Veganism in gamedesign

Nope. The actors are consenting, for sure. But Game of Thrones doesn't even take consent into consideration. Rape and other coercion is just as common as consent. The books/show is popular precisely because it doesn't pull any punches for modern sensibilities or morality. About the only morality that exists in Game of Thrones is 'might makes right'.

I'm not quite sure society is ready to condone pushing those same boundaries in interactive entertainment yet. Its one thing to say 'this guy is bad, he rapes people' and entirely another to say 'you as the player must rape people'. Its currently barely possible to get games about consensual sex past societies taboos. I can't see exploring non consensual sex going over any time soon.

 

I've only seen the first episode and read the first book, and both quite a while ago. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that one scene is of the aftermath of a young teenage girl's arranged marriage to a barbarian warlord, and another one involves a brother and sister (and a murder, to boot).

 

I'm much more familiar with the violent side of games, so I don't know what you mean with "more realistic" regarding sexual content in games. Do you mean visually or narratively?

That sounds a bit like the dating sim where all the girls are world war 2 tanks and their characteristics are based on the characteristics of the real tanks:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/379980/Panzermadels_Tank_Dating_Simulator/
Meaning, I'm not so sure how serious they really are about that game. But I don't know, I really have no in-depth knowledge of that genre. I think I've listened to (at least parts of) an "ironic" lets play of the sfw version of the game you mentioned on youtube, because your description sounds familiar. With "ironic" I mean the guy wasn't into dating sims and was using them as source for comedy on his twitch stream, and the stream was uploaded to youtube later.

Glad you could join us!

Made me laugh, thanks .

Anecdotal, but to me personally that never has happened. Not even once, and both my girlfriend and my previous girlfriend are/were vegetarians. Maybe there are strong regional and cultural differences here for different people? I wouldn't be surprised if experiences vary broadly along the whole spectrum.

You're not misremembering anything:

Spoiler

but he gets his comeuppance later:

Spoiler

 

That sounds like you're perhaps willfully divorcing yourself from the things happening in the game?

That's like saying that you're not watching a story when you see a movie, you're seeing some actors waffle about on the stage. It's partly a matter of your willingness and ability to suspend disbelief, and partly the content's ability to convince you to do so.

The cutscenes are part of it, sure, but so is the fact that in one case you're (virtually) helping people to set up a drug trade, and in the other you're (virtually) sending a message that you can't become like the people before you. To me that's a choice about how I want to represent myself, even if it's only to me.

 

I think so, here, "everyone" has opinion about almost everything and they're telling you whether you want to hear it or not. Sometimes this leads to situations like this. It's probably connected to the activism as well, which is also very strong here. (BTW, I don't mind activism, I mind when they concentrate on each other's life or mine instead of the public debate about things. For example I love to be involved in public debates, as you probably can see here on the forums as well, but I love to debate about veganism/meat-eating as well. I have no problem discussing whether or not veganism can save drinking water or lowering the methane in the air. I don't like when they are just telling me what should I do. But I have the same problem with religious people as well, a lot of them try to force their own personal view to us non-religious people and they use a lot of non-polite expressions along the way.)

BTW I had vegan girlfriend as well, it wasn't a problem. Everyone can decide what they want to eat and what they don't want. I don't eat any seafood. The problem starts when someone start to poke other people about things.

 

I agree, and I would say that as an artist there's nothing wrong with inflicting your morals on other people. Nobody is forcing anybody to play your game. What I would object to though is the idea that everybody must include or exclude something in their games for the sake of political correctness, or to cater to someone's preferences in order to avoid backlash and not just because it's a perspective they want to include.

There are perspectives and values that I really enjoy seeing in games and movies that are not really my own, but I would prefer that a game was built around these things in an organic way rather than their being jammed in there awkwardly to prevent someone getting fired up on twitter. And no game has to include all of them (or even more than one) at the same time, because the more you have in there the more each of them becomes diluted and confused.

