The Sunday Papers

Sundays are for trundling around a small village in Germany, picking up and dropping off passengers in the wondrous, mostly fixed OMSI 2, using my new Logitech Driving Force GT steering wheel. As I park at the terminal, waiting for the beginning of my next route, why not join me in perusing the week’s best (mostly) games writing?

  • Relevant to my interests, creator of QWOP and GIRP Bennett Foddy takes to Polygon to explain why you don’t want an online version of Matt Thorson’s Towerfall, or other, similarly local multiplayer-only games. Basically, laaaaaaaag: “As a game designer, if you want players to be able to dodge an arrow at the last second, or to stomp their enemies on the head like they do in TowerFall, you’re designing a game that won’t play well even over a LAN, much less over the messy, noisy collection of networks that make up the internet. There’s literally no way to eliminate the effects of lag, and you’ll wind up with game-breaking problems like Dark Souls’ infamous PvP ‘lag stab’.”
  • Kotaku’s Surpisingly Real Talk From A Top Man At EA is full of frank examples of the ways in which businesses think, and the pitfalls of being unable to see the people-forest for the metrics-trees. “We watch our forums a lot, because we care what our players have to say, and [on] some of those forums we’re responsible for, one of the things we have learned—especially in the free-to-play space is [that] the people who spend the most time complaining happen to be the people who spent the most money. So my attitude is: “If you spend enough money with me, you get to complain.” If that’s what makes you happy is to go on the forums and complain, you get to complain.

    The reason they’re doing that is because they are establishing their place in the social hierarchy on the forum. It is not about our product—it’s about their relationship to the other players. And if I get all twisted up based on what they’re saying, I’m actually going to build a product they don’t like.”

  • Keeping with Kotaku for the moment, Jason Schreier talks to Peter Molyneux. As a title, “The Man Who Promised Too Much” suggests this is going to paint the one-time Bullfrog founder as a tragic figure, but it leaves just enough of the door open for people to consider him instead as a buffoonish P.T. Barnum as well. Still though, remember Dungeon Keeper? Cracking game, that. “And at 54, Molyneux has no plans to call it quits. “I’m not retiring—I’m just gonna die,” he told me. “I don’t know what life is without making games.” He has no plans to stop saying ridiculous things, either. In an interview just a few weeks ago, Molyneux lamented his tendency to keep getting in trouble with overambitious promises, then vowed that Godus will be able to support up to eight million simultaneous users.” Actually, what am I saying, I love Molyneux for his outlandish claims and public persona as much as for his games.
  • Gamasutra’s Mike Rose chases down the gunrunners of Counter-Strike: Global Offensive; the people more concerned with trading and profiting from virtual weapons than playing a videogame. “Another weapons smuggler tells me that gambling is a huge part of the CS:GO gunrunning experience, and once you grow accustomed to it, can put you at a huge financial advantage. Some betting occurs within the game, as you pay small amounts of cash to open weapons cases that could potentially contain an expensive, rare weapon… or quite the opposite. However, there’s also a whole additional level of gambling that’s hiding below the surface.” Our own Rich Stanton also got into that betting a bit.
  • Brenna Hillier gets in good with 27 observations of the Need For Speed movie over at VG247. “6. Aaron Paul’s character and backstory is discussed at length by a rich eccentric who runs a secret, illegal race and hosts a live radio show that everyone listens to and yet somehow he remains beyond the reach of the law. Yes, you can tell a video game was involved in the writing process at some point. 21. I’m enjoying identifying which Need for Speed game is most appropriate to each sequence. Like, this bit is Hot Pursuit. This bit is Rivals. That bit is Most Wanted. Most of it is The Run, unfortunately.
  • Daniela Capistrano’s mini guide for women working and thriving in the video game industry is full of solid advice, quotes from experienced designers, and inspiration for those not sure where to begin. “All the women interviewed for this article agreed that newcomers should start – right now – by creating or contributing to video game projects through game jam events or other independent collaborations, as a method to build skills and to network. If you just thought “but I don’t think coding is for me,” don’t let that deter you; there are still plenty of opportunities to volunteer on game projects as a community manager, marketing lead, music composer, artist, project manager, QA tester, or any number of important roles.
  • The Not A Game Podcast is a games podcast, and recently recorded an episode with Simon Parkin and Keza MacDonald. Worth a listen.

Music this week is the wonderful work of Calum Bowen, whose upbeat, Nintendo-ish game music I haven’t been able to stop listening to since I discovered it via Thief Story at the beginning of the week. Start here.


  1. soulblur says:

    I really enjoy that these are coming out at a regular time now. So nice one there, Graham. However, need to take issue with your like of Molyneux. The sooner he isn’t allowed to talk to the public about games, the happy I would be. He can still make them – I would encourage that, even – just no talking about them, especially before they’ve been released.

    • Jason Moyer says:

      I find myself far more interested in hearing him speak about games than actually playing any of the ones he’s made (including the allegedly good ones).

      • DanMan says:

        I think so too. Listening to how his games are supposed to be is much more fun than playing them and realizing that they’re not.

        • Taragon says:

          Listening to what he says opens up a whole new world to what could be. Usually requiring an additional 10-20 years of technological progress

          • Jackablade says:

            Perhaps he needs to move into university lecturing like Warren Spector has. It’d give him an outlet to express his ideas about the potential of game design without the drudgery of having to actually put them into production.

      • bills6693 says:

        I actually prefer the sequals to quite a few of his ‘classiscs’. I absoloutly LOVE Dungeon Keeper 2, and Black & White 2.

        I don’t like to hear him talk so much because he promises such wonderful things that I want to play, and are never delivered.

        • Jahandar says:

          I don’t really know enough about Molyneux to form a justified opinion yet. Out of curiosity though, when people dislike hearing him talk about games, is it because they think he is being dishonest (perhaps even to himself) and exaggerating to build hype, or because he just consistently fails to meet his own lofty goals. I ask because part of me instinctively wants to defend the guy who dreams big, even if he comes up short.

          • dE says:

            I’ll explain it this way, ask a child around age 10-12 to explain their favorite cartoon to you and why they like it. The result is somewhat akin to what you hear from Molyneux when he talks about his projects. He is extremely enthusiastic about his projects. Problem being, the game he talks about is something people on the outside just can’t see. Like the kid not understanding why their parents don’t share the interest in SUPER ROBOT BANZAI BOOMBOTS.

            So he’s struggling to communicate his enthusiasm and it always seems like he keeps on piling up completely made up features until the press finally goes “ah, now I get it”. See? The Kid says, in the cartoon, the robots can fly! Flying robots are cool? See you like flying, so my show ain’t all bad, right? Please affirm my opinion! That’s the moment he’s probably the happiest. Well all those features however, they’re somewhat unrealistic to put into a game. Heck, they probably were never meant to be part of the game to begin with. This leads to a cycle of him completely overpromising the range of the game. And it’s fun to watch him explain it, because it’s easy to see just how much it means to him… but in the end the finer details of SUPER ROBOT BANZAI BOOMBOTS are probably still lost on you. And when you have a look at the result, there are no flying robots and all the other features the Kid, pardon Molyneux talked about aren’t there either. Who is Lochsti and why does it matter that his cannon can fire plasmashells instead of lasers?

