related somewhat to gamergate. The play is obviously not well researched or is obvious bias against pro-gamergate side of the story as well as having character throw around terms like "serial careerist" that is suppose to be bad thing that scares people or makes people hate someone for being so… for some reason from what I can tell of the synopsis.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/entertainment/article/Non-Player-Character-based-on-Gamergate-12541126.php

http://playwrightsfoundation.blogspot.ie/2016/05/interview-with-playwright-walt-mcgough.html

Basically the play is slightly better than "Intimidation Game", but you can tell that it has a big bias for anti-gamergate. What I was saying is that it could've been better by focusing how Gamergate started with the whole Zoe Quinn thing, which the whole thing is obviously based, and show how people interpreted the whole events differently. As in something that doesn't smell like Intimidation Game or an obviously bias political piece that will likely bore you to tears.

And in a surprise move by nobody Anita Sarkeesian and others are criticizing Donald Trump on his stance about video games, despite them having the exact same views, simply for the obvious reasons.

I always knew I would disagree with Trump on something. serious enough to cause a schism in his supporters. Never expected it would be the gun and violence debate.

Donald Trump:
Making Enemies into Unlikely Allies.

I wouldn't say they're allies at all.

This is just Anita and everyone else showing their true colors even more.
They don't actually have any real convictions or standards or morals. They don’t care about people’s lives or safety. They don’t want what’s right.

They just want to stir up strife. They just want to be the ones calling the shots. They just want to maintain their status and unearned income. They know it’s wrong. They know their ideals never have and never will work. They don’t care. The only thing that matters to them is that they remain relevant. That they are the "oppressed" ones so they have the right to attack.

The enemy of my enemy is not my ally; this sort of mentality is what led the world to how fucked up it is. She is not gamergate's ally.

Anita is not our friend or ally. Far as I'm concerned, she's just being all anti-Trump since she hates him more than she dislikes the "problematic" content in video games imo.

And I also think she just likes to grandstand and hold the "correct" viewpoint. In the end, she's hypocritical and give another reason why we shouldn't seriously consider her views.

No. I would not ally with those who betray their principles to oppose someone.

You know I might have a modicum of respect for Anita and the games journalists if they kept on with their narrative despite Trump. This only makes me hate them more because they have proven in my eyes they don't care about video games just ideology/ SJW brownie points.

Seen Thunderfoot talk about Anita and Trump in the same video lately.

Honestly I'm totally enjoying watching sjw's reaction to Trump being anti-video game. It's like watching if a person could segfault. We might actually see anti-gamergate finally fucking die out, cause in order for them to continue they would have to agree with Trump's political views.

What is pretty much happening with sjw's currently, "I think video games cause violence but if I think video games cause violence that means I share some beliefs with Trump… OH NO! I agreed with Trump on something!"

Again, it really should not be surprising to anyone really since this was highlighted a while back (all three sort of saying what sort of sounds like the same thing but that might depend on one's interpretation and personal feelings on the candidates).

Although if I remember right, the argument was that video games cause sexism and racism from the SJW and anti-gamergate camps. Not really violent RL behaviour that most politicians seem to go for when asked about video games. At least other old views like DnD making young people into murderous, suicidal, sex-driven Satanists or insane people who can't tell reality from fantasy hasn't popped back up, yet.

Meanwhile for those that choose to double down

Florida school does a gesture of throwing away violent videogames so kids don't develop a toxic mindset. Despite every study stating otherwise.

Well I can sum up my whole feelings about this new re-start of the video games cause RL violence on the scale of mass shootings debate

Unless the all parents did the same thing with their kid's games what difference does it make beyond showing ignorance about the subject

Politics? Really its showing the influence of Media and Politics upon mass indivduals having more effect on the actions of people then video games.

So Ethics all around!

Also Gamergate is now Anti-Trump according to Vox. So…

Looks like Anit-gamergate hates Trump more than gamergate by some reason. Guess that mean's there will be more devouring soon.

