Giant Bomb News

81 Comments

Worth Reading 08/09/2013

A new set of weird games to learn of, stories to get jealous and frustrated about, and your regular dose of miscellaneous.

Starting next week, these idiots will be yapping at you live on the front page, at least until someone pulls the damn plug.

Just as soon as I think I have this recording video from your computer thing down, something else pops up.

While recording Worth Playing earlier today, it refused to capture my browser, randomly switched the resolution, and generally forced me to pull my hair out. It all looks fine now, except my webcam is in a different position and varies in size during each game because there’s no way standardize this stuff and there sort of is but I don’t use it well and I’m sorry and aosijdafpsijdfaposijf.

Anyway.

The morning show comes back next week. We kick off at 7:30 am PST / 9:30 am CST / 10:30 am EST. We’ll (hopefully) be doing it twice a week, and the plan right now is Monday and Friday. We might even have a guest on Friday to discuss something that was going to be a feature on the site, but instead morphed into a segment on the morning show instead. We don’t have many guests on the Bombcast, but since we’re already recording the morning thing over a Google Hangout, it makes sense to bring in other people when it makes sense. We’re already starting to plan something that is going to go well beyond the 30 minutes it was meant for, aren’t we?

My anniversary is this weekend, and it’s crazy to think it’s been more than a year since the events of last summer. 2012 and 2013 were quite a whirlwind for Patrick Klepek, and I’m okay with that. It would be nice if the next year could balance out the bad news with the good news, though. It’s hardly a guaranteed thing, but I was asked to submit a pitch for a regional TED talk out here in the midwest. I’m still mulling over my topic, but I only have a few days before I need to submit my pitch. Who knows if it’ll get picked, but it’s an honor to be asked.

Hey, You Should Play This

And You Should Read These, Too

It would be just grand if Tevis Thompson could stop writing columns for Grantland. His ability to connect the dots between experiences that have seemingly nothing to do with one another is remarkable. Thompson takes up The Walking Dead: 400 Days (the latest Faces of Death feature is coming, promise), Sorcery!, and Depression Quest with one fell swoop in this latest piece. Thompson explores the relationship between player character and player, and ties that into the larger debate happening in games about the lack of diversity in our game characters. It’s a shame more people aren’t reading Thompson’s pieces over at Grantland. Let’s change that.

"But every time a game explores another subjectivity, both the medium and the player expand. I had never played as an abused child until The Binding of Isaac. I had never played as a transgender woman in transition until Dys4ia. I had never played as a person struggling with depression, even though I’d actually been one, until Depression Quest. Each of them spoke to me in the unique language of video games, evoking empathy through agency, and more are coming out every day. We will soon say: I escaped my abusive parent, or I experienced the frustrations and hopes of hormone replacement therapy, or I survived depression (and still fight it every day). This is what it’s like. You are not alone."

I wanted to throw up after reading this. I’ve long objected to the design of many social games, and it’s sickening when the psychological logic driving the design is broken down to its essential elements. This is the furthest thing from skill and fun, and at what point does this begin to constitute gambling and catch the attention of the outside world? These games are straight up tricking people, and I’m going to start exploring a story I’ve been kicking around for a while. I’ve heard what social games focus tests are like, and the metrics companies look for made me uncomfortable.

"A coercive monetization model depends on the ability to “trick” a person into making a purchase with incomplete information, or by hiding that information such that while it is technically available, the brain of the consumer does not access that information. Hiding a purchase can be as simple as disguising the relationship between the action and the cost as I describe in mySystems of Control in F2P paper.

Research has shown that putting even one intermediate currency between the consumer and real money, such as a “game gem” (premium currency), makes the consumer much less adept at assessing the value of the transaction. Additional intermediary objects, what I call “layering”, makes it even harder for the brain to accurately assess the situation, especially if there is some additional stress applied."

If You Click It, It Will Play

Satoru Iwata Sounds Awfully Like Steve Jobs Here

“If I was to take responsibility for the company for just the next one or two years, and if I was not concerned about the long-term future of Nintendo at all, it might make sense for us to provide our important franchises for other platforms, and then we might be able to gain some short-term profit.

