Last thread: >>187245
>Valve has revealed a new version of its Steam controller, now with added analogue stick.
What are you doing Valve. Why.
I finally got around to beating Transistor. It was too linear compared to Bastion, but I still think it's excellent. That ending is quite bittersweet, though... here's hoping it's less bitter upon Recursion.
Also, if Royce wins, do you get a different ending, or does it just Game Over? That's something I'll have to try...
Also also, did anyone think that Royce was too easy? Not a short battle, but the "run and hide" tactic seemed to work extremely well. I only took damage when I couldn't get enough distance (and obstacles) between us.
Aren't the touchpads supposed to simulate analog sticks? Why would they put one on? That's so pointless, and makes it so left-handed people can't use it.
Because as cool and functional as the touchpads are, they just don't simulate it well enough for action games for some people. This is ultimately an option for the people who just aren't comfortable with them.
Also, left handed people can't use them? It's the same basic location as the N64 and GC. What are you talking about?
A friend gifted me Jet Set Radio because I've never played it. Either the game has aged terribly or it was never that good to begin with, but... sheesh. The music's still fucking amazing, though.
The original Jet Set Radio didn't age well, no, but sequel Jet Set Radio Future did (or at least it aged better than JSR).
Say someone customized the controller setup to where movement was on the right touchpad, and the four buttons on the left as before. It would've been a better option for left-handers who want to use the buttons with their left hand. Now that's impossible and it looks like every other controller out there.
It's Valve so if you yell loud enough they might actually get rid of it.
My guess is that's why it's there in the first place.
>It would've been a better option for left-handers who want to use the buttons with their left hand.
Has this ever been an issue before with any other controller?
You know, the basic setup ever sense the NES.
Not one of my many left handed friends/co-workers have ever had this problem. Never mentioned it at least, and considering our hobbies/job are extremely game centric I would hope it would have come up at least once.
Nice to hear its got all the mechanics where they need them. Hope it does well and it does franchise out into a more complex title. I miss Jade Empire very much.
I would like a Jade Empire II, but not from modern Bioware.
Very True, maybe a spiritual successor from Platinum if this game hits the mark. Bring in Obsidian to do some added RPG bits.
The last thing this or any game needs is a comparison to Jade Empire.
I bought The Fall when it was on sale on Steam, because Vinny from Giant Bomb highly recommended it. And even though it's only 2.5 hours long and ends on a cliffhanger, I don't regret it one bit. What a ride. Holy shit.
Why is it that, whenever people talk about a new game in a series, when they compare it to a previous game on a different console, they always say it like this?
>"Mario Kart 8 was pretty good, but I prefer the Gamecube version"
Usually the people who do this are the industry professionals. Why not just say "Double Dash"? If you say "X version" then I'm assuming it's the same game but on a different console, when it's not.
>We already knew that things weren't so hot between Nintendo and its indie guy Dan Adelman, but now Adelman has confirmed that he has left the company after nine years.
>Adelman was banned from posting on Twitter by Nintendo last year, after he spoke ill of the company's region locking exploits. Now Adelman has told Kotaku that he left Nintendo last Friday.
Divinity: Original Sin is making me face the cold hard facts. I will never have as many friends as the man with many cheeses.
We've gone full circle now.
Uh...this is making me kind of unhype for Broforce. Still its just a free little downloadable sidegame made separate from the actual Broforce to promote the movie so its not a big deal.
Since its official I'm guessing they got paid for it? That would be good, more money for Broforce propers development.
The first Resident Evil – or rather, the Gamecube remake of that game – will receive a remastered release on the PS3, the PS4, the 360, the XBone, and PC. Capcom has it scheduled for late 2014 in Japan and early 2015 in the States.
Upgrades include HD-remastered graphics, 4:3 and widescreen options, and an option to switch control schemes from the original’s Tank Controls to a "move in the same direction as the joystick" scheme (likely inspired by the more recent Resident Evil games).