 

Okay, thanks. I wasn't aware of those details. I knew there was one rape scene, and I've heard of one incestuous couple, but I didn't know they were a common occurrence.

In that case I point to my next (edited in) paragraph, where I point out that we portray characters who do these illegal, "immoral" violent acts as justified or sympathetic in many cases, but that doesn't happen at all for illegal, "immoral" sexual content.

Again, I'm not trying to say we should. I'm saying there's a disconnect there, one many people seem content with ignoring.

Hmm, I guess narratively. I was kind of echoing your statement about violence in games. Violence in games is very sterilized compared to reality. The effect of a gunshot will be far more gruesome in real life that it's portrayed in the majority of games. What actually happens in such a violent situation doesn't really line up with what happens in the game--in terms of the actual action and effect. But for sexual content it's a whole lot closer to reality. Though frequently the "gory" or intimate details are glossed over, how the event is described or portrayed in terms of an action and its effect is closer to reality.

You don't wind up with "shoot a gun at someone, they fall down dead with no bullet wound or blood/urine/defecate spilling out of the body" levels of dissonance.

I've heard of that one but never played it. I imagine that's "played for laughs," or designed for comedy. This definitely isn't. It's actually a fairly serious VN.

Just as an aside, a dating sim is a game where you're manipulating mechanics like going on dates or giving gifts to get a girl to like you (increasing "affinity points" or something through your actions). A visual novel is basically a choose-your-own-adventure book, heavy on art and voice overs. They frequently involve a romance but it's almost never a "game" system, just a set of choices you pick. And they can involve no romance at all.

Some of the most lauded ones do involve a romance, but it's almost always a background element to more high-level themes like time travel and the impact of choices (Steins;Gate, Ever17, Root Double), intrigue/thriller elements (G-Senjou no Maou, Muv-Luv, Grisaia), redemption (The House in Fata Morgana), sadness that makes you cry (CLANNAD, Little Busters, anything else by Key), freaking finance (World End Economica).

If you ever decide to enter the genre at all, you should start with either Steins;Gate or The House in Fata Morgana, both available on Steam and neither having really any erotica, and both focusing heavily on meaningful themes you don't see frequently explored to such depth in games. Sorry, I got off track didn't I?

 

I know what you mean, but I don't think it's willful because I always try to get immersed, from the dumbest action film to the best immersive sim. I really try because if that suspension of disbelief / immersion does not happen for me, it usually means I'm not enjoying it. It just seems to get harder and harder the older I get and some aspects in games like "voiced protagonist" or "many cutscenes" seem to make it harder for me.

Spoiler

It might also have something to do with whether or not I find characters relatable. In FC4 neither Anita nor Sabal completely convince me and I find it hard to relate to either of them. I think the fact that neither of their visions for the future of Kyrat convinces might have lead to that immersion breaking thought of "I'll just continue doing Sabals missions till the end and stop worrying about these dumb 'pick your poison' kind of scenarios."
I started with following Sabal because he's prioritising protecting people over possible offensive advantages in the war through intel etc.. I know it's not a purely systemic game, so I know that no intel in the game can have any real battle-deciding value. I'm basically the god of death in Kyrat, I can kill the whole royal army alone if they'd let me. Is that what they call ludonarrative dissonance?
Anita's plan to turn Kyrat into a drug state didn't convice me because as far as I know that never has worked out well for a country in the long term and I don't think selling more heroin makes the world a better place. She does have some compelling arguments, no doubt, and Sabal might very well turn out to be a real prick that I'll regret supporting, but I'm fairly certain if I played all her missions I won't get a happy end either. That's what bothered me about FC3, the game left me no option to resolve the story in an ending that I find acceptable.

