|
On March 12 2015 01:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:10 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. I actually feel that we've failed a bit as a community everytime I read one of these "well I enjoy the toxcity" comments. At the end of the day it's prioritizing your own (rather banal) enjoyment of frivolous stuff like rape/gay/racist/troll jokes over the enjoyment of others who just want to play the game. People who might be deeply affected by this, and who cannot, as some might expect them, to just "have a thicker skin". And all this stuff isn't even required to play the actual game either. It also relates directly to sale and marketability. People who make games want to sell them to as many people as possible. If they are losing a section of the audience because of this behavior. If the section of the audience happens to be women and they are unable to sell games to that demographic, they have good reasons to address the issues. For a lot of developers, who want as many people as possible to play their games, the idea of losing the audience that does not want to "get a thicker skin" isn't acceptable.
Actually I think there was some commentary previously that given the success of the Wii in the last console generation, and the increasing costs of making games generally (and specifically, "AAA titles"), it has become risky (as a buisness move) to make games purely for a "hardcore" gamer audience (who I guess are supposed to enjoy the toxicity, though I really doubt that).
|
The problem is that most people who are supposedly "defending" feminism don't know much about it. Feminism is not a complete and undiscussed theory. There are moment in the history of feminism, and you can almost always use old theory to critic new ones and vice versa. For exemple, I never liked the third wave feminism, that had its time (1970-1980 in the US mostly). I've always find myself way closer to french theory on masculine domination, in Bourdieu's work (Outline of a Theory of Practice and The Masculine Domination). It's especially relevant because most people barely know what the third wave is about - how to define J. Butler's concepts such as gender performativity, queer, etc ? In the recent year, Butler distanced herself with the queer theory, and there are ton of works on the limits of the gender theory - like Janet Halley "After Sex ?" or "Split, Décisions, How and Why to Take a Break from Feminism ?". Most notably, J. Butler and the likes came back on the idea that the violence was strictly the result of heterosexual interactions (from men to women) and showed that, against what they believed at first, there can be violence in lesbian couple of gay couple that reproduce the scheme of domination that exist in men / women interactions (which goes against this idea that sexism is a specificity of women) - the butch-femme.
But somehow, now that the limits of the theory are discussed in the community that created those concepts (and all theories have limits), they are so well grounded in the mind of people that just discussing those bring rather crude comments from people who have no clue and take everything they read at face value without any criticism. It's also very funny that people bring out gender theory and then feel threatened when some people discuss it.
|
On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word.
So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush.
What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games).
And anyway, popularity shouldn't be the measure of the rightness of anything. I am sure that the swatting videos are popular in the sense that they probably get plenty of views, but I am sure we can all agree that it is a pretty awful practice that wastes the time of the police and traumatises people.
|
On March 11 2015 23:49 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2015 23:44 wei2coolman wrote:On March 11 2015 23:37 OtherWorld wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Sorry bud, saying that women are worse off than men when talking biologically is indeed a nonsense, but when talking about men and women as societal groups it makes a lot of sense and has a very legit value. Just like a comparison between two societal groups almost always make sense. Yeah, because women on average can lift as much as men? ... I suggest you read my post again. If you still don't get it, here's the thing : -things such as alcohol tolerance or amount of weight that can be lifted is biological. -things such as average salary, amount of domestic violence received or given, or society-based discrimination in general is societal. That implies the biological strenth advantage isn't what formed those societal 'discrimination' in the first place. If your job is physically demanding, and the average female is a couple standard deviation of strength weaker than men, doesn't it reason that there is going to be an obvious population bias towards having significantly more males in that job? Especially if you consider how normal curve scaling goes when talking about 2 groups whom's averages are off by standards of deviation.
|
On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy.If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. You're dead wrong with the bolded part. Every time there's been a major demographic addition, the original core audience suffers. Remember when CoD first hit it big? And then practically every shooter after it had to try to grab the CoD audience. Even totally unrelated games like Ace Combat did it. Remember when Starcraft Broodwar started to get a huge following? And then every RTS after that had to try to be BW. How many MMO's have been WoW clones?
So basically most devs now try to grab the biggest demographic that might possibly be interested in their game. And that turns off the core audience, who were fans of it when it was an original idea, not a CoD-clone or whatever.
|
On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. b) Female developers will not magically make trolls better people, either. This has nothing to do with gaming. You should make a good parenting thread. c) Trolls are not communicating usefully in team games, so muting them makes no difference to your chances at winning. d) Many games implement a system whereby you can choose not to be matched with certain people. I'm sure more will do so in future. e) There is no shortage of games that appeal to women. We are talking about competitive gaming. You're making broad and inapplicable statements. A game like Call of Duty which features in this documentary is clearly aimed at males. Something like Dota is much more gender neutral. f) Nobody is purposefully excluding anybody.