            So people are probably mad because they’re listening to the explanations of a man who’s still a child inside (which is great, to be honest!) and expect those explanations to manifest somehow.

          • Jahandar says:

            Thank for the reply, dE!

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            One super robot banzai boombot, please

    • alex_v says:

      Can’t you just not read what he says?

      I find Molyneux consistently interesting – rarely a boring interviewee.

      • soulblur says:

        I could try, but because he’s also the person making the games, and I want to find out about the games, and because he talks so much, it’s difficult to not read what he says.

        My feeling is that his games would feel subjectively better if he wasn’t allowed to talk about them.

  2. LionsPhil says:

    There’s literally no way to eliminate the effects of lag

    But we’ve had over a decade of showing that there are ways to mitigate it, and his excuses of why they don’t work ring a little hollow. Here’s his real reason:

    Part of what we were worried about was the time it would take us to develop a good networking system

    Ok, fine. You made that business decision. Just swallow it. If you don’t put in the effort to make online multiplayer work, you lose out on a lot of customers who will go “Wait, I can only play this on the rare occasion when all my buddies pile into the same room? Guess I’ll pass.”, and their complaints are perfectly valid.

    By the point he’s reached not having to “register an online account” he’s into rather desperate straw-clutching, because that’s not intrinsic in online multiplayer at all, just more modern games made of progressive unlock grind and DRM.

    • Lone Gunman says:

      Well one of the wonderful thing about indies is that they don’t have to be all about maximizing profit. They shouldn’t have to be obliged to include online multiplayer in order to reach a larger market if that will harm what the developer wants to make.

      • LionsPhil says:

        It’s a nice sentiment, but show me an indie developer who doesn’t wish they had Notch’s success and I’ll show you a liar.*

        More pressingly, if you go “well, I’m just going to go ahead and exclude target market X”, you then don’t get to complain when the feedback from target market X is “well, guess I’m not buying this”.

        (* Yes, OK, the Flappy Bird guy. Flippant comment. Generally speaking, though, you want people to play your game, not to not play your game.)

        • CookPassBabtridge says:

          I would agree and add a bit. Everyone wants success. People just respond differently when they get it. The flappy bird guy did it right IMO. Made a ton of money and got out when the attention was too much. “Make enough that you never have to work again” is quite a common dream and I think more sensible than become the sexy hunky uber lord of some 100 year empire.

        • ChrisGWaine says:

          If the feedback is “It’s simply amazing that the dev couldn’t understand that the lack of this simple feature is necessary in this day and age for multiplayer” then articles about why it isn’t actually simple probably are in order though.

          • LionsPhil says:

            True, and given the replies I’m getting it’s possible I’ve misread his tone to be “whinier” than that.

        • Lone Gunman says:

          The developers of Towerfall would be example. I hope you never complain about the likes of activition churning out cod after cod.

    • Nyctef says:

      How well you can mitigate lag depends massively on the type of game, though. For shooters, even though having low latency really helps, the process of turning, aiming and shooting takes a long time compared to the amount of latency, so the game can assess how well you performed and then decide whether you hit or not. Then there’s the much longer-term skills of just having good spatial awareness and positioning.

      In other games (say Nidhogg, for example) you have to be able to do something completely unexpected at the last millisecond, and still have it work properly. Any sort of noticeable latency really kills that, and it’s not something you can really fix at all unless you’re playing locally (or on a LAN, maybe).

      Maybe the article didn’t do a good enough job explaining this, but it’s absolutely a real problem.

      • Rizlar says:

        Nah, the article did a great job of explaining it and it makes complete sense.

      • LionsPhil says:

        For the sluggish modern shooter, maybe, but Quake 3 Area and UT99 both existed and were massively successful, and that was in the bad old days of dial-up for a lot of people.

        There’s a huge, huge amount of prior work out there showing that (the illusion of) twitchy online multiplayer works well enough that people enjoy it. Even if TF2 snipers sometimes headshot you a split-second after you get to cover, that it works the other 80% of the time is sufficient is supported by the sixty-six thousand people currently playing it.

        • P.Funk says:

          I’d like to see a Sniper headshot me through my excellent acting in the Heavy disguise.

        • fish99 says:

          Q3 and UT do exist and are fun, but you can feel the lag.

        • jrodman says:

          Fortunately this was entirely addressed in the text of the article to which you are replying.

    • thedosbox says:

      If you don’t put in the effort to make online multiplayer work, you lose out on a lot of customers who will go “Wait, I can only play this on the rare occasion when all my buddies pile into the same room? Guess I’ll pass.”.

      There are plenty of games with multiplayer for that audience. I actually wish more developers would focus on a good SP game instead of wasting resources on a shitty MP that hardly anyone plays.

      • LionsPhil says:

        Sure, but he isn’t making or defending singleplayer games, so that’s irrelevant.

        • thedosbox says:

          “Sure, but he isn’t making or defending singleplayer games, so that’s irrelevant.”

          Um, he’s defending NOT making internet-multiplayer games because the resources needed to do it properly could be used to better effect elsewhere.

          • LionsPhil says:

            No, he’s defending making multiplayer but non-online games. Singleplayer does not enter into this. At all.

        • thedosbox says:

          No, he’s defending making multiplayer but non-online games. Singleplayer does not enter into this. At all.

          Perhaps you should re-read the comment. Hint: “internet multiplayer”.

    • SuddenSight says:

      I don’t understand your complaints.

      Lag forces you to build delays into your design. His game, and the other games he discusses, are designed to rely on very precise timing interactions. There is no way to get around that disconnect, no matter how good your netcode is.

      So he is faced with a decision: make a worse version of the game that includes netcode, or don’t.

      To me, the “this game would be better with online multiplayer” argument makes as much sense as saying Gone Home should have a shooting section. Even if you would like it more with that element included, that isn’t how the game was conceived.

      Nidhogg is a fantastic example of this. The game was originally designed as an in-face-only game. The developer added an online multiplayer component, because that’s what the cool games do these days. And now every review of the game has to include a little section on how the game *technically has* online multiplayer, but it’s rubbish.

      Honestly, I think the bigger issue is the growing acceptance of games means it has become feasible to create games with a higher bar to entry. Just look at “Punch the Custard”. It is apparently fantastic, but I will never be able to play it due to my lack of any of the extra equipment necessary. This means there will inevitably be games that lots of people like, but you can’t play. It’s frustrating, but would you rather a world where those games couldn’t exist at all?

      • TechnicalBen says:

        There is also computing, processing, imputing and display lag on every system. MP adds to that granted, but no system is “lag free”. :)

        Thus it’s more down to deciding when and how to cut of factors (like lowering processing and simplifying a game/graphics to improve FPS or doing the opposite to improve the visual effect). This applies to both SP and MP games.

        • jrodman says:

          If the display output is 60 frames a second, and the system can produce the very next frame based on your input reliably, then effectively it is lag free, even though the next frame make take some fraction of a second to be produced.

          So yes, lag-free is possible, so long as you don’t use a silly definition.

          However there are many other sources of lag, such as display systems buffering for more than a sixtieth of a second.

      • Moraven says:

        Fighters have decent online mode due to good netcoding, design.

        • Baines says:

          Fighting games are increasingly designed with compensation and hiding lag in mind. Input delays, slower speeds, longer animations… The linked article covers some of the stuff fighting games do to deal with lag, and one of the commenters covers why GGPO can (mostly) work for fighting games but will fail for a game like Towerfall.