>Here at Capcom, we believe that the near future is simply the past of the far future, meaning we're already in the past, and so we will immediately drop any work on new games and instead continue to slightly revise prior games every 2-3 years and release them on new platforms, like we were making Microsoft fucking Office or something.
>New Franchises? That sounds like a horrible idea, why would you suggest that?
Normally I’d join you in the rightful ripping of Capcom, but the REmake hasn’t seen the light of day on any system past the Wii (as part of the 2009 Resident Evil Archives re-release that included Resident Evil 0). It hasn’t had a standalone release since 2002, and it never saw release on a non-Nintendo platform before now.
The graphical upgrades and the ‘modern’ control scheme alone make this worth a re-release. I’d love to see them do this for the other ‘numbered’ games in the series (as well as Code Veronica), but I’ll take this in the meantime.
Oh, and last I heard, Capcom will only release this as a digital product. The price might end up within budget release levels.
Remember Citizen Kabuto?
This twitch thing is utterly ridiculous.
This is what happens when Google buys you.
And when the major media conglomerates force an outdated, archaic, and harmful view of copyright on you.
(No RIAA every time a song plays in someone's livestream it is NOT "a lost sale" you fucking dingbat wangsultans.)
Huh. That's kind of creepy.
Is this entitlement?
I don't think he understands the difficulty of dealing with multiple American companies and this exclusive preorder thing.
Besides, this whole thing strikes me as mainly an attempt to get Japan more into the series. Just look at the OCs.
Looks like Valve is thinking about branching Steam into more media types. Whether this is to do with their music player or the intent of selling (if anything at all) remains to be seen.
Might be a long while after release until I actually play it, but... cool!
I'm trying really hard to give Hitman: Absolution a fair shake, but I just can't do it. The stealth/instinct systems are just hilariously broken. Disguises are all but useless because the enemies who have access to the areas you need to get into are the ones who will see right through it. Sometimes there's a janitor disguise that will help, but a lot of the time there isn't. I can see what they were going for with the enemies-you-are-diguised-as-will-spot-you-if-you-come-too-close thing, and it's not actually a bad idea, but they define 'too close' way too fucking broadly. You will draw aggro from pretty much every guard who has line-of-sight on you, no matter how far away they are. It should be more like 'arm's length or doing something suspicious'. Their ability to see your face should also be a factor. As-is, there are a lot of areas that are straight-up impossible to get through without using Instinct, and Instinct burns out insanely quickly and opportunities to replenish it are very limited.
On the flip side, if you leave their line of sight before they figure out you're not one of them, they immediately forget you exist, no matter how hilariously suspicious the way you vanished is. In one room, I made my way through under a police officer's watchful eye by ducking behind a piece of cover whenever his suspicion meter grew too high. In previous Hitman games, that kind of weird behavior would have prompted an immediate spike in suspicion. In this game, it causes a complete reset. Likewise, if you're dealing with someone who isn't disguised like you, you're basically invisible unless you draw an inappropriate weapon or otherwise blow your own cover. This is true even when the person in question really should be able to spot a ringer: in the very first level, the anal retentive head of security, who handpicked all of the guards, won't detect you if you disguise yourself as one of the guards. If you disguise yourself as the chef - the only chef anywhere on the property, who is clearly several sizes larger than you - he gets on the radio and demands to know who didn't tell him about the new chef's assistant. It's ridiculous.
Well I guess I can finally drop the game now. Nothing like wasting all that time and energy only to have my face pissed on.
Square-Enix was unreasonably disappointed with the sales of the multiplatform Tomb Raider reboot. Now Rise of the Tomb Raider is to be (for a certain period of time) an Xbox One exclusive. Because that makes sense.
Microsoft probably paid out the buttload to have it be exclusive.
