Widestancer posted:

Widestancer posted:

Be gamers to each other in here and find really funny things that gamers say other places!

Quest For Glory II posted:

Furthermore, Well, I could point out you're comparing the peak results of the Dreamcasts established hardware versus the new hardware of the Ps2, but I was talking more in terms of gameplay. The Ps2 was when games made the true transition from an attempted emulation of the console experience to a more fully realised idea of console games as an experience meant not just to amuse, but to really sink ones teeth into. Lets compare the way the two consoles approached puzzle games. The Dreamcast gives us Chu Chu Rocket - colourful, simple, cartoony. Gaming equivalent of candy. The Ps2 gives us Ico. Artistic, hauntingly beautiful, impactful in the way no game before it could have been. Gamings ambrosia.

Widestancer posted:

quote:

I find the increasing propensity of games being "pay-to-win" instead of "play-to-win" highly disconcerting. By playing on the insecurity of people, on the ego, and on a phony sense of accomplishment (or an unhealthy fear of losing), these psychologist/marketers connive to get people to open the wallet over the most trivial of things.

Want to portray yourself as smart? PAY for that mega-freeze, or mega-inspire, in the new Scramble tournaments! For just a few coins, you can get an extra 50% time advantage on your cheap opponent...and we'll show you words you didn't know existed! I've watched a few of those tournaments in the last few days and almost without exception, the person whose avatar has "FREEZE" under it will win the match. You see, while the tournament play is blind - you just see the avatars of those matched, and the opponents just see each other's avatar - the game designers make sure to show you when someone is using that paid "FREEZE" boost.

Now I don't really care whether I win or lose internet games (and I win many and lose many), so don't think this is sour grapes. I'm far more concerned about the mindset and psychological manipulation going on in today's culture.

When gaming is all about money instead of hard work and talent, then gaming is no longer honest competition. I saw this in paintball many years ago. We all had the same guns, single-shot, bolt-action, and they all sucked equally, so tactics, a bit of luck, and guts (you had to trust yourself enough to charge that stand of trees) won the day on the field.

Then came automatic weapons, and paintball is...well, more like a water fight with fire hoses.

I see it in softball, as every year, the manufacturers of bats adjust for maximum pop against the newest balls being used. It's an arms' race of sorts, with leagues trying to keep players safe, and teams trying to gain advantage...at $300 a bat. The difference in bat performance is HUGE to the outcome on the field. Again, not sour grapes - I've got a desk full of trophies from Clan Battlehammer over the last few years, and have the resources to make sure we've got decent bats.

Buy your election. Buy your kid better SAT schools with tutoring and testing programs. Buy your kid a place in a private school with a donation. Buy your kid a million-dollar horse and make sure she can't lose against the kid who got a foal out of a field and trained it, and trained herself/himself to high quality. Buy your kid a professional trainer to make sure he/she gets a leg up on the competition for that little league all-star team.

It's a mindset and direction that I find anathema to a healthy sense of accomplishment. I also find it so against the proposition of an even playing field, which I thought a basic tenet, and a basic advantage of the US in the early days of our nation.

Merit and money are not synonymous. When one (money) begets the other (merit), the societal result is mediocrity.

Quest For Glory II posted:

Furthermore, Well, I could point out you're comparing the peak results of the Dreamcasts established hardware versus the new hardware of the Ps2, but I was talking more in terms of gameplay. The Ps2 was when games made the true transition from an attempted emulation of the console experience to a more fully realised idea of console games as an experience meant not just to amuse, but to really sink ones teeth into. Lets compare the way the two consoles approached puzzle games. The Dreamcast gives us Chu Chu Rocket - colourful, simple, cartoony. Gaming equivalent of candy. The Ps2 gives us Ico. Artistic, hauntingly beautiful, impactful in the way no game before it could have been. Gamings ambrosia.

Quest For Glory II posted:

Furthermore, Well, I could point out you're comparing the peak results of the Dreamcasts established hardware versus the new hardware of the Ps2, but I was talking more in terms of gameplay. The Ps2 was when games made the true transition from an attempted emulation of the console experience to a more fully realised idea of console games as an experience meant not just to amuse, but to really sink ones teeth into. Lets compare the way the two consoles approached puzzle games. The Dreamcast gives us Chu Chu Rocket - colourful, simple, cartoony. Gaming equivalent of candy. The Ps2 gives us Ico. Artistic, hauntingly beautiful, impactful in the way no game before it could have been. Gamings ambrosia.

Broseph (not the one here) posted:

That seems like a pretty poor argument.

Change for the sake of change isn't good in itself. You can say, "things must change!" all you want but what's being proposed, ultimately? We don't really know. Not much apparently. We just know that, things gotta change and that's it. Of course, it's easy (if not somewhat demagogic) to paint everyone opposed to this (pretty much undefined) change as retrograde people, scared of new things (which is implicitly implied as positive) but it's not so simple.