          As for fighting games having decent net code, that is a claim that would get shot down on most fighting game forums. Only a few games probably can pull a consensus that they have acceptable net code. You do still find uninformed comments inside fighting game communities, such as the people who can’t understand why a “simple” game like a fighter has lag issues when FPSs solved(*) lag issues long ago, or the people who tout GGPO as a magic bullet that fixes everything (and anything that isn’t GGPO is automatically garbage that isn’t worth considering).

          (*) An FPS is of course a different game than a fighting game, and the FPS didn’t “solve” lag issues anyway. Go to an FPS community and you’ll find people complaining about their games’ net code, with bullets curving around corners, people stabbing through walls or behind themselves, and the like.

    • blind_boy_grunt says:

      to me the question is if games like tekken, street figher et al. have online multiplayer and from the quick google i did, they do and it seems to work.
      So i think i agree with LionsPhil, but i see it more as they(they as in indies) don’t have the know-how to make really good(technically speaking) multiplayer games yet, but they’ll learn. Integrating multiplayer is a pain in the ass and you basically have to plan for it from the start.
      I mean some time ago, 3d was the dividing line between AAA and indies (anyone remember that shark/space marines fps game that never came out and how amazed we were that it looked like it did; at least that is what i remember) and now there are amazing looking indie games.
      edit: he even cited sf4 as an example and said they made the gameplay slower. It think that’s (quit frankly) bs because even if that’s true there are still those decisions of did the player press block at the time the other guy attacked or not. Which is basically the exact same thing as the towerfall arrow dodging.

      • Geebs says:

        I think SF4 is a bit slower than the Championship Edition, but it doesn’t feel any slower than the original SF2. Frankly, though, the championship edition was a bit chipmunk-ish and making everything less frantic was a good move, especially given that everyone who was into SF2 back in the day is currently working on their first cataracts…

    • malkav11 says:

      The thing that gets me is that so many of these games are coming to the absolute least suited platform: the PC. I have no use for any kind of local multiplayer on the PC. My friends and I are not going to crowd around my desk to play games on my speakerless (I use headphones) PC. It just doesn’t work. Online multiplayer is great, though, since everyone I know has a PC and I can take advantage of Steam sales and bundles and such to pass out additional copies if my friends don’t already own the game.

      Conversely, on consoles, the combination of my friends needing the same console, the same expensive game, and (in some cases) a paid online subscription (which I for one don’t have for the following reason) means I’m basically never going to get to partake in online multiplayer. I think I’ve ever even tried like…twice. But give me local multiplayer, and we can sit around in front of my TV with my console and my copy of the game and all is good.

      (I mean, I suppose I wouldn’t be playing your Nidhoggs and whatnot anyway because competitive multiplayer does nothing for me generally speaking, and I really, really don’t get Nidhogg in particular. But still. It seems to be becoming a trend for coop as well – all the wrong type of multiplayer for the system.)

      • mechabuddha says:

        What you just described are arbitrary conventions. I have my PC hooked up to a large screen television in my living room, where my friends and I play local co-op games sitting on the couch. This isn’t hard to do. It was as easy as taking the HDMI cable and controllers from my XBox and just moved them over to my PC. Your criticism of not being able to crowd around your desk is entirely self imposed.

        • Lemming says:

          There’s always this kind of response….it’s not an arbitrary convention. Some (I’m going to say most), people have their PC separate from their living room for a whole host of legitimate reasons. If that weren’t true, Valve wouldn’t be trying to make Steam Machines.

        • malkav11 says:

          Sure, I could do that. But when I’m using my PC by myself, which would be the vast majority of the time even if I were doing local multiplayer on it, I vastly prefer doing it at my desk because, among other things, that’s the situation that it’s actually designed to be used in. And moving my console over to my desk wouldn’t change the reasons it’s a bad fit for online multiplayer.

      • Kitsunin says:

        The difference between PC and console is, with a PC you can do literally anything we have the technology for!

        On a TV? Sure!

        With a dance-pad? Why not!

        On a monitor two feet from my face, with a mouse and keyboard? Yup!

        Strong computer connected to the monitor and also streaming to a weaker PC when I want the TV? Hell yes!

      • Baines says:

        Sadly enough, it is starting to reach a point where consoles aren’t seen as couch gaming systems, at least not in regards to genres that it used to hold.

        Consoles embracing online has led to a degree of backlash against local multiplayer. Take the console FPS that has moved from four player split-screen to single player. It was kind of sad seeing Activision hype two player versus bots as a great new feature for Call of Duty last gen, when before last gen that would have been considered a bare bones minimum for a console FPS.

    • trjp says:

      I’m sorry, but the sort of game which the article is talking about WILL NEVER WORK over the Internet – even LANs may not be good enough and you can’t code or buy your way out of that.

      There is no lag prediction algorithm which will allow players to precisely do things like “land on each others heads” or engage in “real-time fast-action combat” so if that’s your aim in your game, don’t even try.

      You make it sound like it’s just a case of spending some time and money – it’s not. The best possible result over WAN is inconsistent lag in the 20-40ms range and occasional lag which is much longer – for LAN the timings are shorter but the inconsistency remains.

      All games which play “over the wire” already compensate for this by simply not being those sorts of games – they use slow-paced combat, ranged combat (harder to argue whether you’ve been hit with bullets than with a dagger), avoid high-damage positional combat (backstabbing is something people always complain is ‘bugged’) or are, essentially, “turn based” which removes the issue entirely.

      I think it’s important players understand this – network software and hardware will NEVER be as quick and consistent as 2 controllers plugged into the same PC – NEVER. You get around this issue by avoiding some really satisfying types of gameplay OR you include those and shun “over the wire” multiplayer – simples…

      • trjp says:

        p.s. and a bigger issue is that achieving low-latency means getting the end-user to buy and configure a lot of kit which most people would resent spending money on or have NO CLUE how to setup properly.

        The technical support aspect alone would bankrupt a medium-sized company and for most players it’s not even an option.

        Example: I noticed a thread on Steam yesterday where someone was railing against the fact that F1 2013 didn’t make it clear that playing an F1 game on a keyboard might not be the best possible experience. They expected a keyboard to control the fastest racing car on earth – no analog input at all (OK, maybe mouse steering which is – well – stupid) – those are the people you’re asking to understand the issues of networking…

      • Nate says:

        I thought technicalben was doing the strawman thing up above, but I guess not.

        LAN’s about 1 ms of lag. Less, sometimes.

        An LCD monitor means 60 fps max which means up to 17ms lag between input and display.

        That’s not including latency from the keyboard and USB bus, which should be another 5ms or so.

        Network latency is additive with input latency and processing latency, but in a well-designed system, display latency shouldn’t add to it.

        Human brains do weird things. Our perception of time blurs to give us illusions of simultaneity or near simultaneity when our reaction speeds even under the best circumstances are 150-200 ms. Latency far less than this impacts performance, but there’s a threshold– get it low enough, and it seems to completely disappear.

        So while Mr. Foddy does a good job explaining the lack of WAN play in Towerfall, I don’t think the lack of LAN is answered. Not that any devs are beholden to anyone to make games with certain features!

        • Baines says:

          LAN may be seen as more dead than couch play these days.