It may be an assumption, but it's hardly a massive or unreasonable one. I think you are making the unreasonable assumption that because trolls are loud they are overly common, but it just seems that way, and rightfully so. People are more likely to remember the guy who was a dick all game long rather than the other 3 people who were silent or communicated politely.
I never said female developers would make trolls go away, I said it would help bring in a female audience. Aside from online harassment, poor representation of well-written female characters and female perspectives is a problem with a lot of games. There are still a lot of non-narrative games that don't allow you to play as a woman or don't contain any meaningful women characters. No one loses if that situation is improved.
Again, you are making an assumption. Over my 2,000 hours I've run into a lot of good Dota players who in between making useful communications return to abuse. Yeah, the guys who just say "nigger" over and over into voice chat are no-brainer mute fodder, but muting the ultra-competitive players who are trying to win but can't do it without being an asshole hurts your chances of winning the game.
It's great that games are starting to allow blacklists, but in the ones that do it isn't uncommon for people to run out of space on their blacklists or to have dozens and dozens of people on it. You have to hear the abuse before you're able to mute/report someone, and it doesn't keep a completely different person from trying to ruin your experience in the next game. The one thing I do agree with you on is that a lot of this comes to poor parenting in the internet age, but who would have thought you have to teach your children to be as polite on the internet as they would in any other public place?
And yeah, some people are purposefully excluding women, that's the whole point of the discussion. It may be a minority or it may not, but just look at Twitch chat when a woman gets on-stage at an event. You may be able to have a discussion in between the "GRILL" and "8/10 would bang," but that right there is a culture that is exclusionary.
|
On March 12 2015 01:27 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush. What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games).
It's a small minority who are just outright aggressive to people without a reason, but it's probably a majority who enjoy controversy (Idra) and who communicate in an offensive manner. In Dota you're just as likely to get somebody insulting you or yelling at you than somebody offering calm advice. Comes with the territory.
|
On March 12 2015 01:35 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy.If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. You're dead wrong with the bolded part. Every time there's been a major demographic addition, the original core audience suffers. Remember when CoD first hit it big? And then practically every shooter after it had to try to grab the CoD audience. Even totally unrelated games like Ace Combat did it. Remember when Starcraft Broodwar started to get a huge following? And then every RTS after that had to try to be BW. How many MMO's have been WoW clones? So basically most devs now try to grab the biggest demographic that might possibly be interested in their game. And that turns off the core audience, who were fans of it when it was an original idea, not a CoD-clone or whatever. There is a whole Green Day song about it and what happens when creators have to leave some of their fans behind. The games people love will still get made. Maybe not as often, but thats not the worst. I have never had a problem finding a game a love to play and today there are more games than ever before.
I don't see it as a huge issue if it means more people get to enjoy gaming.
|
On March 12 2015 01:35 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy.If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. You're dead wrong with the bolded part. Every time there's been a major demographic addition, the original core audience suffers. Remember when CoD first hit it big? And then practically every shooter after it had to try to grab the CoD audience. Even totally unrelated games like Ace Combat did it. Remember when Starcraft Broodwar started to get a huge following? And then every RTS after that had to try to be BW. How many MMO's have been WoW clones? So basically most devs now try to grab the biggest demographic that might possibly be interested in their game. And that turns off the core audience, who were fans of it when it was an original idea, not a CoD-clone or whatever.
I don't really get your point. So are you saying that the original core audience of FPS suffered when COD hit it big? Incidentally not all FPS had to try to grab the COD audience, that is plainly wrong. There are plenty of poular and thriving alternatives - Team Fortress, L4D, and of course Counter-strike which came before COD in the first place. There's HALO on the consoles as well.
Or that RTS fans were hurt by... broodwar being popular (I can't believed I just typed that)? Or MMO fans suffered with WoW being released (WoW is pretty much a clone of stuff that came before it anyway, so WoW clones are just continuing the trend)?
|
On March 12 2015 01:41 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:27 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote: [quote] This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. [quote]
Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush. What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games). It's a small minority who are just outright aggressive to people without a reason, but it's probably a majority who enjoy controversy (Idra) and who communicate in an offensive manner. In Dota you're just as likely to get somebody insulting you or yelling at you than somebody offering calm advice. Comes with the territory.
Well if that is the case then the majority just facilitates the small agressive minority, by basically consuming the drama that comes out of trolling.
And any way back to my original quesiton - what's wrong with trying to improve the territory, seeing as all these insults and yelling are tangential to the actual game. Is yelling at people that essential to our gaming experience that we need to hold on to it at the expense of other people's enjoyment?
And anyway if Idra is your exmaple, I think it's a rather poor one. The guy got removed from his team for generally being offensive, and EG would not have done that if they thought that everyone ejoyed trolling that much.
