Censorship? There is no censorship!

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by cronicler, Nov 29, 2014.

  1. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    That you think those things are more pressing doesn't mean other people need to think the same thing. To them, and to me, representation is a pretty important issue. You don't need to agree with that, but why are you getting upset over the fact that others think that's important? No one's forcing you to listen to them. No one's forcing you to read about it. You could just go "play some damn games".
     
  2. CthuluIsSpy

    CthuluIsSpy A Smooth-Skin

    636
    Dec 20, 2011
    How would diversity improve the overall quality of a game? Wouldn't it be ultimately no different from having a different color scheme, ie, a palette swap?
    I do not see how it would improve the writing or mechanics.

    Likewise, a lack of diversity would not be an improvement either.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2014
  3. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    Yes I think it's actually quite hypocritical that gamergate doesn't put comments on diversity, sexism, racism etc. towards them on the same level as negative comments they themselves make. Either they're all ok, or none of them are. Except for threats and trolling etc, of course, which is never ok. And more importantly a waste of everyone's time. Of course the same hypocrisy goes for the opposite side. I would advise both gamergaters and the opposition to be as reasonable as possible, but regardless of who is spouting hate I apply the same judgement to it, and how people deal with it.

    It's not that feminists apply it's critique on the basis of the game itself, it has nothing to do with artistic quality, but more that feminists rests a responsibility onto the creators for being politically aware.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2014
  4. Atomic Postman

    Atomic Postman Vault Fossil

    Mar 16, 2013
    Alright, I understand your point.


    I think I probably overreacted earlier in the heat of the moment, I can see why diversity is important to some.


    I would like to make this clear: My problem isn't with diversity, it's with rabid SJWs attacking developers with name calling and forcing them to change their game to their exact standards.

    So, I understand your points and I definitely overreacted looking back at my earlier posts today, I think there has been a a misunderstanding on both parties on what our points exactly are, so I'm gonna leave it at that.
     
  5. Tagaziel

    Tagaziel Panzerkatze Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Dec 10, 2003
    Nobody, at least here, is doing that?

    Because it is an important issue and it concerns a wholly different part of the gaming development process?

    Asking a developer to make a game more diverse is not going to cripple anything. Making a more inclusive game doesn't hurt anything. It doesn't really cost much (no matter how much Ubisoft wants to think you otherwise). It won't affect gameplay development, or level design, or the soundscape (voice actors are a different affair). It will affect the game insofar making it richer - instead of being surrounded by white characters for no discernible reason, you can interact with people who not only look different than the Default Character, but also are different (given good writers, though that's a general claim - everyone deserves to be represented by poorly written characters, not just white people).

    Rushed releases, cutting off content for later resale, poor quality assurance, these are not the developers' fault. It's the publishers'. But the publisher doesn't make the game and they can't decide whether a game is diverse or not. It's the duty of the developer and the request here is to be more considerate of the actual makeup of the world's population.

    Imagine a Witcher game where elves and dwarves are only mentioned in passing, because diversity is irrelevant and only humans will play it. You don't have to be an elf to be pissed off by such a situation.

    Yeah, stupid people exist in the pro-diversity crowd. That doesn't make the points any less valid, especially when they are the fringe and have not hijacked the movement in any measurable way.
     
  6. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011


    dwarves and elves are not real people jesus christ

    why are you getting offended over pixels
     
  7. Kilus

    Kilus Not Australian Orderite

    May 3, 2003
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  8. D3xter

    D3xter Banned

    8
    Nov 1, 2008
    Most people and especially most gamers don't give a shit either, unfortunately the insane gender ideologues that two of this site's staff seem to have been brainwashed into want this forced down hard into everyone else's throats:

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 9, 2016
  9. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    I want to restate an argument made in that first video: It is an assumption that players of video games identify with the character they play as at all.

    I find this very important.