          LAN will add complications to the design though.

          Local is one copy of a game running on one machine. Controller and display lag are external to the game. It isn’t the game’s concern if one player happens to use a controller that has more input lag than another player, and everyone views the same display. (Though some rhythm games do offer a user “calibration” setting to adjust somewhat for potential display lag.)

          LAN is two or more copies of a game running on two or more machines. The game’s code needs to be able to talk to another copy of itself and stay in sync. Even if the overall lag introduced by LAN is less than the lag introduced by a sluggish display, the impact of that lag can be greater, and affects how the game actually runs versus how the players perceive the game running (the way that controller or display lag affect it.)

          • Nate says:

            I totally agree LAN play is dead (wasn’t introducing the idea myself). And I totally agree that implementing it could lead to changes in code flow, even, when done badly, to problems.

            But I do disagree that that lag is present on a “crappy” monitor, and it might have been because I presented it as a LCD monitor. Anything (including CRTs) running at 60hz is going to face up to 17ms of latency. If you get fancy, drop the resolution for 120hz, you halve the latency to 8ms. If you’re unfortunate enough to have a cheap monitor, pay the lag tax some more. (Online databases are plagued by poor testing methodology, but suggest 5-50ms additional latency from LCDs. A high speed camera test of input-display latency on youtube shows about 50ms latency from click to display.)

            I should also clarify that when I was talking about 1ms latency on LAN, I meant wired LAN. No idea how wireless might affect things.

    • Shuck says:

      “Mitigate” is very different from “eliminate.” You’ll still end up with plenty of circumstances (once you’ve opened the gates to online play) where reduced lag is still game-breaking lag. Also, one of the means of mitigating lag is having gameplay that’s not fundamentally reliant on twitch. (Which in this case means “don’t make the game that you’re making.”)
      Also, “lack of time” doesn’t necessarily mean “business decision,” either. In indie development, you’re often extremely limited in how much time you can devote to anything and still have resources to, you know, live off of. It’s about survival decisions, and making a complex system that provides little to no benefit for your particular game is not a survival-friendly move.

      • LionsPhil says:

        Also, “lack of time” doesn’t necessarily mean “business decision,” either. In indie development, you’re often extremely limited in how much time you can devote to anything and still have resources to, you know, live off of.

        That’s pretty much exactly a business decision in this context.

        Per “it won’t be perfect”: well duh. But see above. Plenty of other games succeed with “good enough”.

        • Kitsunin says:

          I dunno. If the issue is that you have to go back to work in another month to avoid starving, unless you start selling the game, and you won’t have time to continue work with a 9-to-5, you could call that a business decision…but your hand has been forced, so I find it hard to call that a decision at all.

          • LionsPhil says:

            Well, we can argue over which words to use for it all day, but since I’d rather play some games, can you at least see that it’s the same kind of thing? You have a savings budget and a cost-of-living eating into that which dictates a schedule in which you have to make a release. You’ve got to pack features into that time. At some point you have to make a call on which of the competing set of all features you might like are most important and which have to be dropped, trading off against how they’re going to affect your success. This guy dropped online multiplayer, and he’s going to have to accept that that means he probably won’t sell to people who don’t live with other gamers. (I probably misread the tone of his article, and he has.)

        • RobF says:

          Well yeah but in the case of Sportsfriends (and Towerfall and most of the current crop of local multiplayer titles), it’s not a business decision, it’s a conscious design decision to make the game the best it can be for what it’s trying to achieve which is entirely to facilitate local multiplayer experiences.

    • Moraven says:

      My biggest concern is needing that much controller hardware. It is on PS4 now, but I have no reason to have 4 controllers.

      Release the game onto Wii U. Problem solved.

    • Geebs says:

      There’s literally no way to eliminate the effects of lag

      To let my inner pedant out, that’s objectively nonsense; the entire point of good netcode or multiplayer design is to eliminate the perceptual effects of lag.

      I’d also stipulate that even this sort of twitch game is only chucking a couple of floats around (iirc you only have one hitpoint in towerfall, so you don’t even need to calculate health) so they’ve got much less prediction to worry about that even Quake did.

      In brief: clearly Call of Duty is objectively a better game than Towerfall.

  3. AndiK says:

    Um. Could you please fix the OMSI 2 “mostly fixed” link? Right now it points to this very article.

    • Premium User Badge

      Graham Smith says:



      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        So would you recommend it now? I’m looking for some relaxing distraction and I like Germany

        • trjp says:

          You sound like their ideal customer!!!!

          Just don’t go in there expecting a precision ‘game’ – go in there expecting a slightly shitty part-time-job and you’ll have a whale of a time tho ;0

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            Cool. I’m going to buy some sausage from the German Sausage stand in town, put it in a pack lunch box and eat it mid way round my route. I know I won’t have to shout at misbehaving teenagers or drunks either because germans are polite and cultured.
            EDIT: OK £27 is a bit pricey for me at the moment. My time at the wheel will have to wait for a steam sale.

          • TWChristine says:

            The other day I d/led a Scandinavia mod for Euro Truck Sim 2. I thought the best part was when I crossed into Sweden the first thing I came across was a giant IKEA. To get to Sweden though I had to go through *drum roll*..Germany! So it has that going for it.

            Fun fact, you want to eat German sausages, and IKEA is where I used to eat a lot of hotdogs. Primarily because it’s also where my famous hotdog pick-up line came from.

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            Ohhhhh myyyy goooood there’s a EuroTruck 2 SImulator Demo. I just actually screeched at my screen. TA!
            Also. Hot Dog pick up line …. ? Do I want to know?

          • TWChristine says:

            I just realized how sleazy that sounds..but no it’s nothing bad. Nothing exactly great either. I’m just really bad at trying to start conversations with people. So I was leaving IKEA and figured I would have a hotdog. Lo and behold, the girl at the counter was rather cute. So I went back for a second hotdog, trying to think of what to say, but coming up with nothing. So I went back for a third hotdog even though there was no way I could eat it and managed to stammer out “So..uh..are these hotdogs from Sweden, too?” To which she laughed (score!) and said “No, they’re regular beef franks.” I then nodded and said “Ah ok!” My body overcome with the rush of adrenaline, and a solid ground work laid, I then decided to leave before I came off any more awkward.

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            Pure skill. TBH she has probably heard every sausage joke going so getting a laugh is quite something :)
            Right. ETS 2 demo is downloaded. I AM THE KING OF THE ROAD
            EDIT: BOUGHT

          • TWChristine says:

            Woo! Glad you enjoyed it! :)

          • Gap Gen says:

            The phrase “beef frank” reminded me of the shirtless guy doing football tricks outside Sacre Coeur yesterday.

        • AndiK says:

          Last time I checked (~1 week ago) it still took every opportunity to throw useless access violations at you. Ironically, the release version was stable on my machine, so YMMV. X-)
          That’s why I asked Graham to fix the link – maybe he’d found some new patch or something. M&R aren’t famous for telling people about new game versions — not on their homepage, and if you’re lucky you find some hint in their forum.