What I believe is that Nintendo is a very unique company, because it does its business by designing and introducing people to hardware and software - by integrating them, we can be unique. And because we have hardware and software developers in the same building, they stimulate each other.”

-- Computer & Video Games

Like it or Not, Crowdfunding Isn't Going Away

Tweets That Make You Go "Hmmmmmm"

Oh, And This Other Stuff

Patrick Klepek on Google+
89 Comments
  • 89 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited by BeachThunder

In relation to the Candy Crush Saga segment: this is why it's a good thing that Microsoft are ditching points.

Also, I strongly recommend that people check out Depression Quest.

Posted by jimmyfenix

KLEPTOMANIA is back at it again!!

Posted by mrfluke

curious to see if this comment thread will explode over that latest Anita S "masterpiece" Seems the fire over this junk is not there as it used to be.

Posted by noizy

@mrfluke said:

curious to see if this comment thread will explode over that latest Anita S "masterpiece" Seems the fire over this junk is not there as it used to be.

Yea. I guess everyone is growing secure in their inadvertent misogyny.

Posted by MrMazz

This is always my favorite piece of GB content outside of the BOMBCAST.

That candy crush piece just is a gut punch. It's showing you all the strings and men behind the curtain and you just feel so helpless about how you get played. Well my mom gets played I don't touch those f2p mobile baby games #ConsoleGamingElite

Patrick I really hope you get into the Giant PowerBombcast just so they'd have to explain pro wrestling nostalgia to you, which is a realy weird thing.

Posted by indy_aka_rex

A youtube video talking about proper pronunciation of game titles... That mispronounces game titles! >_<

Posted by TheHumanDove

@noizy said:

@mrfluke said:

curious to see if this comment thread will explode over that latest Anita S "masterpiece" Seems the fire over this junk is not there as it used to be.

Yea. I guess everyone is growing secure in their inadvertent misogyny.

I check my privilege every six hours now. Thanks OBAMA. I mean Anita.

Posted by InsanityPrawn

@bishop113: You're right, all that is misogynistic!

Posted by wemibelec90

@patrickklepek: "It would be just grand if Tevis Thompson could stop writing columns for Grantland."

I don't get this line. Is it a bad thing that he writes so much good stuff? Or is Grantland not the right place for him?

Edited by SilentPredator

The Polygon piece on AO rated games was really good. I was quite surprised that The Witcher 2 managed to get an M rating when there is so much sex in it.

Posted by mrfluke

@bishop113: You're right, all that is misogynistic!

from the dictionary.

mi·sog·y·nis·tic (m-sj-nstk) also mi·sog·y·nous (-sj-ns)adj. = Of or characterized by a hatred of women

so by your logic, just cause male writers write male characters indicates a hatred of women now?

good grief,and you wonder why more people dont worsh-i mean listen to Anita S.

alright, im out of here, glad notifications are broken, want no part of this imo extremely stupid argument.

Posted by patrickklepek

@patrickklepek: "It would be just grand if Tevis Thompson could stop writing columns for Grantland."

I don't get this line. Is it a bad thing that he writes so much good stuff? Or is Grantland not the right place for him?

I'm jealous at how good he is :(

Staff
Posted by Sergio

I think there's a bit of sarcasm going on that is being missed - at least, that's how I'm taking some of these comments.

Posted by Fobwashed

Okay, that typing game is pretty goddamn amazing.

Will be going through this material over the weekend. A very nice side effect of Patrick being on the East Coast is that these come earlier in the day for me here on the west. Thanks!

Online
Posted by gesi1223

I was told to play Candy Crush Saga by a friend of mine, I had better judgement in his ideas of good games before then. The game was fun at first, attempting to play through it without buying any bonuses at all is proving to be way more frustrating than fun. I'm beginning to steer clear of mobile games more and more because of these gross monetization methods.

Edited by zipperface

I am all for equal rights, but man, Anita Sarkeesian is just searching for negative shit.

Posted by Mr_Misery
Edited by macks

Depression Quest was disturbingly accurate, especially during the bits that deal with crippling anxiety and the inability to push self-deprecating thoughts out of one's mind.

Edited by beard_of_zeus

Free2Play / monetized games have always perturbed me, but seeing all the psychological triggers and tricks being laid out so bare in that article makes it seem even grosser than I thought possible.