The story arc about Noore I found more convincing because I found it easier to both relate to her predicament, and also to loathe her for what active role she seems to play in the suffering that Pagan Min's regime creates. I was very tempted to just shoot her in the back of the head in that scene (partly to find out if it's even possible, because I think more games should have options for anti-climatic but realistic "boss fights" - like Gunpoint has), but I waited too long and then the cutscene switched over to the one where she just kills herself in the end. And after the whole thing Pagan gives you some more background info on how hard it all really must have been for her, given her original intentions for Kyrat. I would have preferred to have the choice implemented so that right before you enter the cutscene you can just shoot her in the normal way you shoot things in the game, or you step out and confront her to start the cutscene where she kills herself. That would have felt better to me and given me the few more seconds that I needed to make up my mind, and then I would have probably shot her.

And I thought it was a copout that they don't let you shoot De Pleur. Or rather they let you, but magically his body turns invincible when he's unconscious. And then Sabal even says he would have understood if I had killed him. Did I miss a choice there that wasn't telegraphed? Was I supposed to sink the car with him in the trunk in a river, or set it on fire or something like that if I want to kill him? I thought "if an arrow to the face doesn't do the trick, then I guess he has plot-armor that I can't pierce."
I did appreciate his game-selfaware dialog during the car ride though, about how AJ is this amazing killing machine and must be bored already and itching to get back to the killing.

Ah, I didn't even know there were such mechanical destinctions. Thanks for pointing it out.

Too late, I already picked Doki Doki Literature Club as my entry because it got reviewed on Zero Punctuation and I wanted to play it before I watch the review. Haven't finished it yet though.

 

How does this ruin it for everyone? Seems to me there are enough games out there that everyone can find one they like. If one does not like a game that makes a social statement, then they will not have to play those games as there are others that will fit the bill.

The real thing that could ruin the game industry is if game companies start catering only to the largest category of game players, and exclude everyone else. If you look at steam, filter for most popular games, you will see a lot of FPS, Survival and rpg games, but you will also find some gems that are hard to categorize, with great reviews and a loyal following.

Like art, person preference and yes, our own political/ethical/moral views will determine whether we like something or not. We are all different so the more variety of games out there, the better it will be for the industry. It is our games that create gamers. If society moves in one direction, it is not bad to move with them.

At a time in our world with so much uncertainty, it can be good to play a game where you are saving the animals rather than killing them.

 

In MGS V you can put animals to sleep with tranquilizer darts, tie a balloon to them, and your recovery crew will pick them from the sky and bring them to the zoo section of your repurposed oilrig base. In the narrative you're being paid by an NGO that wants to save the animals from warzones and pays you for it. They're just kept on the oilrig till further transport can be arranged. I think there's even some npc dialog from your guards, talking about it being nice to have some animals around the base.

 

Missed this thread but World of Warcraft offers optional hunting, optional animal killing, and optional consumption of meat. There is always an equivalent vegan dish for buff food. They didn't need menu options, they just allowed gameplay choice.

I eat meat but infrequently and stick to chicken or fish. I would prefer to eat lab meat if it was a possibility. Your game can't possibly encounter everyone's tastes but you can let them choose.

 

its not about anyone implementing these things. If you like to, go for it.

by ruin it for everyone i mean all the social justice warriors with their autistic screeching and public shaming for not having the same opinion. and i know, this sounds far fetched, but it's really not.
so, no, i don't want any developer to cater to the political agenda of any player. make the games you want to make. if you want to give players a choice, fine, if not, its also fine.
i hope we never get to the point where people get offended over anything in a videogame

I'am not really a fan of this either, but as big coorporations mostly produce AAA titles, and they are rather expensive to make, it would be hard to make some niche games profitable. so obviously many of them develop something that has a big playerbase, where the risk of a financial desaster is smaller


edit:
i also wanted to comment on this
"The real thing that could ruin the game industry is if game companies start catering only to the largest category of game players, and exclude everyone else."

now, i don't know how you meant this exactly,
but game companies don't have any obligation to cater to anyones needs & wishes.
this is a free market, they do either what makes them money or what they want to do.
so if they decide to only produce fps & rpgs, its their right to do so.
if anyone feels excluded, they can take it into their own hands and create a game they would like to play.

