Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 443
  1. #381
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    That's right, still the same answers. They won't change no matter how many times you cut and paste nor how many times you demand things from me.
    Last edited by RobF; 08-04-2013 at 01:23 AM.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  2. #382
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lagoon West, Vermilion Sands
    Posts
    4,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    I'm not trying to troll or anything here, just trying to see what exactly people think the problem is when it comes to games specifically and not the industry, culture, or society as a whole.
    I didn't think you were. I do believe that there are some objectionable aspects to certain titles (the sexualizing of EDI in ME3 for instance), but I must admit they are few and far between and as you rightly point out they're more common in the Asian market place than from western developers on the whole.

    Maybe Rob can answer your question?

  3. #383
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lagoon West, Vermilion Sands
    Posts
    4,459
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    That's right, still the same answers. They won't change no matter how many times you cut and paste nor how many times you demand things from me.
    And they're still not answers. So again: -

    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    If you want to help people then one major step is accepting what they are so that you can help meet their needs. Positing that we brush over issues of gender, race or sexuality is not a good thing. The problem with posing this as an egalitarian issue is that people are not of the same social status, they are not of the same gender, race or sexuality. They are not equal, they do not have equal support, they do not have equal rights, they do not have equal status in society.
    What does any of that have to do with assessment of factual information? Does the colour of a jurors skin or their mobility impact how they should view evidence extraneous to their being?

    So it's building on bullshit from the off. You can believe it's not but as I said earlier in the thread, it's equivalent to arguing that the world is flat or evolution doesn't exist or something like that. That's not going to be much use when we're discussing inequality, right? Assuming everyone is equal already is completely ignoring reality (and yes, this is a fact! We're not equal! Surprise!). So no, let's not do that. it stops us from being able to find where issues lie.
    You don't understand the process of logical assessment do you?

    Calling for an objective look at facts is bullshit also. This is an emotional issue because it deals with people, not stats. It is the wants, the needs and the rights of human beings. It is right to be appalled when people are treated badly, it is right to want to change that and have people treated better. It is not right to dehumanise a very human issue.
    I'm fairly sure our entire legal and education systems are built on the assessment of facts devoid of emotion, but do feel to continue to say otherwise.

    Well, actually, it just sort of means "go and talk about it elsewhere if you want, you can't do it here". But really, again, ask yourself what you want to debate here for reals. Do you really want to debate whether we should be making the world a better place for minority groups or do you want to debate how we do that? Because if it's the former, then well, you're a dick. Do you want to be that dick? If you're genuine in your concerns then as I responded to Unaco earlier, the first step there is to listen to what these people are telling you not shouting them down. We can move on from there.
    Why would people want to talk elsewhere? If John is so absolutely convinced he's in the right where's the loss in allowing people to comment? In truth 'comments off' doesn't seem like the action of a person confident in their position at all.

    No-one has ever asked you to just blindly agree. I'm not sure where you get that from. By the way, I'm not convinced there's anything to be proud of about pushing against people trying to make the world a better place, trying to find ways of undermining their arguments. No, really. That's probably a bit silly.
    Simply demanding the freedom to speak shouldn't necessarily be taken as a given that an argument is intended.

    Actually, it most definitely objectively is. That you might not agree with it is, well, that's subjective, right?
    Hold up. earlier on you were saying there's no such thing as objectivity ('Calling for an objective look at facts is bullshit'). Now you're saying that there is?

    Again, what would you like to debate? What is it that you really want to debate here?
    Why does it bother you so much that people would simply like the option to discuss the article in the comments section exactly?

    All the time in the world.

  4. #384
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    Based on this and the other replies, it doesn't seem like there is that much of a problem then when it comes to gaming. DNF was a shit game regardless and having one example doesn't really give much credibility to the "video games are sexist" debate.
    It's not really that any one videogame or all the videogames are the epitome of horrendous or anything like that, it's kinda awkward to present it in such terms. It's that some things that happen in videogames, some things that are designed in videogames, some things we take for granted in videogames are not really very nice or good things. It's not necessarily that they're sexist as a whole or even in the majority part.

    So when you sort of pose the question "well, are you still buying them?", you're asking people whether they have the conviction to hold off on a fairly large chunk of otherwise worthwhile culture where it may well just be one tiny element of the videogame that's egregious (like impractical-tits-on-display-armour or something). It's far more reasonable to say "OK, well all this stuff is good but this stuff isn't cool, guys. Stop that" so that you get more of the good parts without the shitty bits.

    The few that cross the line into out and out hateful are, thankfully, few and far between. They do exist but yes, they are in small number.

    The point at hand extends outside of what's in the game and into the realms of the more pervasive attitudes around gaming culture. See Fat, Ugly or Slutty, see the death threats, rape threats and everything else that comes with being a woman in gaming. That's stuff you can't sort by not buying DNF, unfortunately. Although it would be nice were it possible, I'll admit.