I'd wager they want to to be their Uncharted/Last of us. Though I hope the whole scene with her and the doctor is the start of the game and she's dealing what she saw and the loss of her father figure and such. Otherwise I'd say it means Sam is dead at the end of this adventure and that would really suck.
Yeah, they probably thought it would be some sort of saving grace. Because, you know, no one *hates* the system, it just isn't selling because it doesn't have a limited exclusive Tomb Raider...
This makes so much sense and can be applied to so many indie darlings of the games media.
So what the fuck is going on with Zoe Quinn? I know she's the person behind Depression Quest and got accused of opportunism because of Robin William's death, but apparently the controversy over her is huuuuge now and since she's a woman and moreover a feminist it's going to be impossible to get an impartial understanding of what exactly happened from either side, and while I know this place is generally feminist-sympathetic you guys are still on the relatively saner side of it all and at a happier middle than most other places I've been to.
I did read some stuff from TotalBiscuit's end on it since he's pretty good at avoiding either extreme too, but so far he's been spending most of his feed defending himself against SJWs who are slamming him left and right for not outright taking her side and calling him a misogynistic MRA puppet (which is super dumb since he's gone on record multiple times encouraging women's participation in the videogame industry and denouncing MRAs for their extreme butthurt), even though he went out of his way to point out he wasn't actually accusing her of anything yet.
What's going on with ZQ is that until rock solid proof of the bribery aspect comes out and thus is relevant to reviewer/developer corruption, the entire business has no relevance to this board.
What I get from this is Matti Leshem is an idiot of bewildering levels and JonTron isn't even close to the villain of it all like I've seen lots of people on Tumblr try to paint him as.
Phil Fish got doxxed, and is apparently selling the Polytron and Fez IP. Ostensibly the doxxing was in retaliation for whatever he did in this whole ZQ debacle.
The doxxer is trying to frame /v/ for the doxxing, but does a terrible job at pretending to be legion.
Oh look, Phil Fish being a dumb twat again.
Is it a day that ends in y already?
While the doxxing is probably stupid (I haven't followed the drama du jour), Phil Fish is a whiny prick and I have no empathy.
Him calling TotalBiscuit a nerd and him changing his Twitter tagline in response to it was pretty golden though.
Who the hell is Adam Atomic again?
And now TotalBiscuit and JonTron ended on this mess as well, somehow?
We shouldn't care that much since it seems /v/ is worshiping them, and we all know what that means.
You are under the very mistaken impression that we care.
They do realize that Totalbiscuit worded his stance on the matter such that he could very easily turn against them and become one of Quinn's allies if the allegations don't show any substance in the immediate future right?
Also that JonTron isn't really on their side/against Zoe Quinn so much as not being fully for her either (a headsup which goes to the SJW who are accusing him of being a misogynist and rape culture enabler as well).
Is there actually any there there to this whole debacle other than the ravings of a bitter ex (possibly truthful but certainly suspect) about private matters that have nothing to do with anything we, the denizens of the internet, have any reason to care about, which have now been glommed onto by /v/-dwellers as a way to further attack a (what a surprise) female games developer they already had an irrational beef with?
I can't tell you what to believe, but I have the links to the arguments being made if you want to check it out. React to it as you will, but I do recommend going through it for the sake of perspective.
Personally, I think there may be an issue with internal corruption that need to be explored, but /v/ has gone about it aaaaaaaall sorts of wrong.
The real problem with the response from non-gaming-journalist peoples lies in its purpose.
Like, okay, I get it – you feel pissed that Kotaku and possibly another couple of sites might have had a couple of editors trade sexual favors for positive press. (We have no strong evidence that the allegations hold true, so I feel inclined to say they don’t hold water.)
So…what do you plan to do with that anger? How can you transform that anger into a productive (not destructive) act?
I don’t think any of the not-personally-affected-by-this-situation people on either side of this have any clue how to answer that question.