 

Doki Doki certainly isn't bad, though perversely that's a title that works better in some ways if you're familiar with genre. Hope you enjoy it. It's very, very different from anything I mentioned (and from most games in general) for reasons you'll understand when you complete it. Just be aware that it's not at all the typical "VN" experience.

 

I like that.

 

I think that what is very important to some people is totally indifferent to others and it is ok.
Problems arise from intolerance, Charlie Hebdo shooting incident is a recent example of this.
The fear of Violence (verbal, physical, from individuals, from organizations, religions, teams, goverment e.t.c.) is an important factor that drives people's actions. In Greek mythology, Violence (Βια) and Power (or Authority-Dominion-Κρατος) were brothers.

If you feel that some things must be said, you just do it and face the consequences, it is the society that dictates the consequences and individuals who take the risks. Blacks and White are equal, women do vote, LGBT do have equal rights like "normal couples" because some people spoke - acted and faced the consequences.

It is important to help people express their POV without fear.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - it's a little dramatic but holds some truth. What is problematic is when parents enforce all sort of potentially life threatening choices to their children - strict diets that lead to malnutrition, non participation to vaccinations e.t.c. This and hate speech - fake news - they are dangerous and should be limited.

Games tell a story - every story has political - lifestyle messages and without candies, sex and violence the game may not sell but this is a choice.

Sometimes a story must be said.

 

this stupid thinking is like not playing pokemon because is against animals rights

 

I wouldn't go that far. If someone does not want to play something because whatever reason, that's her/his own private business.
The stupid starts when they start to poison the public with this and/or try to ban the game on this basis.

It's like the SWSJ warriors and especially the notorious Anita S. and her mob-like fans. It is their right to think that games enforce and strengthen patriarchism or whatever, even if they're factually wrong. But unfortunately with their torches an forks they can alter the market. Companies are fear the mob. No matter if the mob is right or not.

This is the bless and the curse of the information era. Information travels fast and strong. It can reach a whole lot of people. The catch is, both the useful information and the useless equally.

 

Don't know..the only screeching and shaming I see is the guy saying that he does not want ANY developer to make social or political comments in his games. lol I get offended by things I see in games all the time! I talk about them...and then I do not buy the game.

Oh the irony.....

 

Absolutely, wish I could have you 100 likes!

Games are an art form, even those FPS games everyone loves. They do make a statement even if the statement is shallow.

Throughout history, messages have been told through oral stories, books, newspaper comic strips, and then on to comic books, TV shows and movies, and now in games.

Throughout history it has usually been those that fear change that carry the torches, not the people who present the art. Books are still burned in some places. Harry Potter is banned by some religious groups. A recent sculpture of David Bowie was defaced by those who...I do not know, hate rock and roll?

Games that send messages about social change, religious wars, gender issues, are just the natural progression of things. Video games are growing up. I think it is a good thing.

It will only expand the people who see games as healthy rather than unhealthy. It will only help the market and games status as expressions of art and entertainment.

 

Well, then we disagree on it. I like my strong hero stories. And don't want to see them gone. And I wouldn't have any problems with the SJWs if they were fighting for an expand. For something more. Not replacement. You know, I won't take away your game, you shouldn't take away mine.

But according to the current events, it seems the strong hero is bad. No one should develop such a game, because damsels in distress, blah, blah, blah...
And the torches and the forks are just flying into hands and the mob start to pick on companies.

I would even fight for the additional games, because I can enjoy the strong female characters, sometimes I'm in the mood to play games with more depth, and even stories with serious social critic and cultural mirrors. Too bad they don't fight for the expansion.

Oh, and right now, the SJWs are "burning the books" (try to eliminate certain genres and certain stories). Sadly.

 

first, i never screamed or shamed anyone here
and second if you had read my post, you would have seen that i don't really care what devs implement into their game, and what they do not
what i don't want to see is the mob pressuring devs into implementing things because its political correct, or for the diversity, to a point where devs give in so the mob is pleased

and we have seen this
-overwatch tracer pose too sexy
-people beeing offended because kingdom come: deliverance only had white people
-peta wants to ban fur in warhammer

 

Deploying de-escalative chinchilla video in 3, 2, 1, go!