          Granted, it’s easier now that OMSI 2 is on steam, but I played the first one for 1 1/2 years in V1.0, always looking on their news page hoping for a patch that never came. Only to find out that there had been patches all along and that they had to be installed via the crappy Aerosoft Launcher which I’d ignored completely. ARGH!!! Honestly, I love the concept von OMSI and you gotta admire the amount of detail these guys put into their buses. But from a technological point of view (engine performance, general “build quality” and so on) both games are complete crap IMO. M&R’s decision to build their own game engine from scratch and even create their very own scripting language (Reads like a mixture of Assembler and Befunge) is a huge arrow to the knee. It takes such incredible amounts of effort to create and maintain an engine that could much better be used to improve core values of the game and/or generally speed up development. Again, I admire the incredible effort they put in their product. I could never pull off something like OMSI myself, yet still I cannot but beweep the sheer inefficiency of their methods.

          Okay, rant over. You may go now.
          BTW, I say this as someone who has clocked in 20 hours of OMSI 2 and many times that (>100?) in OMSI 1.

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            I just bought Eurotruck Simulator 2, as the demo is great fun. I think I will wait until OMSI 2 has green lights right across its dashboard (it sounds like its still spluttering and having clutch issues at the moment) and a cut price fare before I jump on board :)

  4. Philotic Symmetrist says:

    Regarding online and offline multiplayer, I often find it a bit frustrating when games have online multiplayer but don’t have local multiplayer; I can see the reasons why online wouldn’t always be feasible but surely single machine multiplayer should be easier? Split-screen gaming actually works quite well and on a computer is there not some potential for multiple monitor solutions as well? It’s the most significant area where console gaming absolutely trounces PC gaming…and it shouldn’t.

    • sabrage says:

      It’s the most significant area where console gaming absolutely trounces PC gaming…and it shouldn’t.

      Last I checked, which was ages ago, console games seemed to be trending away from split-screen multiplayer in favor of system-link.

      • bills6693 says:

        Perhaps but split-screen is still a thing for most console games, isn’t it? (genuine question)

        Not a console gamer myself but I remember back when I was in school, we had a 360 in the common room and 4 controllers and would play split-screen on that constantly. We didn’t have a second xbox or second television, so split-screen was the only way.

        It is that, and having friends round on the sofa, that are the two main reasons for split-screen and why I don’t think it’ll go away for a while. And with the whole ‘steam box’ direction, I think it’ll become more and more important for PC games to include this too.

        • dE says:

          Judging from my playtime with the consoletoy, Splitscreen is still a thing on there. Maybe it’s the selection of games I play, but coop splitscreen is a pretty common sight.

        • Darth_Pingu says:

          CODBLOPSTWO allows something as crazy as split screen online multiplayer.
          … Yes – Split screen while in an online game.

      • malkav11 says:

        It’s not system link – that’s basically the equivalent of a LAN and hardly anyone does that anymore either – it’s online multiplayer. For which they charge annually.

        • TCM says:

          PS3 doesn’t, and Wii U doesn’t. That makes the two of them the only consoles with working internet services still on the market that don’t charge for access to multiplayer servers.

          If you’re counting handhelds, you can probably also include the Vita and 3DS.

    • draglikepull says:

      The problem with creating a split-screen mode is that you have to render the equivalent of two separate screens but you’ve still got the same amount of CPU, GPU, RAM, etc. as you do for rendering one screen in a single player (or online multiplayer game). That’s why it’s so rare to see split-screen gaming any more, and why when you do see it the split-screen mode runs at reduced graphical fidelity.

      • SuicideKing says:

        Um but the screen is split into two, you’re still pushing the same amount of pixels…

        • ChrisGWaine says:

          There are a lot of things for which the costs are not per pixel.

          (although it’s true it’s not equivalent to two separate screens with the same resolution)

        • Randomer says:

          If you play a game like Halo, a lot of objects get winked out of existence as soon as you are out of sight and unlikely to revisit them. And that is necessary for performance reasons. Split screen can double or quadruple the number of objects that are being controlled/rendered/lit/shadowed/interacted with. That was one of the reasons why Bungie opted to kill the quad split between Halo 3 and Halo 3 ODST.

      • AngelTear says:

        If AAA devs weren’t so scared that without extreme graphics their games wouldn’t matter they would allow it either way. Split screen is great fun, and it can’t be replicated with online multiplayer, removing some HD textures or AA to allow it is not going to kill anyone.

        Plus, as others have said, consoles do it fairly often still, despite their limited CPU/GPU, there is literally no reason to take away that feature from PC.

  5. HugobertingtonEsq says:

    There are CS:GO players running a ….virtual gun-running gig?
    I’m not sure whether that’s hilarious or pathetic

    • HadToLogin says:

      Not different than TF2 unusual or Dota “will buy courier, paying $50000” 2. It’s “Oblivion’s Horse Armor”, just for gambling addicts.

      I know a guy who unpacked knife in CSGO, worth on market over $200.

      Thanks to his “addiction”, he ended practically trading it for m4 asiimov (on market for around $20). He of course traded that knife for keys and various other things, but his addiction to opening cases ended him with trading everything he had just to get that one m4 asiimov.

    • Kollega says:

      To me, that’s actually neither hilarious nor pathetic, but very, very, very depressing. Valve struck gold with their TF2 gamble-crates, and now they’re going to turn every multiplayer, and maybe not even just that, game into an excuse for putting the player in front of a glorified slot machine. And that is immoral, mercenary, and extremely damaging to the future of F2P gaming… and maybe not even just that.

      • HadToLogin says:

        That’s why there’s no HL3. They have no idea how to put crates in single player game.

        • LionsPhil says:

          Perhaps they should go ask EA for advice.

          • HadToLogin says:

            That didn’t really work.
            Valve looks for something that will bring few thousands, if not millions every MONTH from players who already bought game and are replaying it again even in 5 years.
            Something like Portal 2 had (hats for robots) but totally didn’t work.

      • TechnicalBen says:

        This. :(

    • Moraven says:

      Bitcoin of gaming. Valve, make cheap games, profit off auction house for non game changing items. Free money when they barely have to do much. Steam cards are the same way.

  6. Philopoemen says:

    I’m trying to work out from the CS:GO article…are people actually making real money off these trades, or is it all steam wallet “value?” I’m assuming with the Paypal transactions there’s some actual currency changing hands, but for most of the article it seemed like it was strictly Steam-based.

    • AngelTear says:

      I remember, from the old RPS article about Dota2 trading, that Steam trading is for small common stuff. Rare items and things that start costing upwards of 100 dollars are traded outside of Steam – I mean, they are gifted through the Steam inventory, obviously, but accompanied by a payment with real currency in the real world.

  7. Blaaaaaaag says:

    One too many a’s, and you’ve missed the B entirely. Geeze, guys.

  8. guygodbois00 says:

    from that REAL TALK with somebody at EA called Rich Hilleman:
    “…If you spend enough money with me, you get to complain.”
    What amount constitutes “enough’? Surely, purchasing the game at any amount should give the buyer complaining rights, no?
    Also gems like:
    ” …When that’s true, it means that your customer’s expectations in the future are not something you can measure today because they’re in motion.”
    That’s why they churn out sequels like there’s no tomorrow, I guess.
    And that logic about game price being 60$ ” ’cause retailers ” – HA!
    The whole article reeks of corporate doublespeak and plain old BS, but it shows EA steady on the old course of not caring. And why should they? Money is good, anywho.