InternetAristocrat is a hardcore rightwinger whose antipathy against social justice warriors is due to their ideology rather than their methods and who has been known to make blatantly partisan videos that omit facts to make his side look good in the past. Even if I'm not particularly leftist myself and have agreed with some of his videos I can't take the man and his Pat Buchanan-esque politics or tactics in good faith.
Don't just dismiss people based on grounds of ideological school.
Take each argument and point individually. Reflect them on facts and evidence and decide from there.
There is the issue of supposed censorship via copyright claims. At least one indie dev explicitly threatened TotalBiscuit with that on twitter.
The whole "vidya journalism is corrupt/retarded" issue isn't any more relevant now than it has been all the other times, it's just that the shitstorm hasn't been this intense before (gee I wonder why)
"Video game journalists" being liars and anti-gamer shills is not news. We've seen that time and time again (and we've seen way worse than the predictable spin of this case), yet somehow people didn't get this angry about it in the past.
Yeah, it's called poisoning the well. Used all too frequently on Internet arguments ("well they're a feminist/conservative, we shouldn't listen to them when she says beating up little kids and stealing their lunch money is wrong" or "they're a libertarian/social justice zealot just like me, therefore it's OK that they're repeatedly encouraging someone to commit suicide because they're fighting for the 'right' cause).
There is no strong evidence that any actual favor trading occurred at this time. Taking that out all that remains is the bitter relationship element which is not, and never will be, the internet's business. Making these dumb macros and calling it "The Five Guys Saga" just underlines that the people perpetuating this drivel don't actually care about any of the actual corruption elements, they're just persecuting their preexisting, caveman tier vendettas.
Do not respond to this shit. Do not engage in attempts by people to get it started here. Ignore it, for the love of fucking god, ignore it and talk about video games. Here, I'll start for you:
Counterspy looks cool, if not terribly stealthy. In addition to this, I saw Liam stream the whole thing last night. It's got this great, weird 60s look like Jazzpunk had and I love all the weird cold war political humor.
Is it me or are we seeing a lot of these faux Cold War spy games recently? So far I can think of Jazzpunk and Thirty Flights of Loving (which isn't much of a game but whatever).
Well those two are by the same person, who also made Gravity Bone iirc.
Nah Jazzpunk is by Necrophone and Chung was responsible for Thirty Flights/Gravity Bone but not Jazzpunk.
Was Donkey Kong 64 solely responsible for killing the "collectathon" platformer?
It became the go-to genre of choice for shovelware. Nothing survives that and comes out unscathed.
I honestly think THAT'S the worst Non-Shovelwear Collect-A-Thon out there.
I honestly think it's a better game than Banjo Kazooie. I had some fun with Sunshine. That's more than I can say for BK.
Why do so many people hate on Sunshine? Aside from the bad camera, obtuse Blue Coin collection system, and underutilization of the Yoshi mechanic I thought it was pretty swell.
I miss collect-a-thon platformers.
Mostly because of all the variety in levels and what you had to do to collect the stuff. Not sure how the idea of them being chore-like came up. Maybe people where picking up on a pattern I wasn't recognizing.
In any case, I'd love to see the genre come back in some way.
Have you tried 3D world/land yet?
Really liked World, but Land's controls bugged me. I wonder if it would be better on the XL
It's funny how you said "Aside from the bad camera" when the camera can be a major dealbreaker. The camera is better than it was in Mario 64 and so was the control. But there were a number of things they dropped the ball on. Not FLUDD though, FLUDD was great and I hope it comes back.
In SM64 there are 15 worlds, with 6 stars each. The stars are not linked to the objective you choose when you start, and you can collect them out of order most of the time. This means you can skip missions you don't feel like doing, or even a couple of worlds you don't like. In Sunshine, there are only 7 worlds, with 8 stars each. You don't have much room to skip missions anymore, and the stars are now linked to the objective you choose. Which means you HAVE to get them in order now. This compromises some of the replayability SM64 had.