And again, the popularity of something isn't indicative of its desirability as a practice.
|
On March 12 2015 01:37 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. b) Female developers will not magically make trolls better people, either. This has nothing to do with gaming. You should make a good parenting thread. c) Trolls are not communicating usefully in team games, so muting them makes no difference to your chances at winning. d) Many games implement a system whereby you can choose not to be matched with certain people. I'm sure more will do so in future. e) There is no shortage of games that appeal to women. We are talking about competitive gaming. You're making broad and inapplicable statements. A game like Call of Duty which features in this documentary is clearly aimed at males. Something like Dota is much more gender neutral. f) Nobody is purposefully excluding anybody. It may be an assumption, but it's hardly a massive or unreasonable one. I think you are making the unreasonable assumption that because trolls are loud they are overly common, but it just seems that way, and rightfully so. People are more likely to remember the guy who was a dick all game long rather than the other 3 people who were silent or communicated politely. I never said female developers would make trolls go away, I said it would help bring in a female audience. Aside from online harassment, poor representation of well-written female characters and female perspectives is a problem with a lot of games. There are still a lot of non-narrative games that don't allow you to play as a woman or don't contain any meaningful women characters. No one loses if that situation is improved. Again, you are making an assumption. Over my 2,000 hours I've run into a lot of good Dota players who in between making useful communications return to abuse. Yeah, the guys who just say "nigger" over and over into voice chat are no-brainer mute fodder, but muting the ultra-competitive players who are trying to win but can't do it without being an asshole hurts your chances of winning the game. It's great that games are starting to allow blacklists, but in the ones that do it isn't uncommon for people to run out of space on their blacklists or to have dozens and dozens of people on it. You have to hear the abuse before you're able to mute/report someone, and it doesn't keep a completely different person from trying to ruin your experience in the next game. The one thing I do agree with you on is that a lot of this comes to poor parenting in the internet age, but who would have thought you have to teach your children to be as polite on the internet as they would in any other public place? And yeah, some people are purposefully excluding women, that's the whole point of the discussion. It may be a minority or it may not, but just look at Twitch chat when a woman gets on-stage at an event. You may be able to have a discussion in between the "GRILL" and "8/10 would bang," but that right there is a culture that is exclusionary.
I'm talking about Call of Duty a lot because it's the primary game I know will be mentioned in the documentary. But it is not purposeful exclusion to design a game with a target audience in mind and let that audience behave in a natural fashion. They should be under no obligation to cater for people who are not even part of their target demographic. If I wanted to play something that was clearly designed for women, I would accept the differences in the games community.
Nobody is going to develop a competitive game especially for women because it is an insignificant market and the game would have little relevance in the eSports world (and if it did it would likely become dominated by males). It is also not purposeful exclusion when twitch chat says dumb stuff. That's just twitch chat saying dumb stuff (another demonstration btw, of how trolling is an integral part of eSports culture). It is not purposeful exclusion when people are rude in games, because they are rude to everybody. I get told to uninstall/quit on a fairly regular basis. Where there is a significant market, games are made.
On March 12 2015 01:50 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:41 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 01:27 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote: [quote]
Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system?
It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush. What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games). It's a small minority who are just outright aggressive to people without a reason, but it's probably a majority who enjoy controversy (Idra) and who communicate in an offensive manner. In Dota you're just as likely to get somebody insulting you or yelling at you than somebody offering calm advice. Comes with the territory. Well if that is the case then the majority just facilitates the small agressive minority, by basically consuming the drama that comes out of trolling. And any way back to my original quesiton - what's wrong with trying to improve the territory, seeing as all these insults and yelling are tangential to the actual game. Is yelling at people that essential to our gaming experience that we need to hold on to it at the expense of other people's enjoyment? And anyway if Idra is your exmaple, I think it's a rather poor one. The guy got removed from his team for generally being offensive, and EG would not have done that if they thought that everyone ejoyed trolling that much. And again, the popularity of something isn't indicative of its desirability as a practice.
Do you really believe that Idra got kicked for that? I'm fairly confident he agreed to that 'kicking' beforehand on the basis that he was not really dedicated to the game and was not performing very well. He had been much more controversial beforehand and was kept on the team. The point is that Idra was hugely popular, regardless of results, because of the controversy surrounding him.
Your idea of 'improving' the community is what exactly? Policing everything people say? Sounds pretty cancerous to me. Yes, I like the fact that we are less obligated to fit some standard of political correctness online than we are in 'real life'. I heard syndereN call sunsfan a jew on his stream earlier. A lifetime ban is in order for that antisemitic remark, don't you think? Fuck that. We know it's not antisemitic. It's a harmless sociolect. People are disgustingly prone to being offended by nothing these days.
|
On March 12 2015 01:50 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:41 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 01:27 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote: [quote]
Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system?