    As for your question, I guess my overall point was "what are you doing about it, if you care so much". I see a lot of heated discussion and some of you guys seem to care about this issue a lot, but what have you actually done about it other than post about it here (or elsewhere)?
    Well, personally I go out and talk IRL about these things in places where it can make a difference. I try and promote what games can be whenever I can and try and help make a safer space for more people by finding ways to let their voices be heard. I take other people's work to be displayed when I can. I talk about the things I'm comfortable with and the things I'm not comfortable with, I try and help people understand how fucking brilliant games are and can be (I'm a massive supporter of what Game City and Special Effect do, for example) because they're small things that I can do within my power. I also help, within my meagre means, by directly supporting the work of those outside the system. (I also own most of Steam so it's not like I don't like big box stuff either)

    All of which are more productive and useful, IMO obviously, than simply not buying videogames. I don't expect anyone else to do these things and I don't promote one thing at the expense of another either, I'm not out to censor or to remove all the titties or whatever, y'know? But yes, hope that answers what I'm doing about it if I care so much.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  5. #385
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,488
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    No quarter, eh?
    Since when it is unreasonable to expect someone writing an article to, oh I don't know, do their research? It's clear he didn't properly read or even reflect on the article, he just picked it up and posted his own flawed conclusions. Generally when people make mistakes in the public arena they post an admission. John Walker has refused, and instead got up and decided that anybody calling him out on it is an enemy of women and gaming.



    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    Nope! According to me stopping and listening to people who can tell you what their problems are gets you closer to discovering what the problems are. Shushing up and listening to those who are trying to speak up above the noise will help us get more things to analyse, to get closer to the truths of our society.

    So no. Not even close.
    Then we're on the the same side and you should stop trying to create an artificial division between us, which is the kind of crap that John Walker keeps trying to do.
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  6. #386
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    I wasn't so much commenting on whether one should do research or not, more your IT CANNOT BE A MISTAKE comment. It amused me.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  7. #387
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    768
    Quote Originally Posted by NDen View Post
    With comments removed, it makes it clear – debate is forbidden. “Agree with me or shut up.”
    Then delete your post, as it is obviously against the local fascist regulations. Do not post in the comments under other articles on the topic either.

  8. #388
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,488
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    I wasn't so much commenting on whether one should do research or not, more your IT CANNOT BE A MISTAKE comment. It amused me.
    So whenever anybody doesn't bother to get the full story and presents their opinion regardless, it's just a harmless mistake? Particularly after you willfully ignore it afterwards by claiming the ends justify the means?

    Better get on the horn to FOX News, this is what they've been waiting for!
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  9. #389
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    Man, you should really stop assuming I mean something else other than what I typed.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  10. #390
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,488
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    Man, you should really stop assuming I mean something else other than what I typed.
    Perhaps you should try harder at expressing yourself, because you've lamented the fact that people are attacking John Walker for ranting about his conclusions unsupported by his primary data source, because it's an honest mistake (apparently).
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  11. #391
    Lesser Hivemind Node internetonsetadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Estados Unidos
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    Man, you should really stop assuming I mean something else other than what I typed.
    Like when you inject claims that sexism doesn't exist into arguments that don't contain them?

  12. #392
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    I said your post amused me. What more could I possibly add to that to make its meaning any clearer?
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  13. #393
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by internetonsetadd View Post
    Like when you inject claims that sexism doesn't exist into arguments that don't contain them?
    Men stop women from working in the industry! (except they don't, they're actively looking for female employees where possible)
    Women are paid less than men! (except the Wage Gap is a myth, as proven by Christina Sommers and Diana Furchtgott-Roth)
    Women are objectified! (ignoring that men are also, with the wonky and never explained justification of "but that's completely different!")
    Men are against female characters! (when really, it's the market. I was surprised at how many people didn't pick Femshep in Mass Effect 3, because I was told there was this big market for female characters)
    Women are discouraged from playing video games (yet several recent articles pointed out more women are playing games these days.)
    and so on, and so on. Always these big elephants in the room of, "but wait, that doesn't sound right, because..." that get shoved aside to serve an agenda.
    That's the main thrust of the post I was responding to way back upthread when you jumped in with your discussion/nondiscussion comment. I don't really need to inject anything into that, it sort of speaks for itself.
    Last edited by RobF; 08-04-2013 at 04:43 AM.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  14. #394
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,488
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    I said your post amused me. What more could I possibly add to that to make its meaning any clearer?
    What specifically amused you about it? Because it sounds like sarcastic dismissal.
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  15. #395
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    78
    You know, one of the biggest issues I have with this "debate" is that it's always presented as some sort of binary 1 or 0 social justice issue that you either agree with and become the liberator of women in western society or you disagree with and remain in support of the oppresive tyranny, when in actuality it is more a discussion about taste and choice of fantasy in an entertainment medium.

    On one hand people bring up the 20-50% statistics about women in gaming even in "hardcore" title, on the other hand the argument seems to be that they couldn't possibly be content or god forbid even enjoy the actual gaming content (because John Walker knows better what all women are "supposed" to enjoy), if this was seriously such ingrained and far reaching problem and not just a matter of taste for some people or other how do you even explain these numbers in the first place?