The only stars that involve agonizing amounts of searching and collecting in SM64 are the 100-coin stars. Which aren't that bad, because no matter what mission you choose, you always have a chance at 100 stars. In Sunshine, there's the blue coin collecting, which is irritating to say the least. There are 240 blue coins to collect, and 10 are required for a star. With 120 stars in the game, that means 24 of those stars require time-consuming, boring coin collecting. They could've made at least 1 new world with those stars to make this less annoying. Hell why not THREE and eliminate this altogether? If you want us to go through the trouble of collecting coins, the 100-coin stars are enough. And this time only certain missions even have 100 coins, so you wouldn't know which ones unless you read a damn walkthrough, or wasted a ridiculous amount of time already searching for more coins, to no avail.
Let's not forget the extra Delfino Plaza stars. SM64 had fun little extra missions you could do around the castle for more stars. All of them were fun and easy to control despite their difficulty. Here, some of the things you have to do to get them were definitely NOT FUN. Like the rage-inducing basket fruit bouncing, the AGONIZINGLY slow Yoshi boat-hopping, the poison river which was impossible to control, and ESPECIALLY that stupid fucking pachinko machine.
And what do you get for all this extra effort? In SM64, you get 100 lives, an invincible sparkly triple jump, a slightly different ending, and a cameo from Yoshi. In Sunshine? A T-shirt. A fucking T-shirt. Oh, and a half-assed "Thanks for playing!" end screen.
Both prized sucked, though. It wasn't until Super Mario Galaxy where Nintendo came up with a good reward for collecting all those stars.
>I saved an entire tropical island and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
There were also the sunglasses that darkened the screen.
But those you got after 60 stars. And they were only for Delfino Plaza, you couldn't take them into the levels I don't think.
Instead of focusing on the negativity and shitflinging from both sides regarding the whole ZQ controversy how about something more constructive? So far I'm pretty interested in the Theme Hospital-esque game, although the RPS one has a cool concept too.
Now that you mention it...
Huh. I got it from TB's Twitter. He doesn't seem like the /pol/ type, quite the opposite really.
I guess it was just to spite whoever /pol/ and /v/ are mad, though. They don't care about the final product, and fine young capitalist is embracing it since they're getting a lot of money for their project.
Well, oddly enough they have a point about how most SJW are more interested in stirring up controversy for self-validation than any meaningful attempt at change. Whether it's broken clocks or not, and for all /v/'s shittiness, it's a bit presumptuous to think that every single person on 4Chan is a sexist pig and nobody involved is motivated by genuine interest or that at least some of the sexism is just done to look edgy or fit in or even sarcastic. I mean, I'm a feminist and moderate SJ advocate but even I've indulged in quite a lot of un-PC stuff from time to time. I don't think that means I have internalized misogyny or anything. And it seems like at least some of the 4Channers involved are doing it out of an actual desire to be constructive as opposed to pure spite, the way a Neo-Nazi would donate to the Anti-Defamation League to piss off the NOI. Hopefully they're legitimately fond of their new babby and aren't just plotting to use it as an avenue to secretly broadcast ryona/rape threats/Suzanne Venker propaganda or something.
And good job Feminist Frequency for being a bunch of asshats again. Despite their bigotry, 4Chan is working towards a decent cause. The same could've been said of some social justice advocates in the past. A lot of the original suffragettes were homophobes or motivated by racism, and a lot of black Civil Rights activists were supportive of oppressive Communist dictatorships. 4Chan knows they have to behave if they want people to take them seriously, and can't just get away with funneling proceeds to people like Heartiste or Onision. Besides I'd think TFYC knows who 4Chan are at this point and have become wary enough that if they tries to pull any surreptitious fuckery they'd be pretty active at trying to curb that shit.
In any case, the end result is killing cancer and supporting decent games. Whatever motives behind it are personal matters.
It is what it is.