It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush. What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games). It's a small minority who are just outright aggressive to people without a reason, but it's probably a majority who enjoy controversy (Idra) and who communicate in an offensive manner. In Dota you're just as likely to get somebody insulting you or yelling at you than somebody offering calm advice. Comes with the territory. Well if that is the case then the majority just facilitates the small agressive minority, by basically consuming the drama that comes out of trolling. And any way back to my original quesiton - what's wrong with trying to improve the territory, seeing as all these insults and yelling are tangential to the actual game. Is yelling at people that essential to our gaming experience that we need to hold on to it at the expense of other people's enjoyment? And anyway if Idra is your exmaple, I think it's a rather poor one. The guy got removed from his team for generally being offensive, and EG would not have done that if they thought that everyone ejoyed trolling that much. And again, the popularity of something isn't indicative of its desirability as a practice. Yes, this is why combat sports is fun, and comedians are funny
|
On March 12 2015 01:46 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:35 Millitron wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy.If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. You're dead wrong with the bolded part. Every time there's been a major demographic addition, the original core audience suffers. Remember when CoD first hit it big? And then practically every shooter after it had to try to grab the CoD audience. Even totally unrelated games like Ace Combat did it. Remember when Starcraft Broodwar started to get a huge following? And then every RTS after that had to try to be BW. How many MMO's have been WoW clones? So basically most devs now try to grab the biggest demographic that might possibly be interested in their game. And that turns off the core audience, who were fans of it when it was an original idea, not a CoD-clone or whatever. I don't really get your point. So are you saying that the original core audience of FPS suffered when COD hit it big? Incidentally not all FPS had to try to grab the COD audience, that is plainly wrong. There are plenty of poular and thriving alternatives - Team Fortress, L4D, and of course Counter-strike which came before COD in the first place. There's HALO on the consoles as well. Or that RTS fans were hurt by... broodwar being popular (I can't believed I just typed that)? Or MMO fans suffered with WoW being released (WoW is pretty much a clone of stuff that came before it anyway, so WoW clones are just continuing the trend)? Since you brought up halo, look what they've done to it. They added sprint just like in CoD despite it detracting from the game. In earlier halo games, you could move at full speed and fire at the same time; now you have to choose, which makes each shootout a diceroll, just like CoD. Only the BR is any good, meaning every fight is basically the same just like in CoD. Average time to kill is pitifully low, another big feature of CoD. They added load-outs, which are practically the same things as CoD classes; spawning with special abilities and the weapon of your choice. This removes much of the tactical need to control the map, since you no longer need to control the weapon spawns to ensure you get what weapons you want. Halo 4 even had killstreak rewards that they called "ordnance drops".
How many RTS's after BW tried to copy it? Look at the differences between Red Alert 2 and Red Alert 3. RA2 has decentralized resource gathering. You didn't expand to the distant resources, your gatherers went and picked them up. RA3 switched to expansion-based economics, just like SC. RA2 had hardly any units with special abilities, and the ones that did have them were not incredibly powerful. This made RA2 more about commanding large groups than a few spellcasters. RA3 gave every unit a special ability, many of which were insanely powerful. This, combined with RA3 having a population cap (unlike RA2), made RA3 more about commanding a few spellcasters. The smaller numbers mean that matches are more often decided in the first fight, and that fight is generally lame.
|
Well it is a great time to make such a film. The money is flowing for this controversy so they might as well try to get some of it.
TL should try to get on that somehow, announce some female promotions or make a doc about women in the e-sports scene. Maybe the Koreans are sexist? I haven't seen any females in the GSL in a while.