    I certainly don't, and never have. I'm quite good at seperating fantasy from fiction, yet can immerse myself quite heavily in most things. When I play the Witcher for example, I'm thinking about what kind of Geralt I want to create when making choices in the game. Not what choice I personally would take. And least of all that I am somehow geralt in any way. This is the same for games where I can make my own character. The fact that the in-game world is not the real world, makes it impossible for me to identify with the character. But I do realize a lot of gaming fans, and especially rpg fans, do insert themselves. For a lot of people I think, their characters are a more badass, good looking and successful version of themselves. I think that's why so many gamers are clamoring for the specific type of romantic partner in game that they are attracted to themselves.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2014
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  10. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    "Insane gender ideologues", also known as people who'd like to see cultural products reflect all of humanity, instead of just part of it.

    So what's so terrible about seeing women, people of color and other minorities in video games more frequently and in more diverse roles? Why are people getting so upset that people are asking for more equal representation? Maybe you don't care about the issue, and that's fine, but why would you actively fight this?

    Why do people think YouTube videos are a good medium to discuss academic papers? This annoys me to no end. If you're going to try to do in-depth discussion, mediums which require constant, focused attentions with no easy way to reference back and forth are the worst.

    Anyway, in the first video he's only looking at protagonist identification rather than representation as a whole, and he misrepresents the paper in question. For instance, more narratively well-developed characters see more identification, and even very poorly-developed characters see some identification. The paper also speaks exclusively to the use of diversity as a means of altering people's perspective (to give them a sense of what it's like to be someone with a different identity) or as a marketing tool. It does not speak to the value people place on seeing themselves represented and the benefits gained thereof, nor does it speak to the role that stereotyping and exclusion play in forming and confirming consumers' views, nor does it speak to any of the other arguments used to support diversity by cultural critics.

    The second video is completely useless as a critique, as it discusses a paper that discusses whether or not people who play video games identify as a member of the 'gamer' identity and how this interacted with marketing constructs and other personal identities. The paper says nothing about the value of diversity in games, only about the way games are marketed. This question has nothing to do with whether or not gamers identify with protagonists, yet he constantly tries to tie in that old study by misunderstanding both papers. The only assumption Shaw makes in this paper is that it would be better if games as a whole spoke to all audiences. If you disagree with that assumption, then there's no point in discussing it. Making a 20-minute video to make that point is asinine.

    Even so, none of this is actually an argument against diversity in games. If identification doesn't matter, then why would you be upset if we'd see more diverse characters? This doesn't actually hurt you, right?

    We could go all media theory on this and investigate what "identifying with" even means. But perhaps it's more interesting to note that many people who do belong to minorities have written and spoken about the first time they saw themselves represented, and how important that was to them. While you may not identify with characters, it is clear that other people do find this important and that diversity and representation means a lot to them. There's no assumption that every single gamer finds this important, and it's not particularly relevant, either.
     
  11. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    He's saying that you and tagz, are in his personal opinion, insane. I would say that's clearly false, but how do you extract the idea that he's anti-inclusion from that? The most you can say from his post is that he is ambivalent towards inclusion, but certainly negative towards you and tagz.

    Where did I mention minorities? I'm sure it's great for minorities to see their particular minorities in games. It has no bearing on whether they identify with the character they play as. I'm merely very much opposed to the mentality of some gamers, who self-insert themselves into the protagonist's shoes. If you'd given my post some thought you might've realized this.

    "Some people play games not to...play a game, but to feel things. When they kill characters, they aren't killing characters, they are killing people. So they think the only reason one would want children to be killable is that if you got some sort of experience out of it. Probably a sexual thrill, as anyone that would want such an evil thing in the game is most likely a kiddie fiddler."

