[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46037263]I think the comparison between the "videogames make people violent" line and the "videogames make people sexist" line is perfectly justified. TB has made it multiple times, and his politics are a far cry from the AEI. Hell, I've made that point and the AEI disgusts me.
I can't really speak to what you felt. I didn't particularly feel that way. I mean, this Texas sovereignty bumper sticker just congealed from the red white and blue puss and bile which my chest has been weeping ever since I watched the video, so who knows. Maybe you're right.
Personally, I don't care if it was a recruitment tool for ISIS. If it's correct, then it's correct. I don't see why anything else would be particularly important in a discussion about the matters raised.[/QUOTE]
The vast majority of the video is a strawman with a couple of facts put in to sound correct.
Most people aren't saying "videogames make people sexist" atleast not in the same way people were saying "videogames make people violent" back in the violent videogame issue. People aren't saying that "videogames will turn people into misogynists" which is what the video is implying people are saying. Rather that ideas in videogames (both good and bad) subtly add to an overarching view that society generally holds.
The whole reference to the study in the beginning was pointless. Ok, so there is more women than men in gaming. How does that invalidate any of the criticisms that are put against some videogames? That reference to the study was just put in as a way to pander to the audience saying "True gamers" are usually men.
The main issue with this video is that nothing is technically incorrect, rather its very misleading. It doesn't deal with points that the opposition brings up it just builds up a viewpoint that nobody can agree with in order to tear it down.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46037303]I'm arguing that video games aren't the only medium plagued with "level of shitty writing, shallow and boring characters, and a blatant emphasis on pandering to the overwhelmingly male demographic of hardcore enthusiasts that people refuse to take a look at because it doesn't affect them."
Should I bring up books and Twilight?[/QUOTE]
Please don't bring up books, the significantly lower barrier of entry to publishing means it is littered with absolute garbage. There's a reason Sturgeon's law was originally talking about Sci-fi books.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;46037319]at least the film industry has relatively high-ish budget trash movies that pander to women like romantic comedies that get churned out every year, in addition to the annual dudebro explosions movies.
games aren't quite at that level yet unfortunately.[/QUOTE]
Seriously? Movies aren't any more progressive for having more female pandering than books are for romance novels being a huge industry. There isn't a necessity for capitalism to pander to genders equally and if they don't sell, they don't sell.
It would be funny if Otome games became more common in the west though. At the moment it's the iPhone games and Wii Fit that have huge female playerbases, something different would be a laugh.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;46037329]I was personally referring to the whole "Who cares it's videogames" thing but I'll bite.
You're completely disregarding-
a) The context that the video was made in
b) The source of the video in question
c) How irrelevant the statistics and credentials in that article are
I could care less about anything in that article when I've heard every single bit of information presented in that video on fucking 4chan, albeit presented in a slightly more professional manner. Her degree doesn't make her words fact- just a slightly more informed opinion, and even THEN it's still a blatant pandering piece for a conservative thinkhub.[/QUOTE]
do you know that ad hominem is actually a fallacy, and that it doesn't make your position more logical and well supported
"they're wrong cause they a shit"
[QUOTE=froztshock;46037315]I think part of the issue with writing in games is that we just outright haven't figured out how to best do it, to be honest.
We've been able to put words into games for, what, 20-25 years now? It's a pretty young medium. Even weirder, some of the games which provide what many people seem to think are the most artistically fulfilling experiences are the ones with very little written or spoken plot. Journey and Shadow of the Colossus are considered some of the better examples of videogame storytelling and they're incredibly minimalistic.
Though I'm not beyond saying that the problem might also have something to do with an apparent unwillingness to hire professional writers in a lot of cases. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more experimentation with plot in games. Though I'm not entirely sure that "walk around and get fed exposition" is exactly the way forward, as although examples in recent years have certainly been a puff of fresh air I doubt the concept will stay fresh for particularly long. Then again, who knows? Maybe it could get pretty popular with the help of immersion-enhancing technology like the Oculus.[/QUOTE]
i think the reason why games with no narrative like journey are so damn good is because they're the best examples of showing, not telling. their entire worlds are expressed through visuals, pure gameplay, and audio alone, not through super deep audio-log-in-trash-can-for-no-reason lore, or through characters who stand around awkwardly as they wait for the PC to pick from 3 dialogue choices.