|
On March 12 2015 02:02 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:37 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote: [quote] This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. [quote]
Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. b) Female developers will not magically make trolls better people, either. This has nothing to do with gaming. You should make a good parenting thread. c) Trolls are not communicating usefully in team games, so muting them makes no difference to your chances at winning. d) Many games implement a system whereby you can choose not to be matched with certain people. I'm sure more will do so in future. e) There is no shortage of games that appeal to women. We are talking about competitive gaming. You're making broad and inapplicable statements. A game like Call of Duty which features in this documentary is clearly aimed at males. Something like Dota is much more gender neutral. f) Nobody is purposefully excluding anybody. It may be an assumption, but it's hardly a massive or unreasonable one. I think you are making the unreasonable assumption that because trolls are loud they are overly common, but it just seems that way, and rightfully so. People are more likely to remember the guy who was a dick all game long rather than the other 3 people who were silent or communicated politely. I never said female developers would make trolls go away, I said it would help bring in a female audience. Aside from online harassment, poor representation of well-written female characters and female perspectives is a problem with a lot of games. There are still a lot of non-narrative games that don't allow you to play as a woman or don't contain any meaningful women characters. No one loses if that situation is improved. Again, you are making an assumption. Over my 2,000 hours I've run into a lot of good Dota players who in between making useful communications return to abuse. Yeah, the guys who just say "nigger" over and over into voice chat are no-brainer mute fodder, but muting the ultra-competitive players who are trying to win but can't do it without being an asshole hurts your chances of winning the game. It's great that games are starting to allow blacklists, but in the ones that do it isn't uncommon for people to run out of space on their blacklists or to have dozens and dozens of people on it. You have to hear the abuse before you're able to mute/report someone, and it doesn't keep a completely different person from trying to ruin your experience in the next game. The one thing I do agree with you on is that a lot of this comes to poor parenting in the internet age, but who would have thought you have to teach your children to be as polite on the internet as they would in any other public place? And yeah, some people are purposefully excluding women, that's the whole point of the discussion. It may be a minority or it may not, but just look at Twitch chat when a woman gets on-stage at an event. You may be able to have a discussion in between the "GRILL" and "8/10 would bang," but that right there is a culture that is exclusionary. I'm talking about Call of Duty a lot because it's the primary game I know will be mentioned in the documentary. But it is not purposeful exclusion to design a game with a target audience in mind and let that audience behave in a natural fashion. They should be under no obligation to cater for people who are not even part of their target demographic. If I wanted to play something that was clearly designed for women, I would accept the differences in the games community. Nobody is going to develop a competitive game especially for women because it is an insignificant market and the game would have little relevance in the eSports world (and if it did it would likely become dominated by males). It is also not purposeful exclusion when twitch chat says dumb stuff. That's just twitch chat saying dumb stuff (another demonstration btw, of how trolling is an integral part of eSports culture). It is not purposeful exclusion when people are rude in games, because they are rude to everybody. I get told to uninstall/quit on a fairly regular basis. Where there is a significant market, games are made. Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:50 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:41 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 01:27 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:17 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote: [quote]
Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy. If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. a) That is an absolutely massive assumption. The fact that trolling/lewd arguing is so common in gaming is an indication that it is popular/part of the culture. Go look at how popular trolling videos are and then tell me it's a minority. TL is the exception, not the rule. I have played games where nobody speaks without cursing every other word. So okay wait - some people are objecting to things like this documentary on the basis that it is actually only a small minority that actively trolls, and that they just happen to be the loudest. So it is unfair to paint all male gamers with the same brush. What you're now saying is that a good amount (if not most) people enjoy trolling So doesn't that mean that things like the documentary is partially justified? I would think so. Having an entire community cussing and spewing hate is pretty downright alarming (e.g. I don't have kids now but when I do I would like for them to share their father's love for games without being embarassed that their dad hangs out with trolls all the time - especially if I have a daughter who loves games). It's a small minority who are just outright aggressive to people without a reason, but it's probably a majority who enjoy controversy (Idra) and who communicate in an offensive manner. In Dota you're just as likely to get somebody insulting you or yelling at you than somebody offering calm advice. Comes with the territory. Well if that is the case then the majority just facilitates the small agressive minority, by basically consuming the drama that comes out of trolling. And any way back to my original quesiton - what's wrong with trying to improve the territory, seeing as all these insults and yelling are tangential to the actual game. Is yelling at people that essential to our gaming experience that we need to hold on to it at the expense of other people's enjoyment? And anyway if Idra is your exmaple, I think it's a rather poor one. The guy got removed from his team for generally being offensive, and EG would not have done that if they thought that everyone ejoyed trolling that much. And again, the popularity of something isn't indicative of its desirability as a practice. Do you really believe that Idra got kicked for that? I'm fairly confident he agreed to that 'kicking' beforehand on the basis that he was not really dedicated to the game and was not performing very well. He had been much more controversial beforehand and was kept on the team. The point is that Idra was hugely popular, regardless of results, because of the controversy surrounding him. Your idea of 'improving' the community is what exactly? Policing everything people say? Sounds pretty cancerous to me. Yes, I like the fact that we are less obligated to fit some standard of political correctness online than we are in 'real life'. I heard syndereN call sunsfan a jew on his stream earlier. A lifetime ban is in order for that antisemitic remark, don't you think? Fuck that. We know it's not antisemitic. It's a harmless sociolect. People are disgustingly prone to being offended by nothing these days.
Uh yes? That's the reasons EG gave. Idra hadn't been performing well for a while before that kick so if bad performance was the reason then it would have happened earlier. If you want to say that EG is actually lying about the real reason for kicking Idra, okay, but you have to give a little more evidence than "I'm fairly confident". Also I realise that you are saying that he is popular for being a controversial figure - well that's actually a lot different from people enjoying trolling. It's just people's attention being drawn to controversy - lots of people also thought that he was immensely rude and improper too, and that's just them responding to the controversy of it all. They definately do not sound like people that enjoy trolling themselves.
