Gamergate III: Rise of the Machines

[A Random]

What, and validate them?

 

[Coldgrip]

The problem is that they don't play ANY game at all. I said this a few pages ago, the large number of these SJWs are pepole who don't play video games. If they actually bothered playing one most of them would see their ideology crumble before their very eyes, and that is something they don't want to see happen. @Jaimas said it best when he said these people are only doing this for power.

On a related note to this, when they start ranting about how misogynistic games today are their examples are almost always ones from about a decade or more ago. Back when you couldn't program a cart to have more than a few lines of text that required you to keep your story to a minimum. Games like Hitman or GTA (or more recently The Witcher 3) are really the only modern ones that get any real mention from the likes of Anitatosh or Wu because of how mainstream they are.

 

[Optimus Prime]

So, I recently learned of something: a phenomenon called "boobsleeves"

Which basically is when clothing defies the laws of physics and adheres to the body in impossible ways, like skintight catsuits. See picture inset on the upper left.

I wonder if this has anything to do with how those "new" R60 models didn't solve the skin texture - is - clothes problem: whatever program Wu is using (Maya I think?), she or whoever is doing the models now can't make clothes that look realistic as anything BUT boob-hugging catsuits.

 

[Pikimon]

Her boobs look like submarines or a ham

 

[Sweet and Savoury]

Her boobs look like submarines or a ham

Agreed!

They are...icky for lack of a better term.

 

[XYZpdq]

I think they're oddly protruding to show off what their cybersportsbra can do.

 

[GREEDY FIREMAN]

The problem is that they don't play ANY game at all. I said this a few pages ago, the large number of these SJWs are pepole who don't play video games. If they actually bothered playing one most of them would see their ideology crumble before their very eyes, and that is something they don't want to see happen.

Here's a perfect example of what you're talking about:

 

[John Titor]

View attachment 32200

for fucks sake....

Is there ANY mainstream game that they have nice things to say about?

 

[NegaCWC]

Is there ANY mainstream game that they have nice things to say about?

Spoiler: Answer

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Anyone else watch sargon's stream with Baldwin? I can't link it because my phones doesn't like video links. If nothing else it is a good reminder of the fact that the American right is just as psychotic as the SJWs.

 

[DrunkTails]

Here's a perfect example of what you're talking about:

Oh that is 100% what I mean. Poor Sargon. It must be a pain for him to have to read through stupidity and point out their idiocy.

 

[Lucky Wildcard]

WARNING: Massive pic and text dump ahead.

First, a series of tweets by Oliver Campbell.

More whining from Anita...

This funny tweet...

Going Full McIntosh again, I see.

Then there's this bozo...

 

[TheMonkeyMan]

David Auerbach wrote a pretty good twitlonger post about Anti-GG's frustration with AAA publishers:

Sour Gripes: E3, the AAAs, and the Journos
"It's like if all the movie reviews in the local newspaper were written by film studies professors who only like Atom Egoyan and stuff like that but were paid to pretend to be excited for the new Transformers movie." --TheHuss

The "indie" press (for lack of a better term: Kotaku, Polygon, Gamasutra, and a slew of lesser outfits) have been unhappy with the E3. Gamergate hasn't been quite the focus, but it's been an undercurrent. Christian Nutt's focus on Gamergate in the E3 coverage (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...es_its_antiharassment_stance_future_of_E3.php) may seem perplexing. Why badger the ESA head now, ten months after Gamergate began, about why the ESA won't speak about GG? Especially when he clearly is Not Going to Say Anything?

There has been an undercurrent of rage from the non-mainstream gaming press toward the AAAs and the AAA press over the AAA refusal to rail against Gamergate and demonize its members. The adoption of ethics policies by IGN also smacked of appeasement to them. Over the months of coverage, there's been repeated sniping from all the journalists and many indie devs that the AAAs are just standing back and letting Gamergate happen, they're enabling the harassment, etc. (I'll just use "journos" to refer to that particular unhappy segment of the "indie" gaming press so I can stop typing "indie" in quotes.")

This rage is mostly impotent frustration. The journos wanted to use Gamergate as a lever for greater influence over the AAAs and to be included at the table for industry discussions. And given that the journos and their allies were increasingly out of sync with the majority of gamers, AAA support was their best bet for pushing their vision of what gaming should be, and, more baldly, for gaining influence. So if the AAAs were to say, "Gamergate is terrible, what can we do?", the journos could pipe up and say, "Glad you asked! Listen to us! Change your games like we say! Become art!" But the AAAs never asked. Despite the attempts of the journos to spin every AAA mention of harassment as a specific condemnation of Gamergate, the journos have continued to complain that the AAAs don't care about Gamergate.

The thing is, the journos are pretty much right. The AAAs *are* supporting Gamergate, at least tacitly. They don't want the journos to gain any more influence (or to stop losing influence), and they loathe this pseudo-academic "critique" stuff just as much as your average gamer. The thought of having to kiss the ass of some PhD in order to gain an Indie or Social Justice imprimatur is insulting to them. They've got money to make. So by remaining silent on Gamergate and having IGN do the pageantry of adopting an ethics policy (no skin off their nose), the AAAs signalled that they were not in alignment with the journos. And they aren't. They are happy to see Gamergate take these people on--and that enrages the journos all the more. This wasn't a planned strategy on behalf of the AAAs, but it was an easy call to make once Gamergate was in play.

It's also important to understand the difference between amateur and professional corruption. If you talk to service workers at restaurants, they'll generally tell you that the worst treatment usually comes from small independent restaurants. Corporate chains and franchises tend to establish standards in order to ameliorate the possibility of lawsuits and to keep the corporate name's reputation intact. While treatment may not be great, there's an HR department ready to crack down if any one person gets out of hand. In a small restaurant, however, some crazy chef can be as much of a jerk as he wants, and no one can stop him as long as the place is successful. I can tell you horror stories. Capitalism is venal and heartless but it does tend to exert a smoothing effect with scale; excesses both positive and negative get ironed out and professionalized in the pursuit of making money efficiently. Albert O. Hirschman's The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism Before Its Triumph is a fantastic little book about the early theorizing of capitalism and how its proponents argued that financial interest was a much more predictable and much less harmful motive than most other motives that people ever acted on. Hirschman was pretty left and very smart: http://www.waggish.org/2005/albert-o-hirschman-the-passions-and-the-interests/

And it is fortunate for men to be in a situation in which, though their passions may prompt them to be wicked, they have nevertheless an interest in not being so.
--Montesquieu

Which is to say, corporate corruption is *professional*. The journos and their favored devs made such easy targets for Gamergate because their corruption was absurdly inept. The AAAs and mouthpieces like IGN and GameInformer and PCGamer run a professional outfit: sure, it's all a big PR con job, but they aren't going to have journalists reviewing games by people they're publicly friends with (or if called out on it, they'll apologize, add disclosures, blah blah), and they eventually realize to cut out the Doritos nonsense, even if a bit too late. Moreover, they aren't going to be dumb enough to run a bunch of articles on the death of gamers. (That would be the "passions" trumping the "interests.") As far as incompetent corruption goes, the journos were the low-hanging fruit. Investigation into AAA corruption would take boots on the ground that Gamergate doesn't have. The journos made it easy. Indie scenes have always celebrated themselves, but they usually don't make themselves targets to quite this extent.

So Gamergate has been pretty convenient for the AAAs. Gamergate is doing the dirty work of distracting, annoying, and quieting a chronic irritation for the AAAs, and the AAAs just have to sit back and keep quiet. This drives the journos crazy, but there's not much they can do about it, short of politely griping in articles like Nutt's (or impolitely griping on Twitter). Meanwhile, the AAAs are cutting off Kotaku and Polygon even as gamers stop paying attention to them. The journos' strategy has backfired. There must have been some collective delusion that they thought their influence could actually pull some weight with the AAAs, even with Gamergate as a potential lever. As I've said before, I don't know what they were thinking. They ragequit their audience.

"We really did wind up on an elitist 'strategy' for whatever strategy existed, which was none. What makes it elitist? Well, we never actually bothered to try and convince the gaming public along the way. The end result was this split we can now see: Most gamers hated all this shit."
--LoadingReadyRun poster

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smmqdt

 

[ZehnBoat]

i want to make a video game with a female character as the lead.
and whenever the player dies it suddenly cuts and text saying
THIS DIDNT HAPPEN BECAUSE IF IT DID IT WOULD BE SEXIST
or
YOU LIKE KILLING WOMEN DONT YOU?
and when a fight breaks out, it cuts to just after the fight ends
any scene involving conflict is cut to after the conflict is finished
anytime a character has an issue with the PC the NPC will suddenly go into a T-pose and will apologize and praise the PC in a badly acted voice or microsoft sam.