Posted by Levio

@noizy said:

@mrfluke said:

curious to see if this comment thread will explode over that latest Anita S "masterpiece" Seems the fire over this junk is not there as it used to be.

Yea. I guess everyone is growing secure in their inadvertent misogyny.

But how secure is everyone in their repressed homosexuality? I feel like that's the next big thing.

Posted by zig

I feel like the Twitter section could use context sometimes. I have no idea who "mean queen machine" is or what she is talking about.

Edited by 4f3f4324f342

@noizy: I agree with everything here except for the last statement,

The only thing I would add is this: 25 million men died on the front lines in world war 1. more men fight more battles and die violently then women do. It's ok to have mainly males as protaginists as it portrays real life.

Think about it how often will a women take the role of protecter for males these games reflect reality

Patick is awesome and he should stay I enjoy his articles even if they are one sided sometimes and sexist

Posted by 4f3f4324f342

@mr_misery:

Gotta remember patrick brings this up, not the community

Edited by MrMazz

@bishop113: Right, because disagreeing with an ignorant thief who likely hasn't even played the games she's criticizing, has stolen video footage from other sources instead of capturing it herself and has spread blatantly false information in an attempt to push her extremist feminist view is totally misogynistic.

See now I read this when ever I read a thread in which Anita comes up. No one ever posts any links showing that she is an "ingnorant thief" and "spread blatantly false information". Not trying to put you on to high a blast but just saying: posting outrageous statements with 0 corraberating evidence does give the apperance that you are some dumb person on the internet talking out their ass. I'd be gald to see this proof.

Posted by Hailinel

@patrickklepek I don't know that I'd call Parish's article the definitive piece on Dragon's Crown. Most of what he writes should be common sense, particularly in that there are wrong-headed people on each side of the debate regarding the game's sexuality. It's a point that any mature, level-headed individual should be able to arrive at, as is the point that as Americans, we're viewing the output of people from another culture, and using our own values to make judgments based on that. That point, the cultural lens, is the sort of point that they teach in high school social studies classes.

And this reasoning is the sort that more people can and likely have had in regards to the game and its content. It just gets drowned out in the swath of over-defensive "There's nothing wrong here!" dismissive statements and the sanctimonious judgments of "This is sexist, and you're perverts for liking it!"

I think the better statement on the issue comes from Erin Fitzgerald, the English voice actress of the sorceress. To quote:

Both women [The sorceress and Parasoul of Skullgirls] are 2 of the strongest female characters I have ever voiced. So give my blogs another read if you like. But don’t bother me with your nonesense about sexism until you understand it’s true definition.

IMO. Pendulous breasts NEVER make a game sexist, a female character who is victimized, oppressed by men, or taken advantage of, or abused is sexist. If a woman is strong and powerful and has pendulous breasts well that’s just awesome AND most women in my family… You sayin the females in my family sexist just cuz we jiggle? Get over it!

Keep in mind, this is the same woman that took over as the voice of Chie Satonaka in Persona 4 Arena and Golden; a well-written character not drawn or written in an overt sexual manner (outside of aspects in her Shadow self), and a strong character in her own right.

Parish brings up good points, certainly, but as the definitive voice on the matter? No, I disagree.

Posted by bhlaab

I played Dys4ia and I'd argue that I still have yet to play a game "as a transgender woman in transition". It seemed way more interested in just telling me what that is like, and then presenting vaguely related microgames that are not ludically congruent, instead of letting me experience it.

Posted by Bishop113

@mrmazz: Here is a link showing various cases where she straight up downloaded youtube videos to use in her own and didn't credit any of them. I don't have much of aproblem with the lack of credit because it's gameplay and the original uploaders don't own the gameplay but still it shows that she is not only stealing footage from other sources but this suggests to me that she may not be even playing the games she's so strongly criticizing.

http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

Edited by McGhee

@hailinel said:

@patrickklepek I don't know that I'd call Parish's article the definitive piece on Dragon's Crown. Most of what he writes should be common sense, particularly in that there are wrong-headed people on each side of the debate regarding the game's sexuality. It's a point that any mature, level-headed individual should be able to arrive at, as is the point that as Americans, we're viewing the output of people from another culture, and using our own values to make judgments based on that. That point, the cultural lens, is the sort of point that they teach in high school social studies classes.

