RockyRaccoon37's forum posts

#1 Edited by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@dudeglove: Oh yeah completely forgot about that, but to be fair I doubt most people complaining about the writing are speaking about that.

And while I understand criticism against the appropriation of language, I don't think it's inherently racist-- problematic for sure, but depending on the context not necessarily racist. But then, I'm a white dude, so I'm not exactly an expert.

#2 Edited by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@dudeglove said:

@hailinel said:

@dudeglove said:

Why would anyone be interested in anything Anthony Burch has touched?

I dunno. They really like years-old memes?

I'll just leave this here as proof of me not wanting to give Gearbox money for anything this man's involved in.

That... seems like an overreaction to what is little more than a goofy video that you may or may not find funny.

Man I didn't realize how strongly some folks felt about the writing in Borderlands 2. I always felt like it was pretty harmless, not to say I found it especially funny but I certainly didn't find it offensive in any way.

I played through both games and that first game left absolutely no mark on me at all. I quite literally don't remember anything about it except for the very beginning of the game.

Borderlands 2, like it or not, absolutely had more personality.

#3 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@mkf30 said:

I've preordered but will say Goro is meh lol. Hope his spot doesn't take up Ermac, Reptile or someone cooler.

On that note: For those wondering, Goro has been in MK 1, MKT, MK 4/MKG, MK Deception, MKA and MK 9.

However, he hasn't been playable in every version:

MK1-not playable.

MKT-Playable(but only on the PS MKT version, not the N64 version)

MK4/MKG-Not playable.

MK Deception-Playable but only in the GC version, he wasn't in the other versions of MK D.

MKA-Playable(everyone was playable)

MK 9-Not playable(he was only playable in a mini mission via the Challenge Tower which doesn't really count) as a mainstream playable character he's not playable. The PC version you can play as him via a mod however.

Was just about to post this.

Goro as a preorder/DLC fits how they've treated the character in the past. Hopefully they do more with him this time around since he's always been awful to play as.

#4 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@hailinel said:

How did this turn into a socioeconomic debate?

I don't know, I think RockyRaccoon37 was trying to explain how TFYC deserved all the terrible things that happened to them 6 months ago because they accepted donations from 4chan 3 weeks ago.

Pretty sure I never said that, wait let me check...

Yup never said that.

Sorry about the derailing though! My bad :(

#5 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@sergio said:
@rockyraccoon37 said:

Capitalism as a system can only sustain itself through the exploitation of labour which in turn benefits the few who own the means of production and can profit off of it. Built into the very core of Capitalism is an inequality, and of course this all disregards the many social and political barriers and prejudices that exist which make surviving in a Capitalist system all the more difficult for minorities, women, disabled people and so on.

Communism is about the dismantling of the inequalities created and upheld within Capitalism (and as Marx argued, Capitalism is a necessary step for the existence of Communism-- although on this point I am maybe more cynical than Marx), which would be more aligned with the goals of Feminism.

Capitalism is undemocratic, exploitative and purposefully unequal, it can not be affiliated with Feminism in any way, shape, or form.

It's good that TFYC is providing an opportunity for women outside of the industry to design ideas for games, but it is not an articulation of Feminism-- it's merely Capitalism to the core.

Okay, so coming full circle: can you be a feminist if you are participating in capitalism? You claim that TFYC aren't feminists because they are capitalist. Are there no real feminist then? Are the only real feminist those hippie ladies living in a commune?

No of course you can be a Feminist within the confines of Capitalism, but to suggest that TFYC is Feminist because they are giving women the opportunity to design games does not make what they are doing a Feminist action. It's affirmative action within Capitalism.

It's good, don't get me wrong, but it's not some grand Feminist move.

And yeah, sorry didn't mean to derail the conversation!

#6 Edited by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@sergio said:

@rockyraccoon37 said:

Two things about TFYC:

1. They aren't a feminist group. Feminism is, at its simplest, a movement for equality and capitalism is antithetical to equality.

So feminism is communist? I don't think feminism has a preferred economic viewpoint other than maybe equal pay for equal work.

Capitalism as a system can only sustain itself through the exploitation of labour which in turn benefits the few who own the means of production and can profit off of it. Built into the very core of Capitalism is an inequality, and of course this all disregards the many social and political barriers and prejudices that exist which make surviving in a Capitalist system all the more difficult for minorities, women, disabled people and so on.

Communism is about the dismantling of the inequalities created and upheld within Capitalism (and as Marx argued, Capitalism is a necessary step for the existence of Communism-- although on this point I am maybe more cynical than Marx), which would be more aligned with the goals of Feminism.

Capitalism is undemocratic, exploitative and purposefully unequal, it can not be affiliated with Feminism in any way, shape, or form.

It's good that TFYC is providing an opportunity for women outside of the industry to design ideas for games, but it is not an articulation of Feminism-- it's merely Capitalism to the core.

#8 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac said:

@patrickklepek said:

For anyone just now wading into this thread, this Vox piece sums up the situation well.

That article specifically goes out of its way not to mention anything negative about one side of the debate.

"At the time, the Fine Young Capitalists were in a feud with Quinn."

Why were the Fine Young Capitalists in a feud with Quinn? Did they start it? Why would they be angry with her?

The Fine Young Capitalists are trying to promote women in the gaming industry. They've planned an event where a women gives them an idea of a video game, and then they make that video game.

If you look at the TFYC website now, you'll see pitches for 5 different games that you can vote on. Back in february, none of that stuff was there. They just had some text, basically, explaining what they wanted to do.

Now, keep in mind that TFYC is Canadian. Like, REALLY Canadian, to the point where english isn't even the first language for some of the organizers.