 

[DrunkTails]

i want to make a video game with a female character as the lead.
and whenever the player dies it suddenly cuts and text saying
THIS DIDNT HAPPEN BECAUSE IF IT DID IT WOULD BE SEXIST
or
YOU LIKE KILLING WOMEN DONT YOU?
and when a fight breaks out, it cuts to just after the fight ends
any scene involving conflict is cut to after the conflict is finished
anytime a character has an issue with the PC the NPC will suddenly go into a T-pose and will apologize and praise the PC in a badly acted voice or microsoft sam.

I want to make a game in which a question is asked before the player even begins the game:

Are you a gamer or a SJW?

If they answer SJW the game tells them that it is locked to them because it is meant for gamers who love video games, not morons who think they are holy because they defend failures like Anita, Quinn or Wu.

 

[c-no]

Going Full McIntosh again, I see.

Then there's this bozo...

Of course demons, nazis, and zombies rationalize the brutality. Aside from being pixels and polygons with textures, you pretty have to fight them since the zombie is a predator with rotting skin, the nazi is a guy who is trying to kill any untermensch he encounters, and the demon is bad guy that wants to kill you. McIntosh can try to say how gaming has mostly been about violence with the likes of games such as Wolfenstein 3D and Doom but he is just a fool trying to sound like some academic intellectual. Even then, not every game that has demons, nazis, and zombies would have you engage them. Not when you have a game that encourages the likes of stealth and avoiding full on fights.

As for E3 being some "orgy of AAA games, being ran by colluding journos" , the gamers aren't barred from entering and applauding the likes of Fallout 4 and Doom 4. As games journalism being bent backwards by AAA publishers, does this mean the likes of Depression Quest was a AAA title? The guy also says to hell with the consumer.
The tweet I got it from seems to sum up the Jay Allen bozo rather fittingly.

 

[AnOminous]

I find it outrageously stupid, actually, I think they call it full McIntosh, to complain about making enemies demons, zombies, or Nazis (though SJWs might be another good choice), to justify killing them. Well, no shit Captain Obvious. Since shooting them is the whole point.

They basically just hate videogames and don't want them to exist.

Then they whine about why an industry that SELLS VIDEOGAMES and people who want to BUY VIDEOGAMES have no interest in their bullshit.

It's because we loves shooting us some Nazis. Or zombies. Or Nazi zombies.

(Why Hatred is at least amusing in this field is it actually inverts that trope and makes it about shooting completely innocent people or the "good guys" to be edgy. I'd like to see something like this as an actually good FPS with an impressive engine.)

When McIntosh and the kind of tards who repeat his bullshit say things like this, they really make it obvious that they don't want to improve games or make them better, they just want to destroy them. At least Jack Thompson wasn't a concern troll while doing the same thing.

 

[c-no]

I find it outrageously stupid, actually, I think they call it full McIntosh, to complain about making enemies demons, zombies, or Nazis (though SJWs might be another good choice), to justify killing them. Well, no shit Captain Obvious. Since shooting them is the whole point.

They basically just hate videogames and don't want them to exist.

Then they whine about why an industry that SELLS VIDEOGAMES and people who want to BUY VIDEOGAMES have no interest in their bullshit.

It's because we loves shooting us some Nazis. Or zombies. Or Nazi zombies.

(Why Hatred is at least amusing in this field is it actually inverts that trope and makes it about shooting completely innocent people or the "good guys" to be edgy. I'd like to see something like this as an actually good FPS with an impressive engine.)

When McIntosh and the kind of tards who repeat his bullshit say things like this, they really make it obvious that they don't want to improve games or make them better, they just want to destroy them. At least Jack Thompson wasn't a concern troll while doing the same thing.

Yeah, Thompson just said video games are evil because they'd corrupt our youth, not trying to take some veil like McIntosh. What you said earlier in that they need to STFU is very fitting. The tweets McIntosh are nothing more drivel that tries to sound intellectual.

 

[StallChaser]

i want to make a video game with a female character as the lead.
and whenever the player dies it suddenly cuts and text saying
THIS DIDNT HAPPEN BECAUSE IF IT DID IT WOULD BE SEXIST
or
YOU LIKE KILLING WOMEN DONT YOU?
and when a fight breaks out, it cuts to just after the fight ends
any scene involving conflict is cut to after the conflict is finished
anytime a character has an issue with the PC the NPC will suddenly go into a T-pose and will apologize and praise the PC in a badly acted voice or microsoft sam.

It would be a gaming version of this

 

[Ron Paul 2024]

YOU LIKE KILLING WOMEN DONT YOU?

I could see a game like Spec Ops: The Line not only do that, but do it well.