Improving does not mean thought police btw, I don't understand why you leap to extremes immediately (like how you think a non-toxic enviroment is a sterile one). Education - just getting people aware of what they are saying is already improving things (i.e. that saying "you got raped" is unecessary, and insensitive), and people get more discerning about what they say. Making people realise that you don't need to troll to enjoy a game. And better systems to disincentivise trolling or incentivise good behvaior - better verisons of low priority quing and commending people.
And lemme put it this way. You might think that all this is an exercise in political correctness. Okay. But is saying "jew" "nigger" "rape" "fag" and so on SO IMPROTANT TO YOU that you must keep saying it even though people might be oversensitive to them?
|
On March 12 2015 02:04 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2015 01:46 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 01:35 Millitron wrote:On March 12 2015 00:58 ZasZ. wrote:On March 12 2015 00:50 bardtown wrote:On March 12 2015 00:15 levelping wrote:On March 12 2015 00:07 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 23:41 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote: [quote] This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. [quote]
Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Those are broad and really quite tangential statements. But let's say you're totally right, could you tell us why is it practically a bad idea to try and clean up online behaviour towards women? This behaviour is directed not just at women, but at everybody. In this case the point is that it is not a gendered issue in any way. Over time developers have added ways to mute/avoid/report people, and these are available to everybody. There is no reason for women to get special treatment. Okay so if the behaviour is directed at everyone and not just women, why is it a bad thing that women are trying to get people to be polite to them? Why is this special treatment really? Let's say we replace the terms with other things. Suppose everyone gets bullied in a school. Student group A says, we're tired of getting bullied, and this has to stop. They might be acting on the mistake that they get bullied more, but at the end of the day if they are successfully, that's less bullying in school. Added bonus is that there's probably going to be a roll over effect since people realise that bullying is wrong and bullying less people generally and not just student group A. As mentioned, there are foolproof methods of stopping bullying in online games already. This documentary does not seem to be a candid/balanced look at abusive behaviour in gaming, rather it looks like an exercise in entitlement; a demonstration of how cruel the world is to women which ignores how cruel those kids are to everybody they think they can offend. One of their 'solutions' is more female developers... in a genre that is clearly targeted primarily at teenage-young adult males (think about what Call of Duty actually is)... What does that say to you? To me that's disingenuous. Also, lots of people enjoy the toxicity. I would rather have a toxic community than a sterilised one. At some point you have to accept that not everybody is nice, not everybody shares your world view and not everybody wants to make you happy. If you don't like it, you have the option of muting them or trolling them back. It's part of the dynamic of online games. I'd miss it. Again, that puts you in a minority. Feel free to enjoy being an asshole to other people, but understand that is not a common view. Muting and reporting systems are not foolproof and do not stop bullying. For one, most of the games where mute functions are necessary rely heavily on team communication, so having to mute your teammate because he is being a dick is counterproductive. I don't consider that a perfect solution. And when trolls get muted and/or banned that just makes them quiet trolls, they don't magically become better people. And your point about developers gets down to the crux of the argument, if more women were interested in gaming this would no longer be a genre clearly targeted at teenage and young-adult males. More female developers would likely mean more games that are interesting to women, there is no downside to that. It doesn't mean the next Call of Duty won't get made or that there will somehow be less games for gaming's current core demographic to enjoy.If anything, having more female developers would mean better written female characters, even in our dude games, and that can never be a bad thing. It requires more women being interested in the games industry, which is mostly on them, but we need to not be purposefully excluding them every chance we get either. You're dead wrong with the bolded part. Every time there's been a major demographic addition, the original core audience suffers. Remember when CoD first hit it big? And then practically every shooter after it had to try to grab the CoD audience. Even totally unrelated games like Ace Combat did it. Remember when Starcraft Broodwar started to get a huge following? And then every RTS after that had to try to be BW. How many MMO's have been WoW clones? So basically most devs now try to grab the biggest demographic that might possibly be interested in their game. And that turns off the core audience, who were fans of it when it was an original idea, not a CoD-clone or whatever. I don't really get your point. So are you saying that the original core audience of FPS suffered when COD hit it big? Incidentally not all FPS had to try to grab the COD audience, that is plainly wrong. There are plenty of poular and thriving alternatives - Team Fortress, L4D, and of course Counter-strike which came before COD in the first place. There's HALO on the consoles as well. Or that RTS fans were hurt by... broodwar being popular (I can't believed I just typed that)? Or MMO fans suffered with WoW being released (WoW is pretty much a clone of stuff that came before it anyway, so WoW clones are just continuing the trend)? Since you brought up halo, look what they've done to it. They added sprint just like in CoD despite it detracting from the game. In earlier halo games, you could move at full speed and fire at the same time; now you have to choose, which makes each shootout a diceroll, just like CoD. Only the BR is any good, meaning every fight is basically the same just like in CoD. Average time to kill is pitifully low, another big feature of CoD. They added load-outs, which are practically the same things as CoD classes; spawning with special abilities and the weapon of your choice. This removes much of the tactical need to control the map, since you no longer need to control the weapon spawns to ensure you get what weapons you want. Halo 4 even had killstreak rewards that they called "ordnance drops". How many RTS's after BW tried to copy it? Look at the differences between Red Alert 2 and Red Alert 3. RA2 has decentralized resource gathering. You didn't expand to the distant resources, your gatherers went and picked them up. RA3 switched to expansion-based economics, just like SC. RA2 had hardly any units with special abilities, and the ones that did have them were not incredibly powerful. This made RA2 more about commanding large groups than a few spellcasters. RA3 gave every unit a special ability, many of which were insanely powerful. This, combined with RA3 having a population cap (unlike RA2), made RA3 more about commanding a few spellcasters. The smaller numbers mean that matches are more often decided in the first fight, and that fight is generally lame.