    Queue one of the "horriblest of all games" with just "horrifying and appalling depiction of women" from the even more horrible Asian market, who don't know what they are doing anyway and are just (culturally) "mysogynist pigs", the lot of them!


    But oh wait, if you look at parts of the player base, like for instance in this thread that seems to be about introducing yourself to the "community", a very large part of that seems to actually be women who apparently don't have the same problem with it, and supposedly don't need Johns permission to play the game and enjoy it: http://www.aeriagames.com/forums/en/....php?t=1793473

    It doesn't even stop there, there doesn't just seem to be a high amount of women (in what looks to be a rather diverse player base from around the world) playing the game, but some of them are specifically stating that one of the main reasons they are playing it are "because of the boobs" or that they otherwise like the cleavage-based design:

    "I want to play this game because: PvP, Soccer, Boobs, tactics"


    "i like mmo's of course ive been playing them for quite a while now.i am Canadian and a mother of one boy. typically i want to play this game because its fun? i guess the boobs are a draw in as well but mostly the game play."


    "...see you on the battlefield ...doooooooown! ...below my big defender boobies"

    It couldn't possibly be that John Walker has a very narrow view of what he assumes a large amount of the female player base wants to play, limited by feminist rhetoric? If you actually wanted to have a "discussion" about it, you could ask players of these kind of games to get together with others that seem to abhor them, try to talk about it and then digest it from a neutral viewpoint.

    But instead John Walker decides to demonise everyone involved that doesn't agree with his rather flimsy argumentation and could possibly be against the party line of every Not-John-Walker-approved game being "filth" that supposedly sets back gender equality by about 100 years since pixels in a fantasy world hurt real women (for which there is about as much proof as for games causing violence), couldn't possibly be enjoyed by them and for some reason doom what he calls the "Gaming Industry" of which he is apparently a part of.

  16. #396
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    What specifically amused you about it? Because it sounds like sarcastic dismissal.
    No, it wasn't, promise. It was a genuine smile at your hardline stance on this. Nothing more, nothing less.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

  17. #397
    Lesser Hivemind Node internetonsetadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Estados Unidos
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    That's the main thrust of the post I was responding to way back upthread when you jumped in with your discussion/nondiscussion comment. I don't really need to inject anything into that, it sort of speaks for itself.
    Perhaps that's the main thrust of the argument you wanted it to be, but what you've quoted there is simply disputation of evidence in an effort to support a broader point about RPS' coverage and handling of these issues.

    The ironic thing is that NDen carefully laid out why he took issue with RPS' late tendency to reduce disputation of their assertions and evidence to sexism, and then you did precisely that exact thing. NDen was lamenting the hostility toward discussion. That was the main thrust of his post.

    I apologize for my curt little comment, but I was browsing the forum while eating a grapefruit and had to run. I didn't have time to explain, but from where I was standing it looked as if NDen's worldview contained you and that yours did not contain him. Still does.

    There are other things I'd like to respond to, but I need to stop there for now. Catch you tomorrow.

  18. #398
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,488
    Quote Originally Posted by RobF View Post
    No, it wasn't, promise. It was a genuine smile at your hardline stance on this. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Fair enough, comment withdrawn.
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  19. #399
    Obscure Node
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    12
    Dino Dini @dndn1011 6 h
    @botherer maybe best course of action is not to fight, but advocate and set an example. Only patience and love can truly defeat injustice.

    John Walker @botherer 6 h
    @dndn1011 I'll let slavery know.

    I looked in his twitter for something regarding Sean Maelstrom's blog and then saw this. It's hard to believe he says these things seriously, it's way below the YouTube-comments-level.

  20. #400
    Lesser Hivemind Node RobF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    860
    @internetonsetadd

    Haha, no. It's MRA-grade foaming nonsense and falsehoods, man! It's textbook at that.

    For extra points it comes with a side order of special later upthread with my personal favourite tucked amongst all his posts, posts previously defending advertising and women (because we're to assume that advertising and beauty have -always- gone hand in hand and are in fact not societal constructs with a fundamental sexist slant), posts where we're supposed to believe he's standing up for women's right to be hired as sexual objects to stand there showing off products to horny men and go women! (real women, not the fake ones that we're defending, all real women love it), not like us who want Sharia Law and all women covered up...

    ...get this one, it's precious:

    "I have disdain for strippers or sexual dancers too"

    There's our great defender of women there. He has disdain for strippers and sexual dancers, especially those at events. Let's not pretend this is something, anything other than some serious weapons grade women hating bullshit, eh?

    That it comes cotton wooled in some bullshit about how his point of view is oppressed by RPS and John's stance and the comments section being turned off is silencing him, well, that's a thing alright but it doesn't take away from how utterly repugnant his words are and how completely full of shit that first post and pretty much all the ones afterwards are.
    Last edited by RobF; 08-04-2013 at 07:06 AM.
    My actions are in no way born out of some sort of Darwinist offensive
    I just get a bit fidgety times

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •