Issues in Video Games and Entertainment

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
SquishypuffDave



Gender: Male
Age: 33
Australia

  • #81
  • Posted: 05/29/2015 09:12
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Saoirse wrote:
Now can we finally just movveeee on...


Nah. Just a little bit more.

Happymeal wrote:
To top it off, the journalists that push this agenda subsequently state that gamers (their fuckin audience) are dead...


This term refers less to the end of video gaming itself and more to the expansion of the medium to a much larger audience, something that is indisputably true. It's about the line between "gamers" and "non-gamers" being broken down.

Happymeal wrote:
...that they don't even like or care about video games, and etc.


I'm not familiar with this part. That would certainly be an odd thing to claim.

Happymeal wrote:
I do not adhere to ideologies.


You've made a lot of ideological and political claims, like demanding no "politics" in game discussion (which is itself a political statement). Maybe you have a different definition of ideology though? It seems to be a dirty word to you.

Happymeal wrote:
They don't love the games because of what gender each character is, what race each character is, etc. like you guys do.


I also like puzzle mechanics and pirates.
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Happymeal





  • #82
  • Posted: 05/29/2015 19:54
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Necharsian wrote:
I don't think the argument that GTA is sexist is because you can kill women, but more that all women in the game are just meaningless objects. and the ones you can interact with are just for fucking.


That doesn't really make it sexist either. Not adhering to quotas does not make a game sexist. I would never suggest shoehorning in things solely because of this complaint. Of course, this is assuming that the statement "the ones you can interact with are just for fucking" is true. I have a feeling it's not, but I haven't played the game too much because, like I said, it's not my type of game.

Would you people also consider it sexist to possess the same scenario except the opposite way around? Perhaps you think differently, but there are quite a few people who turn that into a statement of female empowerment. I'm not stating those people are wrong in that regard, but if it's not sexist both ways, then it's not sexist at all. Now, you may disagree with this sentiment, but that's what I think regarding this scenario.

Quote:
This term refers less to the end of video gaming itself and more to the expansion of the medium to a much larger audience, something that is indisputably true. It's about the line between "gamers" and "non-gamers" being broken down.


Lol, I'm not stating that interpretation is wrong or right, but people who are proponents of that are just laughable. I still think that interpretation is wrong, but it's at least a different one.

Quote:
You've made a lot of ideological and political claims, like demanding no "politics" in game discussion (which is itself a political statement). Maybe you have a different definition of ideology though? It seems to be a dirty word to you.


"the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group." is what I utilize for the definition of ideology.

See, having a conclusion after reviewing the evidence such as the conclusion "ideologies should not be forced onto people in regards to the creation of art" is different from Christianity or feminism which prematurely states what is right or wrong. The difference between myself and ideologues is that I make a conclusion after reviewing evidence and a situation, ideologues make conclusions prematurely.

The second thing is that my belief is not a body. These are individual conclusions which can be changed at any time. An ideologue would be forced to explain why something does or doesn't fit into its ideology while my perspective allows me to change conclusions when new evidence is presented. Do you see what I mean? I do not adhere to my ideas strictly while ideologues must. Otherwise, they aren't an ideologue.

Quote:
I'm not familiar with this part. That would certainly be an odd thing to claim


A few of the journalists in question had stated that. Of course, I don't want you believing things without evidence so I'll look for the articles/pages which had said that sort of thing.

Quote:
I also like puzzle mechanics and pirates.


Good for you. Hopefully you eventually see why quotas are bad.

EDIT:

Saoirse wrote:
^ thank you, Necharsian, although I hope that was just a general (very useful) critique and not taking the bait. Now can we finally just movveeee on... (and please don't drudge up more responses or indignant accusations as an excuse to flog a dead horse even further. Oh perhaps that's just baiting more, I donno, lose-lose. LET'S ALL GET DRUNK INSTEAD).


The thread is "Issues in video games and entertainment". The issues I'm currently discussing are ones I believe to be important and are completely relevant to the thread. I'm not sure why you're attempting to stop this. Of course people who take sides are gonna be aggressive in discussion. There's nothing wrong with that so long as we aren't being total dicks. As far as I can see, squishy and I are still adding to important discussion and these statements aren't that redundant either. I may disagree with Squishy, but he's bringing really competent points here. That's what makes good discussion.

EDIT 2:

Gamergate and SPJ for anyone who is intrigued. http://journoterrorist.com/airplay/

This might be the most important event in regards to this movement possible. I'm so glad this is happening.
Back to top
Necharsian
Best Ever User


Gender: Male
Canada

  • #83
  • Posted: 05/29/2015 20:16
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Happymeal wrote:
That doesn't really make it sexist either. Not adhering to quotas does not make a game sexist.


are you serious? so what would be sexist? a game has to physically put a "women are secondclass!!" loading screen? implicit sexism is just as bad as explicit sexism, and its probably even more dangerous.

Happymeal wrote:
Would you people also consider it sexist to possess the same scenario except the opposite way around?


isn't it strange when you have to use an imaginary scenario of opposites to argue a point. "well if that's sexist than so is this" should probably not be a debating chip, especially when a real-life example of the latter doesn't exist, but tons of the former do.
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
benpaco
Who's gonna watch you die?



Age: 27
Location: California
United States

  • #84
  • Posted: 05/29/2015 23:49
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Necharsian wrote:
are you serious? so what would be sexist? a game has to physically put a "women are secondclass!!" loading screen? implicit sexism is just as bad as explicit sexism, and its probably even more dangerous.


I'm actuLly sort of with Joseph and you here. GTA V is sexist but is not the worst offender and leaves room for a player to never go through anything misogynistic. If you want, you never have to use those women. However, the fact that women in the game are either to run over with a car or have sex with, while men are to run over with a car or in a plethora of other roles. The idea that GTA's model is sexist isn't totally true (nor what you're saying, but have heard it elsewhere), and I think the whole game could have been saved by a strong female character, even just one. I have no problem with prostitutes existing as long as there's an alternative, and while I guess you can create a character, that pales in comparison to, say, Dragon Age 2, which has male and female protagonists in addition to male and female prostitutes. The idea that having a prostitute in a game is often thrown out as automatically sexist but I don't think it has to be, GTA just should have had more of a range of female characters (let's be honest, having one of the three protagonists be a woman would have changed very little about the story but would have helped this a lot).
_________________


. . . 2016 . . . 2015 . . .

Things I Make
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
SuedeSwede
Ognoo


Gender: Female
Age: 25
Location: On a cloud
United Kingdom

  • #85
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 00:12
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
i didnt even know this thread existed

lol

hey guys
_________________
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
SquishypuffDave



Gender: Male
Age: 33
Australia

  • #86
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 06:27
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Happymeal wrote:
Would you people also consider it sexist to possess the same scenario except the opposite way around? Perhaps you think differently, but there are quite a few people who turn that into a statement of female empowerment. I'm not stating those people are wrong in that regard, but if it's not sexist both ways, then it's not sexist at all. Now, you may disagree with this sentiment, but that's what I think regarding this scenario.


It kinda depends, but context is everything. Maybe it would help to use racism as an example:


Link


You're talking a lot about "shoehorning" and "censoring" but I haven't seen anyone suggest that anywhere in this thread.

Quote:
This term refers less to the end of video gaming itself and more to the expansion of the medium to a much larger audience, something that is indisputably true. It's about the line between "gamers" and "non-gamers" being broken down.


Happymeal wrote:
Lol, I'm not stating that interpretation is wrong or right, but people who are proponents of that are just laughable. I still think that interpretation is wrong, but it's at least a different one.


So even if it's right, it's still laughable? I don't get it.

Anyways, here's the list I used as a reference:
https://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.c...-analysis/

I actually can kinda see why the premise makes some people angry. The death of an identity as a unique class of outsiders with their own culture and history. You described it best: they feel like people they don't relate to are invading their space and attempting to fill it with "ideological bullshit".

We're probably never going to reach an agreement about whether or not there really is some sort of far reaching journalistic conspiracy set on destroying everything these aforementioned gamers love. If so, then articles from respected sources must be dismissed as part of the feminist propaganda that's intent on putting vaginas on all your favourite male videogame characters and shoehorning in castration cutscenes. If it really does go that deep, then this is some illuminati-level shit and you truly are a lone voice of reason in an insane world.

(I know that's not what you literally believe, but this is how a lot of it comes across to me in the language you've used.)

Quote:
You've made a lot of ideological and political claims, like demanding no "politics" in game discussion (which is itself a political statement). Maybe you have a different definition of ideology though? It seems to be a dirty word to you.


Happymeal wrote:
See, having a conclusion after reviewing the evidence such as the conclusion "ideologies should not be forced onto people in regards to the creation of art" is different from Christianity or feminism which prematurely states what is right or wrong. The difference between myself and ideologues is that I make a conclusion after reviewing evidence and a situation, ideologues make conclusions prematurely.

The second thing is that my belief is not a body. These are individual conclusions which can be changed at any time. An ideologue would be forced to explain why something does or doesn't fit into its ideology while my perspective allows me to change conclusions when new evidence is presented. Do you see what I mean? I do not adhere to my ideas strictly while ideologues must. Otherwise, they aren't an ideologue.


So in summary, I'm closed minded and you're a free thinker? I'm an irrational zealot and you're a dispassionate observer?

Yeah I guess we have different definitions. I don't equate ideology with rigidity or premature conclusions. Feminism developed organically over time based on observations of social convention, and it evolves as takes in new information. I see ideals as an inevitable part of existence: having an intact face matches my ideals more than having an exploded face. Even cynics are just crushed idealists.

You're also the only person to bring up the term "idealogue". (Being faithful to a set of ethical principles and being a frothy-mouthed zealot are different things.)

Happymeal wrote:
They don't love the games because of what gender each character is, what race each character is, etc. like you guys do.


Quote:
I also like puzzle mechanics and pirates.


Happymeal wrote:
Good for you. Hopefully you eventually see why quotas are bad.


In case it didn't come across, I thought your description of my reasons for enjoying games was bizarre. Again, you're the only person that has brought up quotas. Games can be about male characters without being sexist. Games can be directed toward a male audience without being sexist. Your attitude to this whole thing seems pretty dualistic: either feminism is forcing strict guidelines on what developers are allowed to do, or they're absent from game criticism.

How much "space" should feminists be allowed to "fill" with their "ideological bullshit"? Is dictating those parameters a form of censorship? Is journalistic integrity an appropriate term to describe the subjective art of game review? These questions and many more will be answered in the next action-packed episode of Issues in Video Games and Entertainment.
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Tap
to resume download


Gender: Female
Age: 38
United States

  • #87
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 06:44
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
games journalism used to have integrity. like when I read nintendo power I knew that they weren't just trying to sell me on something. but now everyone has an agenda and it is a completely new phenomenon.
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Saoirse





  • #88
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 07:22
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Happymeal wrote:
That doesn't really make it sexist either. Not adhering to quotas does not make a game sexist. I would never suggest shoehorning in things solely because of this complaint. Of course, this is assuming that the statement "the ones you can interact with are just for fucking" is true. I have a feeling it's not, but I haven't played the game too much because, like I said, it's not my type of game.

Would you people also consider it sexist to possess the same scenario except the opposite way around? Perhaps you think differently, but there are quite a few people who turn that into a statement of female empowerment. I'm not stating those people are wrong in that regard, but if it's not sexist both ways, then it's not sexist at all. Now, you may disagree with this sentiment, but that's what I think regarding this scenario.