right now it's pretty much impossible to fully utilize the millions of potential choices players have made while playing games, so even the most interactive RPGs and shit feel a bit robotic and same-ey, like a flowchart. and i don't think we'll get to that point until we have random NPCs commenting on how often you spin your camera view around, or when antagonist will be able to tell if you're bluffing depending on your real facial expression, or some other wacky future bullshit
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46037334]its really hard to find a fantasy mmo that has good armor design
in archeage, a few of the quest vendors are chicks with chainmail tops, exposed stomachs and chainmail shorts
whereas im wearing the same set as a male with realistic knight looking armor[/QUOTE]
I think the Souls games do a pretty good job at presenting the characters equally in their gear, but then again there arent many games up to the standards of the armor design of the Souls series.
My biggest fucking pet peeve in this area is the lazy-ass strategy of making male armor feminine by making the stomach show. Like, good job idiot now they're going to get cut in two.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46037334]its really hard to find a fantasy mmo that has good armor design
in archeage, a few of the quest vendors are chicks with chainmail tops, exposed stomachs and chainmail shorts
whereas im wearing the same set as a male with realistic knight looking armor[/QUOTE]
iirc World of Warcraft does a fairly decent job at making gender's armors on the same level.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46037327]i think his point is that an entire medium is not a single entity that can be described as "good" or "bad" in any specific respect, and that poorly executed writing can be found in excess among every medium
and if that's not his point, it's mine[/QUOTE]
It's like generalizing anime as terrible trash that overly sexualizes women
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46037351]because an argument has a fallacy doesnt mean its a shit argument[/QUOTE]
an argument built on a fallacy is the definition of a shit argument
If the only thing you can say against the points someone brings up is "yeah but you're a conservative" then you have nothing to say
stop making games with humans and make a game fully about cool dragons that can't speak and all look the same instead, so people can't complain about lack of poc or women in games
problem solved :downs:
[QUOTE=usaokay;46037348]Exactly.
I had the same reaction regarding that dumb Assassin's Creed Unity controversy.[/QUOTE]
There's a pretty big difference between being "offended" (which, going on a tangent, is the DUMBEST fucking anti-social justice buzzword ever) and challenging the blatantly poor-in-quality standard of a popular medium.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;46037350]I think the Souls games do a pretty good job at presenting the characters equally in their gear, but then again there arent many games up to the standards of the armor design of the Souls series.
My biggest fucking pet peeve in this area is the lazy-ass strategy of making male armor feminine by making the stomach show. Like, good job idiot now they're going to get cut in two.[/QUOTE]
Laziness is the biggest cause for this and the shit writing. You don't make shit like that because of sexism you make it because [I]"What's the easiest way to make this feminine? TITS AND ASS"[/I]
Same as what froztshock and milkandcooki say above, people don't bother putting the effort in to make it decent because that's too hard and there's not as many established conventions. Not that it will make things perfect though, as has been established movies and literature have ages of work to build on and still churn out garbage.
If a developer for example wants to have big boobs and prostitution in his game, should we really forbid him from including these elements?
It's the customer's choice whether he wants to buy a game with sexist elements or not. If he still wants to buy the game despite knowing its contents, should we really forbid him from doing so?
That's precisely why this discussion will never get anywhere. Whatever one may perceive as sexism in games, it's always going to exist as long as the customers are happy to buy it regardless.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;46037350]I think the Souls games do a pretty good job at presenting the characters equally in their gear, but then again there arent many games up to the standards of the armor design of the Souls series.
My biggest fucking pet peeve in this area is the lazy-ass strategy of making male armor feminine by making the stomach show. Like, good job idiot now they're going to get cut in two.[/QUOTE]
i have a big problem with the armors, not just the gross boobs armor that a lot of MMOs get. in some games the artists make female armor, and male armor sometimes, look like trash by trying to make the character's femininity or masculinity more obvious for some reason, which i think is entirely unnecessary
like, monster hunter doesn't really do gross sexy armor, but some of the cooler sets look dumb on the females.
[t]http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130412184734/monsterhunter/images/1/18/FrontierGen-Torupedo_G_Armor_(Blademaster)_Render_2.jpg[/t]
i think the amount of skin showed off with this one is alright, but a lot of the badass knight look is ruined by the face opening and bow on the head.
[t]http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140324114259/monsterhunter/images/6/61/FrontierGen-Altera_Armor_(Blademaster)_Render_2.png[/t]
and then there's minor things that bug me like this. [I]why[/I] would they need to show off the character's face, other than to just go "hey it's a cute girl." i was thinking of playing a female character in MH3 on my 3ds, but when i saw pics of the armor i decided not to.