    It's also telling to me how you criticize the videos for not being about representation as a whole. That was never his intention, or the subject of either the papers or his videos. The papers mention diversity as a whole, yes, but their subject is the gamer identity. So why bring it up? Why always move discussions to it? Is that the only way you can hold these discussions?
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2014
  12. BigBoss

    BigBoss Your Local Scrub

    957
    Dec 24, 2012
     
  13. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    He posted two videos that explicitly argue against diversity in games. And yes, that's what the videos are actually about. It's really the only thing he talks about, even though he plays some lip service to the gamer identity at the start. He's not exploring the concept of the gamer identity, he's exploring his own theory as to why people think it needs to die -- and doing so from the perspective that this is because they want more diversity in games because of identity politics. It's all very odd, but I took a charitable reading to actually discuss some things he talks about rather than write it off as a whole.

    I mean, he even makes this explicit at the start of the second video as he recaps the first video, saying that Shaw showed that "gamers themselves don't need diversity". That's not at all what she showed.

    How is this something you can be 'opposed' to? That's like saying you're very much against people experiencing music as something to listen to calmly, rather than to dance to.
     
  14. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    I can get incredibly immersed in media. But the things the character is experiencing are not what I am experiencing. For most people it's pretty important to seperate fiction from reality.
     
  15. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign Gender Fluid Skeleton Man Staff Member Moderator

    Apr 1, 2005
    What about the immersion bro?
     
  16. Sander

    Sander This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Jul 5, 2003
    Identifying with a fictional character is not about not understanding the difference between fiction and reality. It's about identifying with the feelings and thoughts a character is experiencing. It's why many people get emotional when sad things happen to fictional characters: because on some level, they identify with that character's emotion. It's fine if you don't do that, but being opposed to other people doing that doesn't make a lot of sense.
     
  17. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    Nah, that's not what I'm opposed to. That would be silly.

    :?
     
  18. TheWesDude

    TheWesDude Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Feb 25, 2005
    what i like is how any attacks at brianna wu or sarkeesian or quinn is instantly harassment and representative of the whole of gamergate, but when you bring up positions and statements of radical/3rd wave feminists, all of a sudden they are a minority not representative of the whole.

    or even when sander puts up a link to a study for the US GS workers for pay/wage gaps, and it matches the numbers i have been saying, its still sexisim/discrimination. even when you point out the flaws, some of them on purpose, and explain their findings and how it does not actually indicate a pay gap. nope! still sexism/discrimination.

    or when they post up links of studies of experiences of women in these STEM fields ( and yes, computers/IT is the T part of STEM ) and they frequently talk about sexism/discrimination/quality-of-work-life-balance, and you dig deep into them, they are actually not discrimination or sexism but rather mostly complaining about the hours and work structures. and when you point out examples for these structures, they are called abusive work environments. and of course i STILL notice there was never any reply to my examples of the 2 jobs.

    it borders on delusional. of course i bet if say their local power company followed sanders and tagz advice hilarity would ensue as hospitals lost power and shut down over the weekends and people died. because you know, working 24/7 environment and weekends is an abusive work environment.

    but of course, we are not supposed to think critically or question but rather to just Listen and Believe.
     
  19. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    what I like is how this is all about games, moral/ethics in games and making games better yet for the longest time this GG thing is still spining around Sarkesian/Quin which I consider as important like GamerGate - I don't disslike Sarkesian, I just think in the end she will not change that much either. You want to see big changes? Then you have to get the really big publishers and game developers, those people that reach millions with their products.

    do the same rules apply on GG though?
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2014
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  20. Akratus

    Akratus Bleep bloop.

    May 14, 2011
    I notice that gagmergate's activities are overwhelmingly focussed on journalism, corruption and criticism of social justice. But that doesn't get into the media. Nobody wants to spread the word of the good gamergate is doing. Nobody cares that GamerGate is currently the only group of people trying to improve Games Journalism. Apparantly people think certain individuals being assholes is more important than improving a corrupt industry.

    Edit: See, this is what I'm talking about: https://twitter.com/ProfessorF/status/546825158841741312

    I've been plenty critical of GamerGate.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2014