And this reasoning is the sort that more people can and likely have had in regards to the game and its content. It just gets drowned out in the swath of over-defensive "There's nothing wrong here!" dismissive statements and the sanctimonious judgments of "This is sexist, and you're perverts for liking it!"

I think the better statement on the issue comes from Erin Fitzgerald, the English voice actress of the sorceress. To quote:

Both women [The sorceress and Parasoul of Skullgirls] are 2 of the strongest female characters I have ever voiced. So give my blogs another read if you like. But don’t bother me with your nonesense about sexism until you understand it’s true definition.

IMO. Pendulous breasts NEVER make a game sexist, a female character who is victimized, oppressed by men, or taken advantage of, or abused is sexist. If a woman is strong and powerful and has pendulous breasts well that’s just awesome AND most women in my family… You sayin the females in my family sexist just cuz we jiggle? Get over it!

Keep in mind, this is the same woman that took over as the voice of Chie Satonaka in Persona 4 Arena and Golden; a well-written character not drawn or written in an overt sexual manner (outside of aspects in her Shadow self), and a strong character in her own right.

Parish brings up good points, certainly, but as the definitive voice on the matter? No, I disagree.

I agree to a certain extent with what she says, except one thing. How is having a female character be victimized automatically sexist? Many women in the world are abused. But there can never be a story containing a woman being abused that isn't sexist? Every woman in a story must somehow rise and conquer? Much like Lisbeth Salander (Girl with Dragon Tattoo) tying the piece of shit rapist, Nils Bjurman and tattoing the phrase, "I am a sadistic pig and rapist" on his chest? That is one of my favorite books, but sometimes it doesn't happen that way. Sometimes shitty things happen to innocent people, and there's nothing they can do about it. Stories should be able to go anywhere and everywhere. If we start saying a certain type of story can't be told, we are walking down a dangerous path toward censorship.

Edited by MarkWahlberg

@levio said:

@noizy said:

@mrfluke said:

curious to see if this comment thread will explode over that latest Anita S "masterpiece" Seems the fire over this junk is not there as it used to be.

Yea. I guess everyone is growing secure in their inadvertent misogyny.

But how secure is everyone in their repressed homosexuality? I feel like that's the next big thing.

Well, I feel like it doesn't count as repressed when you consider the Internet spends half its time as just one big circlejerk.

Edited by Marokai

@zipperface said:

I am all for equal rights, but man, Anita Sarkeesian is just searching for negative shit.

I've tried so hard to follow the Sarkeesian videos, but at this point, I don't even get what point she's trying to make anymore. The videos themselves are extraordinarily well produced, but there is so much out of context and logic-stretching concern trolling going on anymore I've forgotten what point she was ever supposed to be making.

Edited by skrutop

I wouldn't mind a game where you play as a heroine protagonist who escapes her bondage on a quest for fame and glory, runs into the standard hero-type dude at some point, has a brief conversation about how she's good on her own, then the game continues until you reach the end of your quest and thwart the evil council/vizier/magician/king or whatever. As long as she kicks ass and actually wears some damn clothes.

Posted by Hailinel

@mcghee said:

@hailinel said:

@patrickklepek I don't know that I'd call Parish's article the definitive piece on Dragon's Crown. Most of what he writes should be common sense, particularly in that there are wrong-headed people on each side of the debate regarding the game's sexuality. It's a point that any mature, level-headed individual should be able to arrive at, as is the point that as Americans, we're viewing the output of people from another culture, and using our own values to make judgments based on that. That point, the cultural lens, is the sort of point that they teach in high school social studies classes.

And this reasoning is the sort that more people can and likely have had in regards to the game and its content. It just gets drowned out in the swath of over-defensive "There's nothing wrong here!" dismissive statements and the sanctimonious judgments of "This is sexist, and you're perverts for liking it!"

I think the better statement on the issue comes from Erin Fitzgerald, the English voice actress of the sorceress. To quote:

Both women [The sorceress and Parasoul of Skullgirls] are 2 of the strongest female characters I have ever voiced. So give my blogs another read if you like. But don’t bother me with your nonesense about sexism until you understand it’s true definition.