Um, but how did any of the original "core audience" suffer? Like if you don't like COD, or the changes to Halo, play Counter-strike for a less arcadey FPS. The option is still there!
And are you really, seriously, suggesting that with the core audience of RTS gaming suffered as a result of Broodwar coming out? Like, the best RTS of all time, and also the reason for the existence of this site?
Maybe the CnC franchise changed a bit (though not really - Generals, which came before RA 3, stuck quite closely to the RA model right? As did tiberium sun/dawn). Though if you wanted big armies versus big armies, supreme commander came along for that (in fact I think total annialation came out after BW), for more squad based RTS there's the dawn of war series.
|
On March 11 2015 23:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2015 23:06 Ghostcom wrote:On March 11 2015 22:55 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 22:04 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 21:29 Ghostcom wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. By now you must have an entire field by straw-manning every single post in this thread. My post had nothing to do with whether or not a society as described in either of the two options currently existed, but which of the two we should strive for. Depending on which you chose you are working with entirely different assumptions - and it is clear that maartendq and piegasm work with different assumptions. ZenithM was by the way completely correct. It is hardly a controversial statement - it was an attempt to facilitate a better discussion as the base assumptions held are extremely important for such a discussion to be fruitful. Perhaps you could for once refrain from trying to straw-man and instead have a civil discussion? EDIT: I'm guessing you consider option 1 to be the one and true way for a society to be equal? Maybe you can elaborate how this ties in with harassment of women who play games, because I don't see how either definition makes the problem any less of an issue. It always amazes me how any time a discussion about women's issues happens on this site its is co-opted by the same group of posters and moves to the most passive aggressive critique of feminism. And then when you try to get back on topic, the claims of straw-manning, fallacies and "not wanting civil discussion" rain down. Do you seriously believe you have left a lot of room for civil discussion? My post was relevant, non-controversial, not passive aggressive, not a critique of feminism as a whole, and fairly simple to answer. You refused to do so, instead purposefully misinterpreted it and now complain that we are off-topic when both of you have played a much bigger part in driving the discussion in this thread to where it is then I have with my 1 post in the past 20 pages. How about we move on? What would it take for you to consider a society truly equal? I don't deal in overly broad, sweeping discussions about society, because I consider them to be very fruitless exercises that lead to watered down insights that mean little.
On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Why bring this up then? You can either talk about it or not. But if you bring up a point and someone disagrees with you, shutting down the line of discussion doesn't make you right, and it's not very convincing either if you're trying to change someone's mind.
On March 11 2015 23:10 Plansix wrote: I deal in specifics, like women being harassed in the game industry and hobby. That is a discussion I think some useful insight would come from. Okay, what's holding up that discussion? I could hazard a guess - the "anti-feminist circle jerk" as you put it earlier?
On March 11 2015 22:55 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2015 22:04 levelping wrote:On March 11 2015 21:29 Ghostcom wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. By now you must have an entire field by straw-manning every single post in this thread. My post had nothing to do with whether or not a society as described in either of the two options currently existed, but which of the two we should strive for. Depending on which you chose you are working with entirely different assumptions - and it is clear that maartendq and piegasm work with different assumptions. ZenithM was by the way completely correct. It is hardly a controversial statement - it was an attempt to facilitate a better discussion as the base assumptions held are extremely important for such a discussion to be fruitful. Perhaps you could for once refrain from trying to straw-man and instead have a civil discussion? EDIT: I'm guessing you consider option 1 to be the one and true way for a society to be equal? Maybe you can elaborate how this ties in with harassment of women who play games, because I don't see how either definition makes the problem any less of an issue. It always amazes me how any time a discussion about women's issues happens on this site its is co-opted by the same group of posters and moves to the most passive aggressive critique of feminism. And then when you try to get back on topic, the claims of straw-manning, fallacies and "not wanting civil discussion" rain down. Or have you considered that you actually just do this a lot, and people aren't just using it as a rhetorical tactic to discredit you?