The notion that feminism automatically = progressive is a bunch of bull, too.

Yes, it's the dominant narrative but it doesn't make it factual. For example Anita, the supposed postergirl for change is clearly and unambiguously in the abolitionism camp regarding prostitution. That's not a progressive position, it's a conservative position.

They just pass this in Canada and oh my, how conservatives and feminists groups got along well on that one... Likewise in France with Catholics groups and feminist associations. But just because you disguise it under a new veneer of women's rights, like so many things, doesn't change its conservative and puritanical origins. And would you know it: conservatives speaks again prostitution in terms of women's rights now! Not in terms of public and moral decency like they used to. Why, it's like you can use women's rights to pass old poo poo as new...




Feminism (at least those in the upper echelons of it, not the basic followers) is very much about conserving female privilege (even more so bourgeois/rich women privilege)

(Long ago...)

Throughout human history, women were always more valued ("WOMEN AND CHILDREN FIRST!") It's always been a greater crime or social transgression (before the legal concept of "crime" was invented) to hit a woman, to kill a woman. Rapists were usually punished severely, usually with their lives. They weren't given a handshake and a tap on the shoulder like the hysterical people who talk about "rape culture" seem to believe.

See, in mammals females are more valued because they are responsible for the continuation of the group (because they are carrying the fetus/children). Otoh you need very few males, reproductively speaking. So your average male is less valuable biologically than your average female. This is not some psycho-evo stuff. It's just the reality in all mammals and anyone who denies that is either a loon or ignorant and probably has involuntary spasms anytime someone pronounce the word "biology" :/

Now, since the advent of human monogamy, industrialization, the drop of infant mortality, since the massive rise in human population (let's not even talk about future poo poo like artificial wombs! Oh boy!) the greater biological value of women have been lessened to a large degree. Why, you could say we've became a more equal species between both sexes (more so in places that has given up polygamy). The traditional "patriarchal" society really was about protecting women and using men as canon fodder.

Feminism, is about trying to conserve, artificially, this old, prehistorical women's privilege. Feminism *Gasp!* is about preserving traditional "Patriarchy"!


Now, I know this goes again every notions that has been indoctrinated in your Rape Culture spewing, Affirmative Consent preaching drone out there and the knee jerk reaction that goes with it but...there you go.

You know how, certain industries goes into panic mode when they're getting replaced? Much like traditional television, feminists...very much are, well, a dying breed :/ They know it too at some level I think.

Control Volume posted:

So how are gender issues being handled in video games theses days?

Kewpuh posted:

quote:

Not to hurt peoples feelings.

It stole mechanics from multiple games amd mixes into one, and all the comedy is "breaking the 4th wall" ever heard of a game called HyperDimension Neptunia? tired of hearing how orginal this game is, im not hating on the game just saying.

Ps. for all those saying how great this game is and making fun of people who don't have the game on their console, why arnt you playing said game rather than ragging on people who are not playing it.

quote:

In this day and age anything that doesn't roll over and conform to rampant political correctness is more or less automatically labeled "extremist", to the point where most of our parents and grandparents by today's standards would have been considered "extremist" in some way shape or form, which most of us realize is a ridiculous proposition.

If the people pushing this "social justice" crap were really concerned about "misogyny", I'd like to see them tackle the rap/hiphop subculture for starters, or hell, good old porn. Of course they can't/won't do that because they don't want to anger other "protected minority" groups, such as the crazy neo-feminists who claim porn is "empowering" (lol). So they go after the pasty white nerds who by and large struggle to even get laid in the first place and add the evil misogyny accusation on top of their preexisting sexual misery.

Pathetic, tbh. They absolutely deserve all the backlash they're getting (they call it "bullying" when they've been spending huge amounts of time and resources trying to shove political agendas in videogame journalism).

quote:

Personally I can't help but sympathize with GG no matter how over the top or abusive it might seem to some, because it is a reaction to people trying to inject political agendas in videogames and videogame "journalism" for quite a while now. Way too many "game journalism" sites at this point have turned into pure clickbait crap ranting on about how Patricia Hernandez got raped in GTA5 or something like that. It's downright ridiculous. Gamergate was bound to happen, and those pseudo-journalists were bound to be tar and feathered at some point.

"Gamers" are absolutely right to not want their hobby to become a cesspool of particularly obnoxious political activism.

Geokinesis posted:

Poor pasty nerds

Butt Ghost posted:

I am a gamer, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the integrity of gaming journalism? 'No!' says the man at Kotaku, 'It belongs to SJWs.' 'No!' says the man at Rock Paper Shotgun, 'It belongs to our income' 'No!' says the man at Game Trailers, 'It belongs to out corporate relations.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... #Gamergate, a movement where the artist would not fear censorship, where the developer would not be bound by petty social justice, Where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the integrity of our journalism, #Gamergate can become your movement as well.

Control Volume posted:

So how are gender issues being handled in video games theses days?