Florida school does a gesture of throwing away violent videogames so kids don’t develop a toxic mindset.

Aw crap, are we going through the post-Columbine madness again? Here're the old bullet points.

• Violent people are attracted to violent games because they already have a predisposition to violence.
  
• Normal people use games to blow off steam and can keep fantasy and reality separate.
  
• Normal people watch MMA, so stop bitching about video games.

I'm sort of waiting for good old Jacky Boy to resurface somewhere during this charade about videogames and school violence to cry out "SEE I TOLD YOU SO!", while trying to hide the fact he's not a lawyer anymore (is he?).

Jack Thompson teleports behind you

"Nothing personal, kid*

https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/news/jack-thompson-offers-aid-in-marshall-school-shooting-case-w516494

http://comicbook.com/gaming/2018/02/08/jack-thompson-returns-video-games-marshall-school-shooting/

http://www.paducahsun.com/news/local/activist-video-games-may-be-factor-in-marshall-shooting/article_3727f91e-a682-5f06-a4e6-0f0b8a502278.html

Well, he popped up for a previous shooting which was the Marshal Country High School one in January this year.

And it sounds like he is gonna try to make a come back some way despite the Florida Bar banning him from law practice for life.

And he hasn't changed at all.

So. It seems GamerGate 2.0 is "Back to our roots" and we, as usual, will fight the government in charge. It has always been about politics. SJW, right wing, left wing, neo-reactionary. They are all the same in the end. A bunch of busybodies who refuse to let us live a normal and pleasant life and can't stop poking where they are not needed.

And in case you wonder, yes, there are much likely games on par with SJW games but on the opposite ideology… In fact Ethnic Cleansing kinda is that kind of game.

Well, I am not that surprised Alarkoz.

Video games, like any other medium that can inspire or influence people in how people think about stuff or show them something, do get people trying to screw with them be they from all sorts of a political groups, mainstream audience, businesses that help make them, fans or a dev with way too much power to their head.

Although it seems that while outside threats to gaming are bad they don't do much long-lasting damage to gaming, however, often enough it is gaming in terms of devs, publishers and fans who help them in their worse self-destructive habits that seem to be doing the most damage to gaming (I do somewhat think Gamergate sprawled into what it was with SJWs due to several video game journalist and video game companies and devs and other businesses having invested in gaming trying to distract people from their terrible anti-consumer practices and I guess corruption).

I am surprised why anyone takes on gaming and gamers to take down despite the track records of those who have not being that successful much at it.

Virtue signaling!

For when you are incapable of/unwilling to solve the problem it's best to do some worthless thing to show everyone how much you care otherwise people might start blaming you.

And of course it feels good but doesn't require any actual effort.

Give it time, they'll probably blame Canada.

Sorry lost my train of thought there for a moment.

Oh right let's get to some relevancy: Like why a certain demographic that is encouraged to increase their representation in STEM is actually going into the profession of complaining about it instead

That said the article is slightly misleading as it makes clear that the demographic overall would rather assist morally instead of formulate and engineer solutions. Then postulates that the studies of aid are how the ideals of social justice come to be accepted.

Or in short:

In the meantime VICE keeps thinking Steam, the client, is a haven for school shooters

Also Play called #Gamergate doesn't address Gamergate and ends up being off topic, PLAYING IN SAN FRANCISCO

Scapegoats all around!

Could someone please share a link or archive of Sarkeezian coming out against Trump's statement? And/or any of the other usual suspects?

Also, I was told by a professor at school that the guy who created "Kingdom Come: Deliverance" turned out to be a white supremacist. That's far too convenient for the "progressive" crowd's expected response to a historically accurate medieval game set in Bohemia.

https://my-little-ninja.tumblr.com/post/171675579672/kingdom-come-deliverance-still-fails-to-deliver

Is there any evidence to that accusation? I've been looking around myself and have yet to find any evidence to support that claim.