The thing about 4chan, Anonymous, hell, even the other side with Feminists and SJWs, is that they are all essentially identities that are self applied, or communities based on participation. None of them really have any kind of proper ideological or moral qualifiers, and they are thus as good as their best members and as bad as their worst, simultaneously.
>the way a Neo-Nazi would donate to the Anti-Defamation League to piss off the NOI
Ironically the Nation of Islam and white supremacists are actually pretty damn chummy due to a common hatred of the Jews and sharing the goal of racial separatism in common.
Is that actually Anita though? Or someone affiliated with her? Not that it would surprise me, always knew she was a big charlatan and counterproductive to progress as it was.
>/v/ created an actual female gamer who is basically a relatively benign "just one of them" type rather than a misogynistic strawman or horrible "fake girl gamer" caricature or anything
Color me pleasantly surprised.
And people donate to charity to pay less taxes.
There's way worse ways to go about their end. But they're actually doing good.
Like that time /b/ rescued some kittens and stopped a bomb threat.
I hate the whole
>NOT ALL M
thing, but I do kinda get ticked off at the whole "4chan is the birthplace and maternity ward of hatred and sexism" for some odd reason because jesus h, even though I've legitimately cut most if not all ties with the site myself, I know many people who actively go on there and participate and are actual genuine productive and progressive member of society who do actual good for media and the people around them.
Am I ticked off because they do some good stuff under the much (in many cases, rightfully smeared) 4chan banner and refuse to do it otherwise?
Because lets be honest, even if its not completely representative of the site, and these people have no idea what being on there is actually like
>mfw "he left his 4chan open."
there is a reason for all the apprehension towards it.
In either case, and the motives they do it for, Chatoic Neutral is doing a goodun.
Good for you, Chaotic Neutral.
Zoe, did you fuck the IndieGoGo people so they don't support any women gamers other than yourself?
At least we can say they're against women in gaming.
We don't even have any idea if Zoe Quinn having sex with all these guys is even true at this point. She does seem to be kind of a dickish person based on the recent behavior that can accurately be sourced to her own doing, and that enough is reason to give me a negative opinion of her, but the stuff involving the folks at Kotaku have been shown to be trumped up (they didn't even shill her "game") and everything else so far is people taking wild speculation seriously or comes from questionable sources which could easily have been totally made up.
So, is the ex boyfriend's account....? Reliable? Unreliable?
He was pretty thorough but man I personally always thought other people's relationships, even if they're minor celebrities are fuckin' none of my biz.
I don't know.
Did the Polaris Game_Jam she was at have anything to do with this "Five Guy" thingy or the supposed TFYC dox or whatever? I'd have figured a lot more of the Polaris personalities would have stepped up to clear the air in this situation. Or were those articles about her not getting along with JonTron and that Pepsi guy being an asshole not really unrelated aside from who wrote them?
>/V/ with a capital letter
I smell a false flag for "lulz".
The way 4chan believes certain information speaks loudly of its sexism.
>Respected women online accuse Skyler Page and Yale Stewart of sexual harassment
>"Where's the proof!? These whores are probably trying to frame these innocent men
>Even after they're vindicated, the victims are still less respected than the accused
>One ex with an obvious ax to grjnd eants off about his girlfriend with nothing and no one to support his claim
>"Fucking whore! Video games are ruined forever! Let's show 'em, guys"
It's amazing how /co/ totally sucks Stewart's cock, it's amazing.
Would Indiegogo actually link to the "you are an idiot" youtube video in their "takedown" message? I don't think so.
>Whelp, just heard from the head of TFYC in a Twitch Stream (before a twitch bot took it down cause it wasn't gaming, even though the head of a gaming thing was speaking...gotta love Twitch sometimes...) and if there's inconsistencies in Twitter it's cause he just literally woke up. The Indiegogo will be back up, he's gonna speak with them (no clue how long that'll take unfortunately) and might be starting from square one again, but at least we know it's him and noone hacked their Twitter too.