 

But putting a chinchilla in a cage isn't vegan! I DEMAND SOCIAL JUSTICE OR I WILL DECLARE WAR ON ALL! No, just kidding.

 

Whatever you say!

 

Well, do you have method to detect games which hasn't been developed? Because I don't.

This is a misinterpretation of my view. I have no problem with opinion. If you read what I've written above, I even defended such thing. My problem is the affecting part, it is applied on the wrong place.
I'm pretty much the live and let live-type of guy. I hate when someone try to tell someone else how to live, what to eat, what to wear, where to go or not to go. Also I hate when someone try to preach about B.S. Like Anita S. And they have effect. That's the problem. If they were fight for the inclusiveness (let's have both worlds) I would fight side by side. But they are fighting for elimination and replacement. Just watch her BS videos. Let's put aside the fact that she has never played almost any of the games she was talking about and she was wrong almost every occasions.

 

Why do your hero stories have to go away? Who wants them to go away?

There is so much more room for different kinds of games. Did I ever say I wanted to take your games away?

This is what I mean by those who fear change. There is no way the hero games will go away. They are based on centuries of hero stories and myths. They are the basis for so much literature.

Do not panic. New and different games are not going to take away from your favorite games. Again, they will simply bring new gamers, gamers who can buy your games. And they will appeal to those who so far, have not become gamers.

It is a good thing! Change brings new markets, new innovations, fancy stuff like AI that allows for more realistic interactions, games that teach, that amaze, and all that other jazz.

 

I deleted my posts because like I was getting at, no matter what I say, you all are gonna think I'm just trying to trick you because I'm a demonic feminist being paid by Anita Sarkeesian to ruin games forever or something, so what is the point? I mean, apparently the fact that 95% of games are still about buff dudes killing S*** won't stop you from believing that feminists somehow made everyone afraid of making those games, and the fact that people like Anita never remotely said anything about wanting to eliminate and replace anyone's existing games isn't going to stop you from thinking that she will. Just back up your hard drive to DVD-R's before you let Anita into your house, then she won't be able to replace your games with the evil feminist ones that are allegedly taking over the market that no one seems to be able to name.

 

Fear is so overwhelming it can sometimes block out reason. One of the most amazing things about the indie game developer scene is that we can all make the game we want to make and if we find an audience, we can be successful. The big game companies will be careful enough, and they certainly will not do anything to lose their mass audience.

When my mom was young, Elvis was the bad guy. My mom had to go to her cousins house to watch him on TV. Rock and role was going to destroy a generation. When I was young, it was TV..it will rot your brain. Now with my kids, I worry about overuse of the cell phones.

But..I am not going to take away the phones, just encourage my kids to have many interests so that they can be well rounded individuals. One of my daughters is actually making a game that has a somewhat social commentary feel to it. Some folks will get it, some won't. It will be beautiful, so that may be enough for many. But no way am I going to say to her that there are those who will be afraid of her game.

We live in a big world. And we can certainly have different opinions on this. I feel sad that some of you are afraid. The mom in me just wants to assure you that you will not lose your beloved game genres.

 

you can try to make fun of people here or have a civil discussion
both at the same time isn't going to work out

no one here said anything about feminists taking over, no one ever talked about feminists to begin with
i voiced some concerns about gamedevs beeing pressured into building their games around different interestgroups because they have different opinions

its not about any devs building games with vegan food choices, trans people, different religion choices or any potentially difficult topic
its about beeing pressured into having to offer these choices

 

Well, let's see:
- attacking the Witcher games because there were no people of color in medieval Poland (yepp, I asked the WTF here)
- attacking the _Hitman_ series, because it is allowed to kill women, also attacking it because you can save them from the human traffickers... well...
- attacking the super mario series, because there is this princess in it and the objective is to reach her
- attacking the XBOX event, because there were hostesses...

Instead of taking care of the new games and help small/medium developers to develop new stories, more stories, colorful stories.