Happymeal, again I find it kind of funny (well no but let's just put it that way) that you constantly demand concrete "examples" and then you make a big assertion that a game isn't sexist and we're wrong for seeing it that way (please don't give a bullshit response denying this because of what semantics were used)... while admitting you aren't that familiar with it. So, go ahead define sexism and define misogyny for me. Describe in detail what happens to women throughout GTA. If you still think there's a way to deny that there's an extreme disconnect between the way men and women are treated in the game and a rather vicious, rancid or when the game's at it's best rather she's-just-my-lover way the players are promoted to use their (always) male hero in interacting with the game's female characters, then you might as well just stick your fingers in your ear and yell "LA-LA-LA-LA" for all eternity.

Keep in mind here I have always been a big fan of GTA- as a greater whole, though with some rather rotten blemishes. Doesn't mean I can't find many disturbing faults in the way the game is produced and how it treats certain characters, and how it relates to the wider and not isolated issue of how video games tend to (but defintely not always) treat it's female characters poorly. The main thing is GTA is far from the only culprit here.

To the second point, If it happened the other way around, where men were routinely physically beaten by women (and Im not saying in a standard female-avatar-in-a-boss-fight), used as nothing but a sexual playtoy or at best, generic romantic motivations and the women got points for harming/soliciting sex from them, that would be disgraceful and in no ways should be treated as something to condone. You seem to love using the "give examples" cop-out to fudge the greater issue, so instead if you see a game where everything I described above happens on screen then in all earnesty yes let's discuss it in greater detail and how it applies to the issue of hypocritical sexism.
Back to top
Happymeal





  • #89
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 16:51
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
Necharsian wrote:
are you serious? so what would be sexist? a game has to physically put a "women are secondclass!!" loading screen? implicit sexism is just as bad as explicit sexism, and its probably even more dangerous.


All characters are essentially second class in GTA. I've played GTA: San Adreas, Vice city, and 4. All of these games show no regards for anyone inside of them. However, I didn't want to make that same assumption for 5 as that's what we were discussing (though I have seen enough game play to make the assumption). However, if we're referring to the series as a whole, no character truly matters. They're all there for you to do whatever it is you want. Which is why my second statement came into play. Both men and women are treated poorly in that game, I don't see how you can say it's sexist towards women and not towards men.

The point isn't that there's no sexism because what happens to women isn't bad, but that almost every negative action perceivable in the series happens to both men and women. Though you can get me at "but you can't have sex with men" throughout the series which is a really good point actually. However, the main characters are male in the games I mentioned so it'd be only logical for that to be solely happening to women. Of course, you could argue that they could make the game have a homosexual protagonist or a female protagonist, to which I would respond, yeah they could, but not having a female as a lead does not make it sexist.

Quote:
So even if it's right, it's still laughable? I don't get it


It's kind of obvious why. Gamers are people who have an interest in gaming. By alienating that audience, you create a new audience that has very little allegiance to gaming. The point is, the reason people are buying games is because they have an interest in them. Games which already adhere to the idea of inclusion (having strong female protagonists or whatever) are still not constantly purchased by non - gamers which means people stating this must want to change the medium to a different one all together. This is because every effort that is possible without changing the medium in order to garner the non - gamer audience has been made. Perhaps a few new genres can pop up or different stories, but games have already created enough that caters to different audiences that stating "we should bridge the gap between gamers and non - gamers" is insane. It has already been done without actually changing the medium.

Quote:
So in summary, I'm closed minded and you're a free thinker? I'm an irrational zealot and you're a dispassionate observer?

Yeah I guess we have different definitions. I don't equate ideology with rigidity or premature conclusions. Feminism developed organically over time based on observations of social convention, and it evolves as takes in new information. I see ideals as an inevitable part of existence: having an intact face matches my ideals more than having an exploded face. Even cynics are just crushed idealists.


You did ask about my "i do not adhere to ideologies" thing. I don't think I ever stated that I don't have ideals or whatever. Just that whatever I think is readily available to change at any time.

