Some reactions to Gone Home make me real angry (Spoilers)

#1 Edited by KoolAid (897 posts) -

Look... I get it. I get it! The game is $20. It's pretty short. It doesn't require much skill, unless you count putting a story together a skill. I can understand why some people wouldn't be into that. I mean, sure, wait for a sale if you have too. I don't think it takes away from the quality of the game, but at least I get it.

But fuck. It depresses the hell outta me to see internet people criticizing the game as "feminist propaganda". For WHAT? Because you play as a woman? Because its mostly about another woman? Because she is gay? What the fuck? That isn't propaganda. That's just people. This isn't tropes vs women. There is never a point in this story where they say "men are bad" or something. If anything, it's gay propaganda, but even that's a ridiculous label.

It just makes me think back to that Remember Me controversy. When some publisher said they didn't want a female main character because it hurts sales and marketability. And we all loved to hate on that publisher and call them an asshole and shit. Well, when I read the gamespot and kotaku comments for Gone Home, I totally agree. Apparently all you have to do is have your main characters be women and its female propaganda.

Man, Sarkeesian went at it the wrong way. Instead of posting a bunch of youtube videos, she shoulda just linked to a comment section about Gone Home. I would have believed her then.

Does this make anyone else as angry as it makes me? I'm not one to champion feminist movements,. I usually think those issues are blown out of proportion. But I think these accusations about Gone Home are totally out of line.

#2 Edited by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

Who has said this?

#3 Posted by Krullban (1034 posts) -

I've literally never heard anybody say this about the game.

#4 Posted by SunBroZak (1073 posts) -

I tend to ignore accusations like that as there's usually no convincing those people otherwise. I think they're wrong, and are doing themselves a disservice for looking at the game in that light, but I'm not going to debate it with them. They can be wrong in their own little world.

It's the same way I'd react someone telling me The Last of Us is just another generic zombie game. Or Bioshock Infinite is the worst game they've played. They're entitled to their opinion, but that opinion is so outlandish that I can't take as anything but a grain of salt.

#5 Edited by Milkman (16619 posts) -

Do you have any examples of this? Obviously, saying that is exceptionally stupid but I haven't seen it anywhere.

#6 Posted by Amikron (254 posts) -

This just in: Comment sections on the internet are filled with bullshit. More at 11!

#7 Posted by KoolAid (897 posts) -

It's what I get for wandering into the comments section for Gamespot or Kotaku. The consensus among some people seems to be that "social justice" game reviewers are giving the game high scores based solely on its themes. The amount of hate the gamespot reviewer alone is getting is sickening to me.

I figured Patrick liked the game because he likes indie games. Not because he is a white knight or something. I would think most of us here would think the same.

#8 Posted by KoolAid (897 posts) -

It's what I get for wandering into the comments section for Gamespot or Kotaku. The consensus among some people seems to be that "social justice" game reviewers are giving the game high scores based solely on its themes. The amount of hate the gamespot reviewer alone is getting is sickening to me.

I figured Patrick liked the game because he likes indie games. Not because he is a white knight or something. I would think most of us here would think the same.

#9 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@koolaid:

I would imagine those people are idiots enjoying the pleasures that the anonymity of the internet affords. I guess I would hope that it just seems like a lot of people are saying this when in actuality it's just a vocal minority. Also, many people who play games and read articles online will never post in a comment section so that vocal minority is actually a very, very small minority.

That said, if someone were to utter those words they are morons.

#10 Posted by Pie (7073 posts) -

People don't like the game. People see that all these gaming journalists who have been writing about LBGT issues do like the game. Clearly they only like it because of GAY SEXUAL CONTENT and women. Clearly these reviewers have looked over all the issues the "people" had with the game because they are white knights.

#11 Edited by Brodehouse (9791 posts) -

@koolaid said:

It's what I get for wandering into the comments section for Gamespot or Kotaku. The consensus among some people seems to be that "social justice" game reviewers are giving the game high scores based solely on its themes.

I believe that that's likely. I believe a lot of people who sympathize with the themes of the game are likely to raise the score simply because they like to see these thematic elements in games. If I played a game that had an extremely positive or sympathetic treatment of things I might relate to, let's say atheism, I would probably subconsciously give the game more credit than maybe it deserves. I would attempt to keep myself rational, or at least admit there may be factors contributing to a bias, but I wouldn't reject the possibility to something playing to my ideals is perhaps clouding my judgement on it.

That someone is a social justice warrior does in no way prove that they're overrating the game, but it remains logical that it may play a factor.

Online
#12 Posted by KoolAid (897 posts) -

Maybe I am giving too much weight to anonymous commentators. But at the same time, we share this hobby with these people. Their money is as good as ours. It makes me mad that some developers may have to cater to these people to help guarantee they will make enough sales.

#13 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@koolaid said:

Maybe I am giving too much weight to anonymous commentators. But at the same time, we share this hobby with these people. Their money is as good as ours. It makes me mad that some developers may have to cater to these people to help guarantee they will make enough sales.

I doubt there's enough of them to matter dude.