    • HadToLogin says:

      Well, he was mostly talking about F2P games – there’s so many people talking shit about them never playing them.
      Reminding me RPS readers leaving comments about CoD – so many people complain about them every time there’s news, but they STILL buy them every year, even when they call them overpriced pile of shit? That’s some serious issues you guys have, stop buying stuff you hate and your life will get better.

      • P.Funk says:

        I never buy them. I get my inside info from playing the copy my buddy buys every year.

    • LionsPhil says:

      Gotta love “and if I get all twisted up based on what they’re saying, I’m actually going to build a product they don’t like”, though, because he’s bang on the money. Never listen to forum-going fans. (This is honestly my biggest concern about “community-driven” Kickstarted games.)

      • ffordesoon says:

        No, no, no. The problem is that many developers – and most human beings, for that matter – don’t know how to parse feedback correctly. Do exactly what the forumites want without thinking, and yes, the game will be anodyne and shitty. But all feedback tells you something, even if it’s not what’s being said.

        Simple example: “This gun is OP” may mean the gun is OP, but it could also mean that other weapons are underpowered, or even that the gun’s animation makes it feel too powerful. If either of the latter two end up being the problem, the feedback is still valuable. The simple identification of a previously unknown balance issue is great feedback, even if nerfing the gun is the wrong choice in the end.

        Instead of simply rolling over and doing whatever people want, you have to find the substantive feedback within their complaints. It’s a tricky art to master, which is one of the reasons why top-flight talent is scarce in any medium.

    • Shadow says:

      Personally, I found the “get to complain” comment pretty aimless, considering he later says he can’t really pay attention to complaining users if he’s to make a game they’ll like. Ultimately, nobody can decide who “gets to complain”: the correlation between whiners and high spenders isn’t shocking. They complain more because they invested more (and want to demand things to justify their investment), and someone who hasn’t invested anything will much sooner move on to a different/better game.

      Also, fun fact, taken from figures in the article: if a 60-dollar AAA game with a budget of over $100 million (i.e. Battlefield 4) is to break even, assuming each copy sold gets the publisher 27 dollars, then it must sell over 3.7 million copies. And then and only then can it actually start turning profits. There’s something seriously wrong with that, and I truly doubt you can blame it all on retailers. It seems increasingly like a runaway train: ballooning budgets and prices will eventually lead to some critical point of unsustainability and a massive collapse that will make the 1983 videogame crash look like a mere hiccup.

      • Horg says:

        I doubt we will see another ”crash” in game development mainly due to how much technology and the market have changed in the last 20 years. AAA might well implode one day, taking the bland sequel conveyor belt with it, but there are now a good number of avenues for developers to go publisher free. There is more talent in the development pool and more tech to license. Alternative funding options keep opening up and new distribution platforms are breaking the brick and mortar stores influence on the market. $100M+ budget games probably can’t be sustained for much longer but game development as a whole is looking fairly robust right now.

        • Shadow says:

          Well, that’s true. I meant a AAA market crisis. Indie games and those with alternate funding methods don’t have to juggle titanic figures to stave off monumental losses.

          Saying it’d be drastically bigger than the 1983 crash is still valid, however, given how the mainstream market is so much larger and worth so much more, billions, at this point in time. But yeah, newer funding initiatives could become common enough to prevent a collapse of grand proportions.

      • Nate says:

        Well, this whole teminology of “rights” and such is awful. Blame Paine.

        But I read it as, “They get to complain without me judging them for it.” Which leaves all sorts of knobs, like how much they pay, how much they complain, and how much one judges.

      • Premium User Badge

        FhnuZoag says:

        Well, this presumably explains why EA is investing so heavily into DLC and digital distribution via Origin. These represent ways to get gamers to spend more, and also keep a larger cut of the value. I assume this is what keeps big budget games like Battlefield 4 profitable.

    • The Random One says:

      What really ruffles my chuffles is that he essentially means that since they’ve spent money he’ll graciously allow them to complain, but actually listen to their complaints? Obviously even his graciousness has limits!

  9. BadBannana says:

    The gunrunning article is worth a read. Also those weapon skins are amazing. I should play Counter-Strike

  10. Baines says:

    Since someone mentioned Anita Sarkeesian last week, and she’s now in the news for the same thing again.

    This time it wasn’t regular fan art, it was an image created for the game’s creator and later sold by the artist with the game creator’s permission.

    Again, the artist isn’t trying to attack Sarkeesian or to stir controversy, but to defend artist rights. Again the artist disputes Sarkeesian’s “fair usage” defense (raising the issue this time that fair usage is a US concept and not a UK one), and takes offense at Sarkeesian’s general response. (Sarkeesian never contacted the artist, Sarkeesian claimed there was a credit in the original video but the artist claimed it was unreadable, Sarkeesian refused to remove the image upon request, Sarkeesian added a new readable credit but used an outdated address, and only changed the address after more emails.)

    (And before anyone might bring it up, the artist posted on Twitter that she gave Destructoid permission to use the picture in the article header.)

    link to

    • TechnicalBen says:

      Interesting. I wonder if there are exceptions when an image is used for political (etc) reasons as suppose to general news reporting/fair use? Or does fair use cover all sorts of profit/commercial/political/ideological use?

    • Rizlar says:

      Yeah, the misappropriation of images is really annoying for artists in this era of google image search and screen media.

      Normally a credit is all that the artist will want. But so many people take the existence of great images for granted and don’t even consider where they came from.

    • Misnomer says:

      Before everyone gets all, damn Americans and their laws (RPS nationalism does get tiring)

      link to

      Also known as fair dealing in the UK

      link to

      There is an exception for:

      “iii.Criticism or review
      Quoting parts of a work for the purpose of criticism or review is permitted provided that:
      •The work has been made available to the public.
      •The source of the material is acknowledged.
      •The material quoted must be accompanied by some actual discussion or assessment (to warrant the criticism or review classification).
      •The amount of the material quoted is no more than is necessary for the purpose of the review. ”

      Now I am definitely not a lawyer and no fan of Sarkeesian, but she tried to give credit multiple times and every other part of the use meets the description of the exception to copyright infringement pasted above.

      This just seems to be righteous moral indignation of an artist.

      • Rizlar says:

        Except the artist’s image was an original response to TWA and not part of the work being discussed (afaik).

        • Misnomer says:

          I haven’t watched her video, so I don’t know how much she talked about the piece of art or if she was only talking about Thomas was Alone. I don’t know the law well enough (not a lawyer) to know how much direct criticism of the work is necessary for that exception to apply in the UK. I will link below to the actual wording of the statute which says the criticism may be of “another” work too…

          “Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work or of a performance of a work, does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement [F1 and provided that the work has been made available to the public]”

          link to

          Fair Dealing/Fair Use is a messy and complex thing under copyright and I am sure if anyone cared to litigate this it would be a tough case barely worth the amount of money required for the lawyers.

          Fan Art itself is a bit of a weird thing to get in a twist about too as they are typically derivative works which may be violations of copyright themselves depending on circumstances. (The artist here got permission to sell the art from the maker of TWA).

          My point is that there is no moral nor legal certitude here. It seems that quite often on videogame sites, indignation over intellectual property is the starting point despite complexities in the law making the indignation misplaced at best.

          • Rizlar says:

            Fair enough. Classic legalise to leave everything so open to interpretation!