IMO. Pendulous breasts NEVER make a game sexist, a female character who is victimized, oppressed by men, or taken advantage of, or abused is sexist. If a woman is strong and powerful and has pendulous breasts well that’s just awesome AND most women in my family… You sayin the females in my family sexist just cuz we jiggle? Get over it!

Keep in mind, this is the same woman that took over as the voice of Chie Satonaka in Persona 4 Arena and Golden; a well-written character not drawn or written in an overt sexual manner (outside of aspects in her Shadow self), and a strong character in her own right.

Parish brings up good points, certainly, but as the definitive voice on the matter? No, I disagree.

I agree to a certain extent with what she says, except one thing. How is having a female character be victimized automatically sexist? Many women in the world are abused. But there can never be a story containing a woman being abused that isn't sexist? Every woman in a story must somehow rise and conquer? Much like Lisbeth Salander (Girl with Dragon Tattoo) tying the piece of shit rapist, Nils Bjurman and tattoing the phrase, "I am a sadistic pig and rapist" on his chest? That is one of my favorite books, but sometimes it doesn't happen that way. Sometimes shitty things happen to innocent people, and there's nothing they can do about it. Stories should be able to go anywhere and everywhere. If we start saying a certain type of story can't be told, we are walking down a dangerous path toward censorship.

I think in that sense, you're correct in that it really depends on the context in which the abuse occurs. If it's abuse for abuse's sake and used to demean a character, then it's sexist for it to have been included. But if that abuse is a part of the narrative, makes sense and is handled properly by the characters involved, then it's not sexist for that abuse to be depicted; it depicts the abuser as sexist (assuming that the abuse is committed for sexist reasons, which again, it may or may not be depending on the context).

As you note, it's a complicated topic, and one that Fitzgerald could certainly have elaborated on more, if she had desired. That being said, as she is someone that is close to the game and character in question, her view on the matter is no less important than that of a journalist watching from the sidelines.

Posted by McGhee

@hailinel said:

@mcghee said:

@hailinel said:

@patrickklepek I don't know that I'd call Parish's article the definitive piece on Dragon's Crown. Most of what he writes should be common sense, particularly in that there are wrong-headed people on each side of the debate regarding the game's sexuality. It's a point that any mature, level-headed individual should be able to arrive at, as is the point that as Americans, we're viewing the output of people from another culture, and using our own values to make judgments based on that. That point, the cultural lens, is the sort of point that they teach in high school social studies classes.

And this reasoning is the sort that more people can and likely have had in regards to the game and its content. It just gets drowned out in the swath of over-defensive "There's nothing wrong here!" dismissive statements and the sanctimonious judgments of "This is sexist, and you're perverts for liking it!"

I think the better statement on the issue comes from Erin Fitzgerald, the English voice actress of the sorceress. To quote:

Both women [The sorceress and Parasoul of Skullgirls] are 2 of the strongest female characters I have ever voiced. So give my blogs another read if you like. But don’t bother me with your nonesense about sexism until you understand it’s true definition.

IMO. Pendulous breasts NEVER make a game sexist, a female character who is victimized, oppressed by men, or taken advantage of, or abused is sexist. If a woman is strong and powerful and has pendulous breasts well that’s just awesome AND most women in my family… You sayin the females in my family sexist just cuz we jiggle? Get over it!

Keep in mind, this is the same woman that took over as the voice of Chie Satonaka in Persona 4 Arena and Golden; a well-written character not drawn or written in an overt sexual manner (outside of aspects in her Shadow self), and a strong character in her own right.

Parish brings up good points, certainly, but as the definitive voice on the matter? No, I disagree.

I agree to a certain extent with what she says, except one thing. How is having a female character be victimized automatically sexist? Many women in the world are abused. But there can never be a story containing a woman being abused that isn't sexist? Every woman in a story must somehow rise and conquer? Much like Lisbeth Salander (Girl with Dragon Tattoo) tying the piece of shit rapist, Nils Bjurman and tattoing the phrase, "I am a sadistic pig and rapist" on his chest? That is one of my favorite books, but sometimes it doesn't happen that way. Sometimes shitty things happen to innocent people, and there's nothing they can do about it. Stories should be able to go anywhere and everywhere. If we start saying a certain type of story can't be told, we are walking down a dangerous path toward censorship.