So, on February 28th, Zoe Quinn and Maya Kramer found this poorly worded website talking about having women make video games, and spent half an hour making fun of it. During that time, the twitter followers of Zoe and Maya tore TFYC to pieces. Their website was crashed, TFYC was banned from twitter, and screencaps from facebook pages were being posted.

Zoe and Maya didn't mean to lead an attack. Their followers thought they were attacking a group that exploited women.

After this, a sponsor backed out of the TFYC event, and they had to pay $10,000 out of pocket to keep going.

All of this was unknown until recently, when this huge controversy blew up around Zoe Quinn. But, with all this controversy around Zoe, websites aren't willing to run this story because of reasons.

Meanwhile, 4chan has given $15,000+ in donations to TFYC. 4chan is now funding a feminist group.

Yes, this is all insane.

That Forbes article is the only one to actually address the events in question. Every other website refuses to do so. If they run an article about TFYC, they breeze past the part of the story where TFYC was attacked.

Gaming websites (such as this one) won't run any content about TFYC at all.

Two things about TFYC:

1. They aren't a feminist group. Feminism is, at its simplest, a movement for equality and capitalism is antithetical to equality.

2. If they were in fact a feminist organization, or at least an organization that cared about women and their representation then they would reject any money from 4chan. But as their title suggests, the source of their money is of no concern, only that they receive money.

If people on 4chan actually cared about women making games, then there are a multitude of Patreon's out there where the money goes directly to the women who make the games, and it's not some 8% pittance. 4chan will only support games made by women who are not visible or vocal, and who make games that fit within their definition of games.

TFYC support is a shield, along with the manufactured hashtag #notyourshield to indicate that they aren't motivated by sexism.

#9 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@r3d_zombie said:

had no idea what they were talking about for the first half, good show otherwise.

I want to be you.

To be fair though, doesn't this response (and others here who have also claimed ignorance) show the need for this website and it's staff, along with the other large gaming websites, to come out and detail what's happening and to condemn it wholesale?

In some fashion I also wish I didn't know about what was happening, but ignorance is not bliss here. People need to know what is happening, why it's happening and where you guys stand on the issue. Not everyone here reads your twitter or tumblr pages, it's a significant gesture when it's posted on the website so everyone can see where you all stand.

#10 Posted by RockyRaccoon37 (450 posts) -

@wolfgame said:

@rockyraccoon37 said:

Either way, I don't care about any of them. I do care about voices being oppressed, people being intimidated and threatened and critical thought being curtailed by anti-intellectuals.

Oppression is fine as long as it is against those who share a different view than you I guess.

I see a whole lot of people that want to "talk" about making the gaming environment a better place, a whole lot of people that want a conversation to be had, but they can't seem to fathom that in ANY movement that conversation may come under fire from the lowest rung of the internet ladder. At that point we have many choices on how to proceed, so far we cower into a corner only to reemerge at the next controversy saying "This is a discussion that needs to be had." Only to repeat the process on a loop. I am only getting so involved in this lately because it's disturbing to see so many people who want to be congratulated for raising issues they evacuate at the first available chance. When the going gets tough it's time to throw the community to the wolves.

The crux of this movement is that the gaming community is complacent in behavior that it is inappropriate, that couldn't be further from the truth. The gaming community will continue supporting everyones right to play video games, they don't shy away from tough topics and they will condemn those who seek to disrupt a dialogue, this plays out day after day. The narrative focus of lone heroes standing against an army of misogynist gamers is fiction. It may break barriers and make certain people feel less special but I am strongly inclined to believe that given the chance gamers would prove they care about these issues and want to see progress made. Can that be done while a persistent effort is made to catalog them with the smaller evil of the internet? Absolutely not. It's painfully clear why this conversation has stalled, but if this just a vehicle to "play pretend" on social issues at least recognize what impact this has on all people when you suddenly decide you can't be bothered to participate anymore.

Oppression is absolutely fine when it's directed towards people who only seek to oppress critical thought, progress, equality and inclusiveness. A dialogue can not be had with a person or group of people who reject the notion that the problem even exists. Those people must be shamed, ostracized and left behind to shout impotently at their loss of a homogeneous group in a culture that has predominately catered solely to them. And I'm not speaking solely to people in that group who are clearly misogynist and racist (of which there are enough that should make any person question the movement as a whole) but more specifically to those who claim they want equality, but only within their terms. Those liberals who are for equality, but don't want people in oppressed groups to be loud or angry or voice their criticisms in specific forms, ultimately requiring a form of assimilation in order to allow for equality.

"You can do and make whatever you want, so long as it makes us comfortable and fits within our terms of what is objective, what is journalism and what is criticism".

Gamergate, at every level of it's confused messaging is at it's core about only one thing: white, male men who identify themselves with a commodified product, are hurt and scared that they will lose control of a culture that has almost always catered only to them. In retaliation to that, we have extremists who are doxxing, threatening, and publicly shaming women in the industry and the men who stand at their side. We have Alex Jones conspiracy theory nuts who deny that any wrongdoing is occurring and if it is then it is entirely self-inflicted and part of some false flag campaign. And then we have the seemingly nice, calm liberal voices who don't agree with those crazies but ultimately still want to control the narrative of progress and are damning themselves (thankfully) by holding onto the gamergate name whose foundation is rotten to the core.

If you have questions about the relationship between the press and the industry, then fine (not really, it's dumb but whatever), but for your own sake don't associate it with this movement in any way. And don't attempt to suggest that the conversation must occur now, because it highlights your utter lack of empathy and reinforces the fact that you (consciously or subconsciously) want to divert attention away from real people who are being forced out of their homes and out of the industry because they have articulated thoughts that upset the status quo.