      • Baines says:

        Regardless of the legalities, most people probably stop using an image when/if asked. We know of two incidents where Sarkeesian was asked to remove images, and both times she refused to do so. (Some of the people who’s Let’s Play gameplay footage she copied might have asked her to remove their video.)

        This is also more than a fan issue. Fan productions tend to get a bit more leeway, whether or not they legally deserve it. And people tend to be kinder towards a small business taking from a bigger business. People tend to be more critical when the bigger guy takes from the smaller.

        Sarkeesian’s Feminist Frequency is a business. It may be a non-profit, and it may claim to champion a worthwhile subject, but it is a business with a decent amount of money involved. If the Red Cross was caught using artwork without the artist’s permission, they’d likely try to work out a deal or just stop using the art. They probably wouldn’t be dictating terms to the artist, or blowing off the artist, as those kinds of things would blow up a minor story into a bigger PR issue. If you want something smaller and more YouTube related, consider how TotalBiscuit might react. He’s careful to use his own footage, or to use official trailers and PR material.

    • Geebs says:

      Bollocks. The artist in question (I’m using the term loosely here – the picture is of a square, and it’s not even an original but “an homage” to somebody else’s square) is just trying to trade off Sarkeesian’s fame, and doing it in such a way as to maximise victimhood. You don’t even have a time scale here – it took “several emails” for this to get sorted out, but that could have happened over the space of a couple of days.

      Then you brought it up in a rather grubby fashion, using it to try to smear Sarkeesian as somebody who’s become too big for their boots (at best in the manner in which people usually snipe at successful people, at worst in the manner in which people snipe at successful women). This in the context that even the person raising the stink in the first place specified that she didn’t want that to happen.

      TL:DR get over it, stop being a chauvinist creep, and shut up.

      • TCM says:

        Between folks who react like you, the “Die CIS scum” tumblr crowd, and constant overapplication of “check your privilege” (not to mention he recent girl scouts “Ban bossy” campaign, which is so bizarre it makes my head explode, and things like “Cultural appropriation” — I seriously saw a 2 page long diatribe on tumblr about why it was wrong to wear your hair in dreadlocks unless you were black or desi, and you were a racist if you did so, even if you didn’t know it), I think I prefer to take a stance of egalitarianism instead of, for instance, feminism.

        I’d rather stand for the equality of everyone than make the worst possible assumption of someone because (you think) they have testicles or ovaries and an agenda, or whatever.

        Do you even know if Baines is male or female? Why make an assumption of male, and a chauvinist? Because he or she criticized Sarkeesian, someone whose work (if my anecdotal experience is to be believed) is rapidly falling out of favor even within feminist and egalitarian circles? (Note: I have not personally watched Sarkeesian’s videos, and I am not terribly interested in doing so. I won’t comment on their quality, or her qualities as a person, this is based on secondhand knowledge. I am not attacking her, again.)

        That honestly says more about you than him or her.

        And another thing: Why is it considered disingenuous for an artist to get their work recognized as theirs, regardless of what you think of its quality? They are the one who made it, and what’s more, they have it for sale — Sarkeesian’s videos should have boosted the signal of the work, and it should have been mutually beneficial. Instead either the credit was not present, not correct, or illegible, and I can’t abide something like that as a creative sort.

        Again, not saying that the artist is absolutely in the right, or Sarkeesian is wrong, not saying anything about the relative quality or value of their works. I’m also not saying Baines isn’t doing exactly what you described, I’m just not assuming it from the word go. I hate it when people’s knee jerk reaction to the criticism of someone who shares their belief is to scream that it’s persecution, or some form of hate-driven motive, instead of evaluating the criticism on its own merits, and taking it to heart in the future.

        • Geebs says:

          You don’t have to be male to be a chauvinist, you chauvinist.

          Baines is using insinuations of impropriety to try to invalidate Sarkeesian’s material without actually addressing it. That’s slimy in the manner of “and when did you stop beating your wife” and it’s been brought up in the last couple of weeks with no real justification.

          • AngelTear says:

            The artist in question is just trying to trade off Sarkeesian’s fame, and doing it in such a way as to maximise victimhood.

            I don’t know where you actually see that.
            I quote from the artist’s statement:

            I would like to state that I do not want to attack Anita Sarkeesian, and I do not want to fuel the hate machine that’s directed at her.
            It’s hard to be clearer than that.
            There’s nothing that indicates s/he has ulterior motives, only suspicion based on “”””””human nature””””” (Did I put enough inverted commas?) “surely he’s just leeching popularity” and no concrete argument.

            Same for Baines. I haven’t seen him/her actually discrediting Anita or her videos, just her practice when concerning the use of material from other people.

            @TCM If you ever have 30 minutes to spare, IMO Anita’s videos are certainly worth watching. Nothing groundbreaking, but interesting, well-researched and well-produced application of some basic feminist ideas to the gaming world.

          • TCM says:

            “You don’t have to be male to be a chauvinist, you chauvinist.”

            Wow, hey, great to know the level we’re working on here.

            Since you’re the only human being who matters, and you have to stoop to personal attacks first thing, I’ll let you get on with your life in peace.

            @AngelTear: Consider it on my radar, then. To this point nobody has given me a good reason to watch it, but plenty of people have attacked me for defending people who are attacked for criticizing it.

            Wow that’s a complicated sentence.

          • Geebs says:

            @ AngelTear – people make entire careers out of managing rights and permissions in all areas of publishing, because it’s a hard thing to get right. Similarly, artists have to negotiate their rights with publishers as part of the normal process of doing business. This problem was solved directly by an agreement between the parties involved before it became a story. The only reason why this was noteworthy is the context of Sarkeesian’s controversial status. This has been brought up on two consecutive weeks in the Sunday Papers comments with no actual context. Y’know, like:

            Bruce Wayne: MY PARENTS ARE DEAAAD!

            Baines: Sorry to hear that Bruce, did you know that Anita Sarkeesian’s a plagiarist?

            Personally I would fall in the camp that says that if people are going to continue to be upset about how over-exposed she is, they should stop bringing up every last thing she does.

            If you want context re: Baines’ mudslinging agenda, just look at the comment thread from last week’s sunday papers.

            @ TCM: if your argument hinges on picking on and over-analysing the specific words that someone else has used, you should at least try to learn what those words actually mean

            Similarly, if you’re going to get your knickers in a twist about personal attacks you might have considered not opening with a bizarre insinuation about my opinion on the cultural appropriateness of dreadlocks.

        • Rizlar says:

          Feminism is entirely concerned with equality. To claim otherwise is a mistake.

          Apart from that, yeah, a bit less bile, a bit more acknowledgement of artists’ work please?

          • TCM says:

            I’ve seen people on tumblr claim otherwise — including self-described feminists. Some of whom weren’t even trolls!

            Actually, this is probably one of my favorite tumblr exchanges — and please note, I don’t just read anti-feminism tumblrs, this is something I came across while browsing a ways back.

            Fair warning, rather graphic language. And concepts.

            link to

            Incidentally, before you tell me to stop confusing ‘real feminists’ with ‘self described feminists’, fair warning I will tell you to stop confusing ‘real conservatives’, ‘real muslims’, ‘real liberals’, ‘real communists’, ‘real capitalists’, and ‘real christians’ with ‘self described’ ones. Because it isn’t fair that only one or two ideologies get to pick and choose who represents them.