Quote:
In case it didn't come across, I thought your description of my reasons for enjoying games was bizarre. Again, you're the only person that has brought up quotas. Games can be about male characters without being sexist. Games can be directed toward a male audience without being sexist. Your attitude to this whole thing seems pretty dualistic: either feminism is forcing strict guidelines on what developers are allowed to do, or they're absent from game criticism.


Perhaps you'll disagree with this analysis so correct me if I'm wrong.

If the gaming industry is sexist because it doesn't have enough female protagonists (which is the gist of what I'm hearing here) and that too many female NPCs are treated poorly, then how is that not stating "a male oriented game is therefore sexist". Also, you're fairly simplistic with your end statement there. People can criticize things all they want, but I'm free to then criticize what they think. You seem to be the one who can't take criticism. It's odd how when you criticize something it's about elevating the medium or about trying to make it better or art or whatever, but when I criticize something, I just can't handle criticism. Perhaps it's because it's the ideas you cling that makes you respond this way. If it were a Jewish person saying that there were not enough Jews inside a video game and that makes you anti - Semitic, then anyone arguing against that idea wouldn't be "not able to handle criticism", but just "criticizing someone's idea".

Quote:
How much "space" should feminists be allowed to "fill" with their "ideological bullshit"? Is dictating those parameters a form of censorship? Is journalistic integrity an appropriate term to describe the subjective art of game review?


I call it bullshit because every criticism made seems to either be attempting to make a quota or just plain out stupid. And, to top it off, everything is sexist if it doesn't adhere to the ideal. However, when journalists create a background communication in order to push this agenda (look up the game journo pros list), that's when the line is crossed. I'm fine with idiotic criticism, I'll argue against. However, action needs to be taken when media falls under such a bias that it's actively pushing this idea while being organized to do such.

Quote:
Happymeal, again I find it kind of funny (well no but let's just put it that way) that you constantly demand concrete "examples" and then you make a big assertion that a game isn't sexist and we're wrong for seeing it that way (please don't give a bullshit response denying this because of what semantics were used)... while admitting you aren't that familiar with it.


This is a fair point. I probably shouldn't have spoken about GTA 5 so you got me there. However, I'm familiar enough with the game and very familiar with the series to make the statement that everyone in that game is treated like shit.

Quote:
If you still think there's a way to deny that there's an extreme disconnect between the way men and women are treated in the game and a rather vicious, rancid or when the game's at it's best rather she's-just-my-lover way the players are promoted to use their (always) male hero in interacting with the game's female characters,


You seem to take issue here with several things and I'll attempt to argue with them, but these points are very disorganized.

Yes, you can deny that there's an extreme disconnect between the poor treatment of each sex because guess what? Everyone is treated poorly. In fact, the only characters to have been tortured and have their genitals mutilated in that game were male. You can also beat and kill men in that game. And perhaps it'd be only fair to have a female protagonist, but I've already argued why not having female protagonists doesn't make a game sexist previously. The point isn't that females aren't treated badly, but that everyone in that game is treated badly. It's the nature of that type of game. The point is that you're arguing that a game which treats everyone poorly is sexist despite the fact it treats everyone poorly.

EDIT: I do want to clarify that I have played some of GTA 5. I may have misled people into thinking that I haven't. However, I just wanted to clarify previously that I haven't played the entire game through. It's just a very boring game.
Back to top
Necharsian
Best Ever User


Gender: Male
Canada

  • #90
  • Posted: 05/30/2015 17:09
  • Post subject:
  • Reply with quote
what would be an example of sexism, happymeal?
Back to top
  • Visit poster's website
  • View user's profile
  • Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 9 of 10


 

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum
Sticky: The Games Forum Suggestions Thread Guest Games
Your Favorite Video Games? Guest Lounge
Video Games section for the Off Topic... Luigii Suggestions
Album of the day (#449): Entertainmen... albummaster Music
Album of the day (#4800): Entertainme... albummaster Music

 
Back to Top