>Oh, and all the game's money is going to the original charity, the Shirt money is specifically what's being voted on.
Well that kinda blows. Although since this is one of those full funding projects, apparently everyone who already donated still gets to hold onto the same money to give back a second time.
I started replaying Baldur's Gate 2, since it's been years and I've had the massive urge to play it again after playing Divinity Original Sin. So I started a new game and because I never actually played as an evil character I chose to do just that. And boy is this not fun. Evil characters get fucking SHAT ON in this game. You're missing out on massive amounts of XP, rewards and even entire quest lines. There are not even enough evil NPC companions to fill the fucking party! So yeah, turns out one of the most amazing games ever made, is only really amazing if you're playing the good guy, because any other option was implemented as a half-assed afterthought. This is a bit of reality check and a big bummer.
I think they intended the upside of an evil party to be that recruitable evil characters are single-classed, thus getting access to high-level features earlier/at all.
Go seek out the Big World Project if you ever have a desire to play any and all Infinity Engine Bioware games.
Jesus christ. I've seen games on PHONES that look better than this.
>not just naming her straight up Vidya and making her Indian since it's a perfectly normal name there, plus delicious brown
No more Nintendo general so I guess this is the best place to put it:
Huh, these actually look kinda cool.
Surprised no one has made a Nintendo general by now.
Stop believing the hype about everything, TB says.
>"Prices are aggressively researched to make sure [they] are competitive," Bise said. Each item is researched and priced individually, and the single most expensive game Bise has seen in the store was priced at $200, although he couldn't recall offhand what that was.
While it's neat that they're giving gaming a focus, half the point of looking for games at a thrift store is because of the often-amazing price difference vs. eBay when you got lucky and found a rare item.
I guess if they still beat eBay in pricing it's worth it; the article says they make an effort to actually keep the fucking cords for the systems they get in, and have partnerships with third parties to supply ones they're missing. And they sell some new stuff and Raspberry Pis. Sounds like an interesting place to check out if I were in the area, at least.
Not directed at people ITT, more of a general observation:
>FPS map pack DLC is cancer, "lol cowadoodee"
>but Mario Kart tracks are okay because Nintendo cannot do wrong
Fanboyism is one hell of a drug. Thanks for supporting the enemy, druids.
GOOD FUCKING GOD JUST GREENLIGHT A NEW F ZERO ALREADY.
FUCK FUCK'S SAKE AT LEAST MAKE AN HD REMAKE OF GX.
Or perhaps, just perhaps, the people who complain about FPS Map Pack DLCs are different people from the people who enjoy Mario Kart Tracks because the audiences for the two types of games are different, and Nintendo fans aren't such spoiled children.
>and Nintendo fans aren't such spoiled children.
They sure love to pull this whole fuckin holier-than-thou spiel, though.
Also this Mario Kart DLC isn't absurdly priced or Day 1 on-the-disc bullshit. This is what DLC is actually supposed to be.
And that’s exactly why people love this DLC: Nintendo already delivered a complete game.
Complaining about ripoff business models != being spoiled.
Less shilling please, game journalists already do enough of it.
It's not so much the subject, but the content and pricing.
>Usually four, sometimes five multiplayer maps with sometimes one or two weapons for $15 or quadruple that for $50
>Three characters, four karts, and eight courses for $8 or double that for $12
>I'm not spoiled! I just think I shouldn't have to pay a company when they come out with new content!
>cutting out parts of a game to sell to you later is a valid business tactic, if you disagree you're just entitled!!
That's how DLC generally works, fanboy. Now stop repeating sycophantic drivel.
The idea of DLC isn't bad itself. DLC is the modern equivalent of the Expansion Pack, but usually done in smaller chunks. The proper use is to add more content to an existing game a moderate time after the game was released. (I can't recall anyone ever complaining about expansion packs, either.)