Actually, that's the point, she wants, because she actually said, that the only way if there are no such things in games. "Because games form people's view of women..." - among other things (LOL, she couldn't be more wrong of anything)

And no, I don't think that she actually will eliminate any games. But if she get traction and she can get on board enough idiots from her herd, they can do that. And that is scary a little bit.

And on the top of this, I haven't said that she can't have her opinion. I said, I will fight against it, and as you can see, I'm doing it.

 

You're seriously misunderstanding something. No one fears your daughter's game. And everyone (at least here) want her to finish it and show off. And probably be successful with it. I for one, for sure.

 

So what if they attack it?? My son filled me in on Anita. I asked him, well, did it change anything? And he said no.

There are so many real things right now in this world to make one afraid. Do not overthink this. Your games will be fine. People will always complain, like those that were afraid of rock and role and thought our brains would rot from watching TV.

But most of the times, those fears were just a waste of valuable time. Make your games instead, the kind you like. Do not try to tell others they cannot make theirs. Then the world will be a better place.

 

Actually, yes.

You may not see this for a while. Because game companies are paying Anita to hold "trainings" at game companies and also pay her to hold "seminars" at universities. For those who will be game developers. Why? Because otherwise torches and pitchforks and burn down the company. That's why.

And she does not say that it is a good thing to have different kind of games. She's washing the brains of the next generation of game developers with her stupid agenda.

So yes, maybe I'm overreacting and maybe I see the spooky ghost, but maybe I have the right to be concerned about the bloody mob who are just killing my favorite hobby.

WTF? When did I say such a thing? :O

 

That was in response to LurkingNinja, not you.

The entire point of a business is to sell things that people want to buy. A seller is not "pressured" into making something that someone wants to buy; they make the thing because they want to sell it and make money. And buyers do not "pressure" sellers into making things because they're evil conspirators, they do it because they want to buy that thing.

If you only like grape candy, but I like lemon candy, and I say "Hey I'd like lemon candy but all there is around here is grape candy", that's not "social justice war" or "political correctness" or any other evil-sounding conspiracy, that's just me saying I want something and I'm willing to pay money for it. And if someone then starts making lemon candy for me because they want to make money, and you don't like it, TOO BAD! You don't get to demand that everyone shut up about wanting anything except grape candy because you want all the candy to be grape. And you don't get to pretend that you're somehow being noble and protecting poor, poor candy salesmen who really only want to make grape candy and who must suffer terribly when they make all that cash from selling lemon candy. If you cut out all the meaningless buzzwords, it sure sounds like you just want to make sure that the only candy available is grape.

 

Until games naturally

Or, and this is maybe going to blow your mind, game developers recognise a changing landscape in terms of how we treat minorities and they want to do better.

 

Well, if you think Anita's way is better then we don't have anything in common. Because I call BS on that.

 

There is no one way or another way. Developers make games that fall somewhere in the venn diagram of games they want to make and games they think will sell. People being vocal about what they want, means more options for developers. That's a good thing.

 

[QUOTE="LurkingNinjaDev, post: 3443755, member: 754541"


WTF? When did I say such a thing? :O[/QUOTE]

Words do matter. You are afraid that people making games that are political or whatever will take something away from you, mainly the games you love.

So...how is this not saying...I do not want those games to be made?

If I misunderstood, I apologize. But when one is angry about something new, it usually means they do not want it to exist.

 

I mean, that's fine, but how do you not see that you too are "wielding pitchforks and torches" and "demanding" that the game developers who currently want to make games that the Dread Mistress Anita would like should instead ignore her and make games that you would like? It's all the same thing.

 

Anita rose up in anger because of something she saw that she did not feel was right.

You are rising up in anger (WTF) because you are seeing something you feel is not right.

It is the same...I see both sides. They are the same, just different sides of the same coin.

 

On the exact contrary. I'm angry at people, who want to publicly shaming game creators because of their creation. I'm angry at people who wants this market smaller and more uniform. Who are working on this public shaming and lies instead of stories.