#14 Posted by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

#15 Posted by SunBroZak (1073 posts) -

@koolaid said:

Maybe I am giving too much weight to anonymous commentators. But at the same time, we share this hobby with these people. Their money is as good as ours. It makes me mad that some developers may have to cater to these people to help guarantee they will make enough sales.

I imagine most devs will not compromise their game to appeal to that part of the vocal community. Or so I would hope.

Ah well, don't let it get to you anyway. The Giant Bomb community seems like the place to be if you want to avoid that sort of nonsense.

#16 Edited by jimmy_p (278 posts) -

Pick up that patriarchy grrl power comic book

#17 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

I think Gone Home very easily could have been propaganda, and the fact that it manages to avoid it is one of the things I like about it. I kind of get where the idiots are coming from though, it does feel like the entire gaming press has been lecturing and scolding us about feminism and stuff nonstop for like a year and a half. The fact that this is a game where all of the central characters are female, and homosexual issues are at the heart of the story really kind of makes it seem like it's just speaking to the sentiments that they've been preaching about all this time. It's not such a leap in logic for them to say that this inflated the score. In fact, it probably did. But if they want to write the game off because they think it's some feminist homosexual propaganda, go ahead and let them, because it's their loss.

#18 Posted by Disaya (288 posts) -

I've only seen a couple comments like this, last few I saw were in metacritic reviews I think. From users warning men not to play this game because of all the bullshit feminist propaganda in it. Eh I don't get it.

#19 Posted by SecondPersonShooter (616 posts) -

Unfortunately if you ever go on 4chan's video game board pretty much all discussion of this game boils down to what the OP was stating.

People suck, ignore them and take pride in the fact that you don't

#20 Posted by XCEagle (112 posts) -

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

#21 Posted by Tebbit (4457 posts) -

"carolyn petit we get that you are part of the LGBT community but dont use gamespot to corrupt the viewers mind, you truly are disgusting Carolyn."

Holy shit man! I take solace in the fact that those kind of comments are the vocal minority... I hope.

#22 Edited by NTM (7321 posts) -

So far, the only thing I've read was reading comments on GameSpot, where people would talk about how this game or that game shouldn't have gotten lower than Gone Home, and that the game got the score because of the reviewer, stupid shit like that (that always happens on their mind you).

#23 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@tebbit said:

"carolyn petit we get that you are part of the LGBT community but dont use gamespot to corrupt the viewers mind, you truly are disgusting Carolyn."

Holy shit man! I take solace in the fact that those kind of comments are the vocal minority... I hope.

Yikes.

#24 Posted by BeachThunder (11802 posts) -

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/gone-home/user-reviews

I think the problem is that it's getting a lot of hype, ergo a lot of people end up playing it. This means that a lot of people that are not the target audience for the game are playing it. A lot of people saying that you can finish it in a minute, therefore it sucks. Also, I've seen a lot of people comparing it to a book or a movie, which seems silly, as it's not supposed to be either of those...

I don't know that I've really seen any earnest homophobia though.

#25 Edited by Nettacki (1317 posts) -

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

It's not really a "game" if you don't interact all that much in a meaningful way. I mean yeah you can click on stuff and look at it and listen to some narration explaining its context (which admittedly makes it automatically better than Dear Esther from a gameplay standpoint, if not by much), but from what I've read of it, it still seems more like you're going through a museum/art gallery where you get to pick up the stuff that looks interesting instead of passively looking at things and listening to people talk.

#26 Edited by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@nettacki said:

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

It's not really a "game" if you don't interact all that much in a meaningful way. I mean yeah you can click on stuff and look at it and listen to some narration explaining its context (which admittedly makes it automatically better than Dear Esther from a gameplay standpoint, if not by much), but from what I've read of it, it still seems more like you're going through a museum/art gallery where you get to pick up the stuff that looks interesting instead of passively looking at things and listening to people talk.

You and I wouldn't get along. I can already tell.

#27 Posted by nsmb2_mario (72 posts) -

@nettacki said:

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

It's not really a "game" if you don't interact all that much in a meaningful way. I mean yeah you can click on stuff and look at it and listen to some narration explaining its context (which admittedly makes it automatically better than Dear Esther from a gameplay standpoint, if not by much), but from what I've read of it, it still seems more like you're going through a museum/art gallery where you get to pick up the stuff that looks interesting instead of passively looking at things and listening to people talk.

I'd call it an interactive experience, as it's stated to be on the recent Bombcast where they talked about it and surprisingly enough, as it's stated to be on its Wikipedia page. I do wish some reviewers of this game were clearer on the fine details, it does come off as slightly duplicitous.

#28 Posted by XCEagle (112 posts) -

@nettacki said:

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

It's not really a "game" if you don't interact all that much in a meaningful way. I mean yeah you can click on stuff and look at it and listen to some narration explaining its context (which admittedly makes it automatically better than Dear Esther from a gameplay standpoint, if not by much), but from what I've read of it, it still seems more like you're going through a museum/art gallery where you get to pick up the stuff that looks interesting instead of passively looking at things and listening to people talk.