[t]http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120704164645/monsterhunter/images/3/38/KushalaXBM.png[/t]
[t]http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120704165405/monsterhunter/images/a/a0/WhiteFatalisZBM.png[/t]
but on the bright side, not all of the armor sets in MH suffer from this!
i'd be the happiest dude in the world if all games looked at the souls series and (most) of monster hunter's armor for inspiration instead of like.... tera.
I don't like the idea that people who play casual games on their mobile devices are also called gamers. Just doesn't sit right with me.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;46037345]i think the reason why games with no narrative like journey are so damn good is because they're the best examples of showing, not telling. their entire worlds are expressed through visuals, pure gameplay, and audio alone, not through super deep audio-log-in-trash-can-for-no-reason lore, or through characters who stand around awkwardly as they wait for the PC to pick from 3 dialogue choices.
right now it's pretty much impossible to fully utilize the millions of potential choices players have made while playing games, so even the most interactive RPGs and shit feel a bit robotic and same-ey, like a flowchart. and i don't think we'll get to that point until we have random NPCs commenting on how often you spin your camera view around, or when antagonist will be able to tell if you're bluffing depending on your real facial expression, or some other wacky future bullshit[/QUOTE]
I do agree. It's funny that videogames are hailed as interactive media yet it sometimes seems like the level where they fall the flattest is in interaction, simply because it's impossible to properly account for all possible player choices, especially when it comes to social situations. Too bad simulating social interactions well is so damn hard. Maybe some advances in natural language parsing, something watson-esque, and better speech synth could eventually open things up there, but that's more related to technology than technique.
[QUOTE=Aide;46037412]I don't like the idea that people who play casual games on their mobile devices are also called gamers. Just doesn't sit right with me.[/QUOTE]
sorry dude, anything one could possibly form a fanbase around has what you perceive as "REAL" fans and "FAKE" fans, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about that.
[QUOTE=Aide;46037412]I don't like the idea that people who play casual games on their mobile devices are also called gamers. Just doesn't sit right with me.[/QUOTE]
Casual mobile games=Video games
People that play video games=Gamers
Therefore, people that play casual mobile games=Gamers.
I don't really see why this is an issue. The whole term "gamers" and the stigmas behind it are some of the dumbest things I can imagine. It's entirely absent in every form of entertainemnt that I can imagine.
[QUOTE=froztshock;46037432]I do agree. It's funny that videogames are hailed as interactive media yet it sometimes seems like the level where they fall the flattest is in interaction, simply because it's impossible to properly account for all possible player choices, especially when it comes to social situations. Too bad simulating social interactions well is so damn hard. Maybe some advances in natural language parsing, something watson-esque, and better speech synth could eventually open things up there, but that's more related to technology than technique.[/QUOTE]
i think games'd do better in the 2014st century if they tried to focus on more showy stories like journey and shit, or games with (don't groan please) simple narratives that have little to no player interaction, giving the writers a story that's way easier to tackle.
like, i don't think any interactive player choicey game i've ever played has stacked up against a game with a focused narrative.
for eg, even tho new vegas is my favorite game ever, i think supergiant's transistor trumps its story in every way because the story flows at a pace the developers intended, and the only real choices you have outside of how you actually kill dudes is small little collectible dealies.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;46037436]sorry dude, anything one could possibly form a fanbase around has what you perceive as "REAL" fans and "FAKE" fans, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about that.[/QUOTE]
This is getting off-topic, but a gamer who only plays Angry Birds casually in between class is a very different kind of gamer compared to someone who spends hours invested in DOTA2 every day
[QUOTE=Aide;46037412]I don't like the idea that people who play casual games on their mobile devices are also called gamers. Just doesn't sit right with me.[/QUOTE]
I think it's certainly fine to call them "gamers" if we take gamer at its face value of someone who plays games whenever, like moviegoer. But at the same time I do think it's important to note that there are multiple distinct demographics which the term may cover.
It's actually a pretty good thing that there are multiple types of people that can be called gamer, because that mean that
A: Different types of people are playing games
and
B: There are actually niches in the industry set up to cater to the needs of these different groups.