I think in that sense, you're correct in that it really depends on the context in which the abuse occurs. If it's abuse for abuse's sake and used to demean a character, then it's sexist for it to have been included. But if that abuse is a part of the narrative, makes sense and is handled properly by the characters involved, then it's not sexist for that abuse to be depicted; it depicts the abuser as sexist (assuming that the abuse is committed for sexist reasons, which again, it may or may not be depending on the context).

As you note, it's a complicated topic, and one that Fitzgerald could certainly have elaborated on more, if she had desired. That being said, as she is someone that is close to the game and character in question, her view on the matter is no less important than that of a journalist watching from the sidelines.

Yes. The easiest example I can think of would be porn that is really abusive and demeaning toward women. Is it sexist and gross? Yes. Should it be allowed to exist? I still think yes. As long as everyone involved are consenting adults.

Posted by MrMazz

@bishop113: thanks for the link on the video front. It still dosen't fully explain the whole ignorant theif and false info spreader part but at least you replied. Most people I ask don't. so thanks.

Edited by KDR_11k

The F2P article makes me think the player of those games should be referred to as the mark because the design clearly sounds like a scam. It's the reason I hate this constant move towards making everything (including new entries in old series) F2P because the design goals shift completely and they are no longer "make a good game".

Edited by SunkenState

Thanks for linking the the newest episode of Damsel in Distress, Patrick, didn't know it was out yet.

Posted by Player1

Was extremely surprised to see a gaming article over at my favorite sports website, Grantland. Really really good content on that site. Thanks for the heads up patrick, will for sure be keeping my eye out for this guy.

Edited by ZironZ

One of the things I find interesting about free-to-play games is how some of the Japanese gaming companies are already involved in gambling through pachinko. Both Sega Sammy and Konami make a sizable amount of their earnings off pachinko (and in Konami's case also outright selling casino management software), and both seem to be acutely aware of the promises and risks of free-to-play's gambling angle.

Here is a nice quote from Sega's recent annual report:

http://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/ir/library/pdf/printing_annual/2012/ssh_ar12e_0925final.pdf

While focused on creating quality games, in addition to frequent players we will also view casual players—who comprise the majority of the market—as a key target. I believe seeking out more interesting games and more beautiful graphics is simply human nature. Additionally, the current trend toward self-regulation for games with a strong gambling element might become a tailwind for SEGA.

And here is another little quote from Konami's recent annual report:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1191141/000119312512313223/d272373d20f.htm

In addition, the social content we develop for social networks have been rapidly growing because our games can be played free of charge, a feature that has obtained support from players. If this type of game is deemed to be harmful to players’ interest in light of commonly accepted social norms, legal regulations may be imposed by the government, which could potentially impact the growth of content for social networks. In cooperation with the social platform operators, we will endeavor to improve the health and soundness of the social content business by taking appropriate measures as needed.

Posted by crameinrub

Holy shit people. Can we not even talk about Mario anymore without having some pseudo-elitist argument about feminism? Mario? REALLY?!

I don’t think anyone doesn't understand why these feminists are upset. No one likes to be stereotyped as powerless. We get it. And if they don’t – well, fuck ‘em.

Let’s look at the other side of the equation. Why should I feel so guilty about wanting to rescue a damsel in distress? Hell, why should I feel guilty for enjoying a bit of sex in a game? I find it hypocritical when I hear all these guys shaming the developers of these games for “boob physics” when you know these same guys watch porn at home.

Guys, by their very nature, are aggressive, sexually-charged, and self-important creatures. Rescuing damsels in distress and looking at boobs is essentially hard-wired into our DNA. What other fantasy/goal would I have in a game? No way I’m hiking my ass across the country to save some dude.

To all of you who get upset for being forced to rescue a girl or see hyper-sexualized female characters, stop playing the game. This is America goddamnit. No one is forcing you. If you think you’re going to change the media – you’re not, unless you change what centuries of evolution did to guys or change the target demographic of video games to females. Guys want sex and damsels to rescue so there will always be a place for it in our hobbies.