You interact as much or as little as you want. I'm not sure why exploration, critical thinking, and puzzle solving suddenly mean this isn't a game. It is a video game, no quotations. If it's not your cup of tea, or there are issues you have with it, fine, that's where discussion can actually be valuable. But people need to stop trying to discredit this because "it's not a game." Adventure games are games. Zork is a game. Gone Home is a game.

#29 Posted by Nettacki (1317 posts) -

@xceagle said:

@nettacki said:

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

It's not really a "game" if you don't interact all that much in a meaningful way. I mean yeah you can click on stuff and look at it and listen to some narration explaining its context (which admittedly makes it automatically better than Dear Esther from a gameplay standpoint, if not by much), but from what I've read of it, it still seems more like you're going through a museum/art gallery where you get to pick up the stuff that looks interesting instead of passively looking at things and listening to people talk.

You interact as much or as little as you want. I'm not sure why exploration, critical thinking, and puzzle solving suddenly mean this isn't a game. It is a video game, no quotations. If it's not your cup of tea, or there are issues you have with it, fine, that's where discussion can actually be valuable. But people need to stop trying to discredit this because "it's not a game." Adventure games are games. Zork is a game. Gone Home is a game.

But Gone Home is not like Zork or any typical point-and-click/text-based adventure games of yesteryear. Gone Home doesn't have puzzle solving or a whole lot of critical thinking, though it does have exploration. Myst has all of that in spades, and then some, and I still consider it a game. And since Gone Home is lacking in almost everything except exploration, I therefore cannot agree with your implication that it can be compared to those sort of games, and thus I continue to stand by my assessment that it's not a game.

#30 Posted by Gregalor (56 posts) -

I can't believe how hung up people are over whether Gone Home is a "game" or not. Practically ANYTHING else about it is more interesting to talk about.

#31 Edited by Gregalor (56 posts) -

I can't believe how hung up people are over whether Gone Home is a "game" or not. Practically ANYTHING else about it is more interesting to talk about.

#32 Edited by Dan_CiTi (3236 posts) -

Gone Home is as much of a game as Super Mario Bros. or Fez? There's exploration and puzzle solving, it just isn't hard, only hard part is finding out where/how to get the first key. Saying it isn't a game just feels forceful and odd to me.

#33 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@dan_citi said:

Gone Home is as much of a game as Super Mario Bros. or Fez? There's exploration and puzzle solving, it just isn't hard, only hard part is finding out where/how to get the first key. Saying it isn't a game just feels forceful and odd to me.

The whole discussion of 'game' versus 'not game' is a great way to keep a medium from expanding and growing. It's the new, video game way of fearing change because change is different. It's amazingly stupid. Also...

@gregalor said:

I can't believe how hung up people are over whether Gone Home is a "game" or not. Practically ANYTHING else about it is more interesting to talk about.

#34 Edited by mlarrabee (2910 posts) -

I stick to Giant Bomb, so I may be completely overlooking this aspect of its ... fanbase? But I really haven't seen any complaints about "feminism" in the game.

@xceagle said:

@nekroskop said:

No, people are mad because this isn't a game. No one is mad because the protagonist is female.

Nope. Sorry, it is a game. Try again.

I don't think it necessarily has to be. I don't consider The Walking Dead a game but it's still a terrific experience.

Movies and books get a few more labels with which to define and categorize themselves, and none of them carry any qualitative connotations to most people. Video games could use a few more, I think. The problem is, most of the reasonable suggestions sound really dumb. "Oh, it's an 'interactive fiction.'" But in some cases, interactive fiction is really a decent explanation, no matter how much it causes my eyebrows to cock.

#35 Posted by I_Stay_Puft (3158 posts) -

Why was feminist movement spoiler blocked?

#36 Edited by development (2221 posts) -

@krullban said:

I've literally never heard anybody say this about the game.

#37 Edited by Nettacki (1317 posts) -

@jasonr86 said:

@dan_citi said:

Gone Home is as much of a game as Super Mario Bros. or Fez? There's exploration and puzzle solving, it just isn't hard, only hard part is finding out where/how to get the first key. Saying it isn't a game just feels forceful and odd to me.

The whole discussion of 'game' versus 'not game' is a great way to keep a medium from expanding and growing. It's the new, video game way of fearing change because change is different. It's amazingly stupid. Also...

@gregalor said:

I can't believe how hung up people are over whether Gone Home is a "game" or not. Practically ANYTHING else about it is more interesting to talk about.

Actually, it's a good way to figure out if we're going in the right direction when it comes to expanding and growing. I'm not fearing change because change is different. I'm fearing this change because this change simply doesn't feel right. I don't think removing interactive elements (the sort of things that make a game a game) and focusing purely on a short narrative that's $5-10 more expensive than the average side-scrolling platformer is the right way to expand and grow this medium. That sort of thing is attained by *adding* interactive elements and integrating the story with the gameplay in a seamless way while also making the game itself worthwhile. Better writing also helps.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.