Except she's deliberately lying and playing people against each other.

But, well, nuances...

Well, are you ignoring me? No. And I have much-much less influence in the game industry than she has.

 

[QUOTE="LurkingNinjaDev, post: 3443773, member: 754541"I'm angry at people who wants this market smaller and more uniform.
[/QUOTE]

Please send me links to substantiate this. And I do not mean links where a woman complains that sexy armor is sexist. I mean some place where someone says....we want to get rid of all these games and leave you with nothing.

Otherwise, it seems to me that both you and Anita are using emotion and exaggeration to the same ends.

And please, someone other than Anita. One person and her band of followers does not a mob make. lol

 

There are real problems with real people involved. Games are not reality, and their characters are not real people.

By going after fiction, people battle non-issues while real problems remain unsolved, and in essence they're battling rights previous generatiosn fought for. Like freedom of expression, etc.

 

Side note: it's cool that I got to paste that meme in a thread that contained veganism and for once it wasn't about veganism! Usually I have to post it when people say "vegans only care about animals while there are actual humans suffering in the world".

 

@LurkingNinjaDev

When I was having a very bad and stressful day, you posted something nice in one of my threads and made me feel better. I would rather be friends than enemies.

So, leaving the thread and getting back to my terrain making.

 

Did the games change because of her? I don't think so. Did the tone of the discussion of these issues change after her first appearance? To me it feels like it got a whole lot more emotional and unconstructive on both sides of the argument. I think that on the bottom line it might even have delayed advances for gender equality and diversity representation in games, because she helped turn feminism into a "toxic brand" that barely anyone wants to associated with now. And now even games like Call of Duty WW2 are described as "ruined by SJW cancer" (source: https://steamcommunity.com/app/10090/discussions/0/1290691308573266477/ ) by... I don't even know what that group of people is called.





Edit: adding a couply more blank lines here, to clarify the next part doesn't belong to my reply to Teila.

There's a good TED talk about people on both sides of the debate not properly listening:

Skimming over this thread (I can't keep up with this volume anymore to read it all properly) I was reminded of this talk at times.

 

I remember I've once seen a video about how many orders of magnitude more videos of people complaining about her are on youtube, than videos she ever made herself, but I can't find it anymore. What I did find was this brilliantly spot on analysis of what made her big, that Jim Sterling made in late 2012 (!):

 

5 years later and unless you are really into the gamer scene, few people have heard of her. There will always be extremists. I have met some here in the past, men who had not so nice things to say about women. I do not judge all men because of those and I am sure you do not judge all women because of one woman.

Point is...this one person got a lot of attention among the gamers, but otherwise, she was nothing. She had some good points, but like any cause, militancy does not help at all. It only turns people off.

Lots of militancy out there these days...anti-gay/anti-trans-gendered/racists/the list goes on.

Feminism is not a bad word, just as Christian is not a bad word. But a few militant folks who feel they need to push their agenda on others can give any of us a bad name.

And...a group of uncouth gamers who are anti-social and play 20 hours a day in their mom's basement gives gamers a bad name.

Extremism is rarely good.

But..this is so far off the topic of this thread. Social issues, such as cruelty to animals or lifestyles such as vegan are fair game here. Anyone who feels passionate about these causes is free to make their game and see if there is a market.

Somehow, all this turned around and back on some woman who caused trouble for whatever reason (do not know enough to have an opinion on her) and now it is so easy for guys to use that as an excuse to not have any politics or social commentary in a game. I do not mean you guys...but there are guys out there who use things like this. And yes, it did hurt the cause.

But most of us are not Anita. It does not mean we do not cringe at some of the sexism we see in games. But it does mean that we let you play with your dolls and we just go off and do our own thing.

So..I did come back..but I had my say. If you guys want to equate a Vegan game to Anita S., then go for it. But I find it a bit overly dramatic and will this time for sure bow out. I will uncheck the alerts and get back to work. That always helps.

Thanks though for an interesting break while assets import.