So, can we go back to talking about video games? Because that’s what I came here for. Video games.

Edited by 4f3f4324f342

@mcghee:

One thing to note. There is a myth out there that women are victems of violence and rape caused by males.

This is very far from the truth

According to 200 independant studies women are more commonly the instigators and perpertrators of violence

(thats why the girl with the dragon tattoo is fiction written by a very liberal author I have read the books)
link here:
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Posted by 4f3f4324f342

Also, People really paid $160,000 dollers to see her youtube videos? Really? They are limited in scope and not very infomative. They are basically the same video for each iteration making the same points over and over again.
And it appears she doesn't even listen to her critical feedback because she doesn't include any of it in her vidoes.

It doesn't matter if games are sexist because the large demographic of video game players are male. As this begins to change so will games. Oh and attacking spelunky when it had both a male and female damsel.... wait what? All her problems are made up problems and don't acutally exist

She should take the $160,000 and give it to an actual good cause like fighting cancer or helping starving children.

Posted by Skanker

@dr_zox: It's a pretty terrible attitude to have that sexism is okay because the audience is largely male. Firstly, the audience is not as skewed towards men as you think. Secondly, do you really expect more women to get into video games when their portrayal in video games is shit and the community is so toxic? Thirdly, we've seen female dominant audiences in cinemas for a while and that's done jack-squat for the sorts of movies that are being released.

Great, in-depth criticism towards her videos, by the way.

Edited by Skanker

@dr_zox said:

I agree with everything here except for the last statement,

The only thing I would add is this: 25 million men died on the front lines in world war 1. more men fight more battles and die violently then women do. It's ok to have mainly males as protaginists as it portrays real life.

Think about it how often will a women take the role of protecter for males these games reflect reality

Patick is awesome and he should stay I enjoy his articles even if they are one sided sometimes and sexist

Women are now more involved with the military than they were in World War 1.

And video games barely reflect reality as it is so I don't understand why you want male-only protagonists so bad. "It has to be true to life!" Welp, then chuck out the whole fucking game.

@bishop113 "but at the same time disagree with Anita's piss poor method of getting her "point" across while flamboyantly slinging around the word misogynistic every chance she has, as if to suggest that video game writers are a bunch of woman hating scumbags when in fact it has more to do with the way in which storytelling is and has and always will be done when coming from people, we write about our life and our experiences and the trials and tribulations of being a person living on earth"

She doesn't toss the word misogynistic around very much and she has clarified a ton of times that she doesn't think video game developers/writers hate women just because they do a poor job of portraying women. You should probably watch her videos before going on a tirade?

Posted by fox01313

Nice bit of things to read & try out though the Poltergeist game just looks like a browser version of a favorite game of mine, Ghost Master from a few years ago where it was you being the ghosts in a Sims world, steam link.

Edited by flindip

@skanker said:

@dr_zox: It's a pretty terrible attitude to have that sexism is okay because the audience is largely male. Firstly, the audience is not as skewed towards men as you think. Secondly, do you really expect more women to get into video games when their portrayal in video games is shit and the community is so toxic? Thirdly, we've seen female dominant audiences in cinemas for a while and that's done jack-squat for the sorts of movies that are being released.

Great, in-depth criticism towards her videos, by the way.

Dominated? It skews about the same percentage wise for population. Since there are more women in the States than men, they are a very slightly larger movie going audience. Its by like a percentage point. Its more or less always been that way. For tickets sold in 2012, its was 50/50 down the middle for genders...

The problem lies is that typically, women will have no problem going to see a film with male protagonists. But men won't flock to the movies for female centric stories with regularity. Exceptions like Twilight/Hunger games can pull in the doe occasionally since it specifically targets young women. But it doesn't do Avengers/Avatar money...

Plus, the biggest way to pull in female audience members isn't by making them central characters. Sad to say, the biggest pull(most of the time) is putting an attractive male as the star. I have some anecdotal evidence for this:

I went to see a matinee for Wolverine. More than half of audience were middle aged ladies. I have my skepticism that they were there because they were big Xmen fans...

  • 89 results
  • 1
  • 2