On March 11 2015 23:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2015 23:44 wei2coolman wrote:On March 11 2015 23:37 OtherWorld wrote:On March 11 2015 23:32 bardtown wrote:On March 11 2015 21:09 Plansix wrote:On March 11 2015 20:00 nasze_zrodlo wrote: "hardcore online games (call of duty)" LMAO. call of duty is the most casual game possible This man is arguing the real argument that should be had. Which game is the most HARD CORE. On March 11 2015 20:24 Ghostcom wrote: You guys need to agree on what defines an equal society: 1) a 50:50 representation of genders throughout all society or 2) equal opportunities regardless of gender. Exactly and since one gender is currently repressed and has fewer opportunities, there need to be laws, systems and awareness raised to fix that. Glad we finally got there. Which gender is that? The one underrepresented in government or the one massively overrepresented at the bottom rung of society, on the streets, committing suicide and discriminated against by both the law and the education system? It takes an imbecile to swallow the feminist narrative. There are benefits and negatives to being of either gender, both biological and societal, and it is a nonsense to say that women are objectively worse off than men or that this comparison even has any value/meaning. You've been writing nonsense from the beginning of this thread. Most people feel an obligation to protect women, and there's nothing wrong with this - it's a natural instinct - but mollycoddling is repulsive. People who have a problem with the way other people behave in online games have the option of muting/reporting those people. Sorry bud, saying that women are worse off than men when talking biologically is indeed a nonsense, but when talking about men and women as societal groups it makes a lot of sense and has a very legit value. Just like a comparison between two societal groups almost always make sense. Yeah, because women on average can lift as much as men? That's it folks, he did it. Feminism is over because they can't lift as much as men. Pack up your stuff and lets all go home.
On March 12 2015 01:50 levelping wrote: And any way back to my original quesiton - what's wrong with trying to improve the territory, seeing as all these insults and yelling are tangential to the actual game. Is yelling at people that essential to our gaming experience that we need to hold on to it at the expense of other people's enjoyment? This is a common question, but games are a social experience for most people playing them. It's not just someone playing chess against their computer. It is about being with other people. Insults may be tangential to the game, but so would any social interaction? Talking about your favorite movie would be just as irrelevant.
On March 12 2015 02:19 levelping wrote: And lemme put it this way. You might think that all this is an exercise in political correctness. Okay. But is saying "jew" "nigger" "rape" "fag" and so on SO IMPROTANT TO YOU that you must keep saying it even though people might be oversensitive to them? Well, is Jew even a slur? It's just the demonym for a Jewish person, right? And I want to ask you, where does someone else's sensitivity lose its influence? What if someone was offended by the word "bossy," for example?
|
^ at the last two points
Well first you are disregarding the difference between insults and talking about movies. Both are obviously tangential, but one is offensive (and by definition of an insult, intentionally so).
I only raised Jew since the other guy raised it - I do not really know since I have never interacted with a large jewish community before. Like conceptually I can vaguely understand that it might connote selfishness or being money minded, but there's also the countervailing issue that Jews are generally in a position of social power so it is different from "nigger" I suppose. Anyway if you want to, just drop jew from that sentence, it is an example non essential to the point.
As to your second question I actually think it is (presently, in the context of the discussion with bardtown) slightly irrelevant. He was basically saying that trolling in general is great, and so I am pointing out what I think are fairly obvious examples of stuff that would would be clearly offensive stuff like rape, racist comments, and homophobia. And really that's where the comminuty is at now, given how toxic it apparently is (according to bardtown).
Since you asked though, I think that if everyone is made to be more polite and concious about what they say online, then there wouldn't be a need to mark out precise lines on sensitivity. Say you're playing a game and you say something. In a more polite enviroment, any person offended might just say "hey stop saying that please I am uncomfortable with it" and then the game goes on without that particular word. And to pre-empt the "what if it is an unreasonable discomfort", well politeness would go both ways too, and in a more polite enviroment people would actually be more mindful about what they do call out as being offended by (to accomodate what the other person wants to be able to say).
|
I feel like levelping's ideal world is everyone only speaks in niceties and useless platitudes, in which no one is reasonably allowed to say what they feel. Which is even more ridiculous than telling people to have thicker skin.
|
On March 12 2015 02:49 wei2coolman wrote: I feel like levelping's ideal world is everyone only speaks in niceties and useless platitudes, in which no one is reasonably allowed to say what they feel. Which is even more ridiculous than telling people to have thicker skin. I don't know, everyone who says "get a thicker skin" just sounds like a teenage trying to be edgy and hardcore. All the adult professionals I know and follow have said "it doesn't matter how used to it you get, it only takes one shitty getting under your skin comment to ruin your day. And you don't control when that happens." There is nothing brave or amazing about being a cynic and not trying to improve things. If anything, being a cynic is the least brave and "tough" way to be.
|
|
|
|