byterunner's forum posts

#1 Edited by byterunner (314 posts) -

My personal feelings on the situation.

A lot of actions that have happened in the past few weeks can be described in 12 Angry Men

#2 Posted by byterunner (314 posts) -

"Like many of us, I grew up playing all kind of games. More or less violent. And I'm still just a regular guy like millions of other gamers in the world. But what I observe these days are games, that used to be considered a rebellious medium, losing that factor and just trying to fit in the nice and sweet pop-culture."

Wow. The dev team behind this are even stupider and more childish than I thought. I'm actually shocked right now.

So because the devs view Video Game Culture in a different way then you, they're idiots?

#3 Posted by byterunner (314 posts) -

I'm going to be quite honest and say that I don't see the point of this statement. Sure its all feel goody and basically denounces any form of harassment, but in the end I don't think this is in any meaningful fashion useful.

All this said, and all you guys said on the Podcast is that Harassment is wrong and why would anyone do that and you shouldn't send death threats. Yes, I do believe that most people in the world know that they shouldn't actually send death threats, even those that send death threats. So other than stating what I feel is a total obvious sentiment, you denounce GG as a hate campaign and are solely responsible for all the death threats and harassment sent towards women, whether or not that is totally true, or if that could be a spin on media bias, that's another topic that I don't think there is a clear answer and we probably will never get one. Anyone that associates themselves with GG is associating with a hate campaign. The issue is that GG states that they are about Ethics in Video Games and they still hold that claim and have publicly denounced any hate campaign and harassment that women and others face. So if I wanted to talk about Ethics and bring up criticize that's like, "Yo guys, you doing this thing is maybe not the most ethical and maybe you should take a step back" I will be met with the idea that I'm some scum eating shitbag that wants all women to die. Its a frustrating situation, but this really does nothing.

You sit there, say that harassment is bad, and then saying that GG is bad, and any association with GG means I'm a bad person. So what is to discuss here. Nothing, other than, Good Job guys, you did it. You denounced those people I didn't like and said basically nothing. Cool.

Also this whole thing seems really reactionary from the MSNBC thing.

Honestly I don't know if I want to resub.

#4 Edited by byterunner (314 posts) -

I will say that Polygon's Video actually does a great job at explaining what Hatsune Miku is and why people really love her.

#5 Edited by byterunner (314 posts) -

@hailinel: That menu you saw was the health bars of the team members.

From what I've seen in the trailer and from what they've said, it seems very much like "Press X and something will happen contextually" it really seems that it will do nothing more than give the player the only option is to press one button and see pretty things.

#7 Posted by byterunner (314 posts) -

@starvinggamer: That really doesn't excuse her for putting on the farce that AJ was dead. That's just fucked up to do to a person. Kenny was not in a good state of mind, for any normal standard. I can't understand how you believe that a man that has had everyone he has loved taken from him time after time, and be constantly reminded and prodded about his failures would have any semblances of a stable mind. No Kenny was not in a fucking normal state, any functioning human would be able to tell he is unstable. Didn't stop Jane from lying to Kenny to prove a point. But wait, she miscalculated and didn't think Kenny would get this violent, that excuses everything she did, obviously.

Also lets not forget, whether in self defense or not, she escalated the situation by pulling out a knife.

And finally, and really the kicker for me, she never even tries to reason with Kenny, OR Clem. She never tries and convince Kenny that the baby is still alive, which is really stupid when you're about to fucking die. But why would Jane do that, she is a smart gal, she wouldn't just sit there and accept death. No she would try and reason, even as a last ditch effort. No, she didn't try to because of Clementine. You see, clementine was there the entire time, she had access to a gun! Why in gods name did she never mention AJ, not only to try and convince Kenny, but to try and get Clem to help her more? I would think its because she thinks the point she made, about trying to make an emotionally and mentally unstable person become dangerous, had already convinced Clem. I feel as if Jane was trying to manipulate Clem. The idea that Jane is so sure that Clem has got her back that she doesn't even try and reason, feels so scummy to me.

#8 Posted by byterunner (314 posts) -

So the couple people here who think there is a conflict of interest because of the kickstarter are basically still ignoring the fact there is no monetary gain when you back something.

Also missed @jeff s post the first time but that's basically my stance.

I'm going to give a random example of how a Journalist backing a game on kickstarter may or may not lead to an issue of ethics.

Lets say that a journalist funds a game and gives 100 dollars because they really like the idea and the team behind it. The development seems to be going smooth and everything is fine and dandy for say 8 months after the kickstarter ends. Then one day, that same Journalist gets an email stating, and showing evidence, that the lead devs at the studio are using shady business practices and the development life at the studio is steadily getting worse and worse. In a normal situation, the journalist would totally make a story from that and publish it. Not only does it give a spotlight to an issue in the industry, but it could be a big break for the Journalist to further their career. But wait, they funded that game. Their money has already been taken, they wont get that money back, and this game could fail and never see the light of day. What if the Journalist really wants that game, and decides not to report about the issues because they invested the money and they don't want to lose that money.

Now, I think that situation is a bit extreme, the idea that a journalist risks their career for a game is a bit silly, but this is just one example, and you can see where issues can arise. There needs to be a line drawn, and a people need to do better to disclose their personal affiliations to the people they write about, and overall not let the industry be so incestuous.

I think that the disclosure of support through Kickstarter and Patreon is important and needed, and I feel the industry's response to the scandal last week was disgusting, including this site. But thats just my opinion.

#9 Posted by byterunner (314 posts) -

Well I've never been on Twitter, and I kinda find some of the things people get real tried and afraid of to be overblown. I always feel like the Twitter Hivemind likes to create boogymans