Of course, not everyone's wishes are accounted for, but it's better than a total monoculture, and does prove that progress can be made.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;46037451]Casual mobile games=Video games
People that play video games=Gamers
Therefore, people that play casual mobile games=Gamers.
I don't really see why this is an issue. The whole term "gamers" and the stigmas behind it are some of the dumbest things I can imagine. It's entirely absent in every form of entertainemnt that I can imagine.[/QUOTE]
It's the same kind of annoyance you get from people who think driving a Prius means you're a gearhead.
Nothing wrong with it really, just as long as you make clear distinctions in the market between hardcore and non-hardcore rather than lumping it all in together. You don't have people calling for Alpha Romeo to change because they're alienating the huge percentage of female drivers.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46037457]This is getting off-topic, but a gamer who only plays Angry Birds casually in between class is a very different kind of gamer compared to someone who spends hours invested in DOTA2 every day[/QUOTE]
i agree with that, but i'm mostly railing on aide for saying that he doesn't like how they're even referred to as gamers. they play games, they're gamers, [I]buuuuuut[/I]
are they more of a gamer than me or daigo or pro starcraft dudes or whoever else? hell no lol.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46037457]This is getting off-topic, but a gamer who only plays Angry Birds casually in between class is a very different kind of gamer compared to someone who spends hours invested in DOTA2 every day[/QUOTE]
The same could be said for a person who watches/reads/interacts with the more obscure works of a medium for more prolonged hours than more casual enthusiasts do, and yet we don't have special terms for them.
Even then Dota 2 isn't some hardcore obscure game lol
for me the "who is a gamer" chart thing goes like this
[t]http://puu.sh/bHEyk/78864efe96.png[/t]
they're all "gamers," but the intensity of their gamer power level is completely subjective.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;46037473]The same could be said for a person who watches/reads/interacts with the more obscure works of a medium for more prolonged hours than more casual enthusiasts do, and yet we don't have special terms for them.
Even then Dota 2 isn't some hardcore obscure game lol[/QUOTE]
There's different audiences for arthouse flicks and the Transformers movies. There's different audiences for classic literature and trashy romance novels. There's different audiences for experimental music and factory-produced pop music.
There's more to it than just engaging in the medium at the most basic level, it's about taking an interest in it and investing a decent amount of time into it. That's where people take issue in the term being thrown around casually.
[QUOTE=dannass;46036939]No i didn't watch it. I just entered the thread to give my 2 cents on the title. Sorry. But i guess i was pretty on point either way.[/QUOTE]
#IgnoranceIsReal
I take the Escapist's definition of gamer:
[quote]Nowadays more people than ever play games, and that's a wonderful thing!
But let us not be fooled: Not everyone who plays games is a gamer. A gamer is a game enthusiast, a person whose primary hobby or avocation is the enjoyment of games. The "enjoyment of games" is a deeper pursuit than merely playing them. It encompasses dedication towards their mastery; understanding of their history; commentary on the design; insight as to their relationships into the web of source material from which they are derived.
Every field of human leisure has similarly dedicated individuals. Everyone drives, but not everyone is a gearhead. A gearhead is a car enthusiast - someone whose primary hobby is the enjoyment of automobiles, broadly understood to include fixing them, modifying them, studying them, and driving them. Everyone wears clothes, but not everyone is a fashionista, or fashion enthusiast. Everyone eats, but not everyone is a foodie, or food enthusiast. Everyone watches movies, but not everyone is a cinemaphile, or movie enthusiast. Everyone takes trips, but not everyone is a traveler, or vacation enthusiast. I could go on and on.[/quote]
[QUOTE=fudge blood;46037018]for fucks sake, there are millions of women who play video games and do not give an absolute flying fuck about 'sexism' in video games. Every girl I've known, they do not care. Every dude I've known, they don't care. The major demographic of people who play games don't care because GAMES ARE GAMES.[/QUOTE]
This, i mean i have a female friend that plays a lot of games, and she is the one that's picking the sexualized characters.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46037334]its really hard to find a fantasy mmo that has good armor design
in archeage, a few of the quest vendors are chicks with chainmail tops, exposed stomachs and chainmail shorts
whereas im wearing the same set as a male with realistic knight looking armor[/QUOTE]
I don't think you're going to find anyone who disagrees with shitty Korean MMOs being sexist.
That's a pretty specific subset of video games though.
I really like her, it's disturbing how incredible it is seeing an actual feminist on the internet rather than just someone starting a war between genders for no good reason.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