            Oh also, not using this as evidence that feminism is a terrible movement, or whatever, nor would I ever even consider basing my worldview on tumblr’s skewed…whatever tumblr is. Just thought it was a relevant anecdote, and a good example of how diverse thought can get even within one ideology — even if the mainstream portions of that ideology may resent it.

            (Incidentally, the aggressor in that exchange went on to Dox the defender, before their account was deleted for ‘some reason’)

          • dE says:

            Isn’t that the crux of the whole dialogue in a way? When arguing this topic, people seem to assume the opinion of the person at the other end of the discussion is equivalent to that of the most extreme and unstable cases to have ever been found.

            It’s one of the few reasons (imho) why this topic is so hard to discuss. For when someone is being convinced they’re dealing with the extreme cases, it’s really hard to not be snarky and condescending, to insult and to attack. And to generally just not bother with an explanation. After all, you’re dealing with the extremely unreasonable, aren’t you? I’ve been guilty of that as much as everyone else.

            However for progress in this dialog, one of the most important steps is to see peoples as individuals, with individual opinions and believes. The person at the other end has a pretty big chance (Statistically) to not be a complete arsehole and actually be reasonable, just disagreeable on certain points, until convinced otherwise. Scolding and attacking someone for the actions of someone else, isn’t going to win that someone over to your side, whatever that side may be.

          • Rizlar says:

            You said you would prefer to be egalitarian than feminist, feminism is based on the idea of equality for women. Feminism is about equality!

            I know what you are getting at, but acting as if the two ideas are incompatible, when in fact one implies the other, is a mistake. It is a misrepresentation of what feminism is. If you truly believe in equality for all, you cannot ignore the real oppression of women.

          • The Random One says:

            I don’t think it’s wrong to make a distinction between the silent majority of a group that actually follows what they believe in, and a small, loud minority that use its name to mean whatever they want to mean, often to the detriment of what the majority believes in or is trying to perform. You’re effectively doing the same thing as people who say “9/11 taught me everything I need to know about Islam!”, that is, taking the stance of a few idiots whose actions are loudest, and saying that, because their actions mean a thing, it’s fair play to attack the whole movement they claim to be part of.

            Regardless of what self-described feminists act like and say, real feminists do fight for equality, and fight for men’s rights in the few situations where they are discriminated against, such as when trying to gain guardianship of their children or child maintenance payments for the children they’re caring for.

          • TCM says:

            @Rizlar: I don’t ignore the very real oppression of women, I am in fact quite concerned about it. However, in the country I presently live in (USA), women have all the same rights as men (Voting, pursuing any career, legal protection, freedom in relationships, etc.), and more besides (abortion/planned parenthood), what needs fixing are the soft values (wages, presence in jobs, discrimination in hiring, gender stereotypes, greater objectification of women than men in media, gendered insults being acceptable, etc.). However, this isn’t an easy thing to fix, and it’s certainly not going to be fixed on the internet. Time, willingness to change, activism, dialogue and discourse are necessities, dehumanizing, attacking, and bullying people who don’t match your ideological positions 100% isn’t. And recently, more often than not, I’ve seen self-described feminists in the latter category, so I’d rather not associate myself with that name.

            It’s the same reason why I say that I am a conservative, rather than a Republican, really. One is an ideology with a wide umbrella, the other is a specific movement that makes claim to that ideology, not all of which I agree with at all times.

            Basically what I am saying is that it is indeed possible to be for all the things feminism claims itself to be for, without calling yourself a feminist.

            @The Random One: Sometimes I wonder why I bother typing things if people aren’t going to read them, and make an assumption based on maybe a quarter of the total text.

    • bill says:

      Are we talking about her using an image for a few seconds as a part of her video, or is the image used as part of her website design or a basis for some kind of work?

      Because I can’t see why there would be a big fuss about using a quick shot of an artwork off the internet as part of a video. (Discounting the obvious thing that people are out to find anything they can go after).

      I understand and support the idea of artists not getting their art ripped off. But I wouldn’t count using a few second shot of something in a freely available critical video as ripping off an artist.
      Giving credit should always be done where possible, but it seems like there was an attempt to do that.

      The only one of her videos I watched had 100s of images popping up the in the backgound throughout the talk, and if it was just one of those then I honestly can’t see why anyone would make a fuss.
      (if I was the artist, I might email asking for a big link to my original, but I wouldn’t be upset about it).
      However, if it was used as something like an opening credit then I’d consider things differently, as that is the kind of thing that should be paid for.

    • Gap Gen says:

      The case itself seems like the kind of thing that’s best left to copyright lawyers to figure out; in general I think, especially for a for-profit organisation, you should be careful about not infringing on copyright; whilst yes, the videos are free, I understand that it’s associated with a for-profit, so you could argue that the videos support its activities (and indeed several people do make money from producing free videos on YouTube).

      The real shame here is that criticism of Sarkeesian and their work is being used by people with a sexist agenda to attack gender equality via the ad hominem fallacy. Whilst the bulk of the vitriol is unfounded bigotry, there may well be criticisms of Feminist Frequency that have merit and that could be used to improve it, but all that is hidden by a wall of wailing manchildren despairing that girls might be allowed in the treehouse.

  11. Premium User Badge

    Aerothorn says:

    The video in the Hilleman article is “set to private.” Anybody know what happened or where to find it?

    • robotslave says:


      Alternately, does anyone know who I might write to at the University of Virginia Darden School of Business about the ethics of removing that one particular video from their Youtube channel?

  12. Acorino says:

    Richard Hillemann, I know that guy! He was interviewed by Warren Spector in the Master Class videos! I liked him. :)

  13. Lemming says:

    This Sunday Papers is omitting the very cool and very hype-worthy footage of Elite: Dangerous that’s recently been released!

    Aside from the off-base narration, it’s just marvelous!

    • Rizlar says:

      Ooooh, it’s so lovely! It’s like you can see the hours of your life being sucked through the screen into the future, where they are all spent playing Elite: Dangerous. :O

      • LionsPhil says:

        Man, offsetting free time now for a larger contiguous chunk later would be a useful ability.

        Although I suppose to some extent it’s what you’re doing when preparing things in advance.

    • Geebs says:

      Speaking of which, have a look at the most recent development update video for Limit Theory. It didn’t get a mention (which is fine, if anything RPS has been a bit over enthusiastic about LT’s dev updates) but this is seriously by far the most exciting one yet.

    • Raiyan 1.0 says:

      I think my favorite Elite: Dangerous footage so far is one where the canopy slowly freezes over as the shields are turned off.

      And the ambient sounds are just exquisite.

      • Stardreamer says:

        If there’s one feature that E:D has absolutely nailed (and there are several different features that qualify in this regards) it’s the sound dessign. It’s been a very very long time since any game has presented a sound-scape as spot-on perfect and compelling as this. It’s just so incredibly good at convincing you that you’re sitting within the complex and detailed collection of technologies we call “space ship”.

        In fact, my hyperbole machine suggests that in terms of spot-effects it might be up there with Star Wars…

  14. bill says:

    I hear that GOG decided to cancel their plans for Regional Pricing, even though it’ll cost them money and business (in the form of giving coupons for the difference on the games that they’d already agreed to regionally price).
    Good for them. I might go and buy something from them just to support them.
    link to