Where DLC becomes bad is when you have huge portions of the game, already pressed on the disc, that you can't access unless you "buy" it. That's where the bullshit comes in, because the company is making you pay twice for content you already own (because it's on the disc you already own.)
This is usually referred to as "Day 1/Day 0" DLC, but even DLC that early isn't necessarily bad. There's a time between the game going Gold (where it's considered "done") and the game going to market where your developers are otherwise doing a lot o' nothing. Maybe some more testing for a Day 1 patch, but that never needs all of them. So you can give most of them a nice vacation since they probably had hellish crunch time at the end (almost never done), fire most of them (too often), or put them to work on making expanded content for the game. Some of these are simple (simple weapons, outfits, hats) and can be put out as Day 1 DLC to get a bit extra income during their launch. This is beneficial for everyone involved; the developers stay gainfully employed, the gamers have some extra options if they want, and the company can make a bit more back on their investment.
Sadly, most of the mid-to-late 00s involved companies doing that disc-based DLC bullshit, which is why people are so soured to it. This DLC is being released after the game has been out for four months, and it doesn't seem like a considerably large pack, either, so it seems to be DLC done right.
As >>189647 mentioned, the price is another point of contention when it's a huge amount compared to the content (e.g. you buy a 50-hour game for $60, and a 4-hour DLC costs $20). But that is far more relative than on-disc DLC, since some people are happy to pay any amount for more of the same. For instance, I was fine paying $20 for the season pass of Bioshock Infinite, even with the shitty BaS Ep2, but I would never have paid $15 for Ep1 or 2 on their own.
>Not resenting the fact that I have to pay for the things I buy makes me a sycophant.
>DLC is the modern equivalent of the Expansion Pack
It can be that, but more often than not it is a ripoff scheme, and we're going to see more and more of that kind (see: pay-to-advance mobile games).
Nintendo isn't EA, but I wouldn't trust them to not fuck things up out of ignorance if nothing else.
Repeating anti-consumer bullshit ('you're just entitled') spewed by gaming press does make you one.
Pay-to-win isn't the same thing as DLC isn't the same thing as freemium, though. I don't look at the actual pay-to-win games, but AFAIK they aren't claiming you're downloading anything new when it's in the game, they outright say it's for unlocking/refilling whatever. That's a bullshit all its own, different from disc-based DLC.
And Nintendo (through GameFreak) was one of the first to do on-'disc' DLC: Each generation of Pokemon have Pokemon on the cart that you can never (properly) access unless you do something special to have one traded to you. I don't think you've ever had to pay directly to receive it, but getting them often costs you at least time of traveling to somewhere (assuming that it's feasible to even travel to that somewhere in the first place!). Hell, one of the gens has a Pokemon (Arceus?) that is impossible to legit get in America because they never did an event to release the item you need to access that area.
>Pay-to-win isn't the same thing as DLC isn't the same thing as freemium
The core concept is to make the customer accept not paying for the entire game upfront.
>the idiotic "not all DLC costs money" derailment strategy
There is a reason why people call DLC "free" whenever it's something that doesn't cost money and that is because DLC implies a payment in the vast majority of cases.
Also I don't recall ever hearing Nintendo calling hacked event pokemon piracy or removing online functionalities from the system of someone caught having one.
>The core concept is to make the customer accept not paying for the entire game upfront.
Bad DLC is made by ripping out or locking parts of the game for the sole purpose of selling it as an extra. Good DLC that is mostly made after the game goes Gold; it can even be stuff that was planned from the start, but didn't make it in for budget and/or time constraints, and was finished later and released as DLC. If you run up against a wall you have to cut something. If you don't, then you wind up with Half Life 3. Except no one has Half Life 3... I see nothing wrong with making a solid game now, then more stuff later and charging for it. That's why the merits of DLC needs to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
>Also I don't recall ever hearing Nintendo calling hacked event pokemon piracy or removing online functionalities from the system of someone caught having one.
How does that change it from being DLC? You have the game, it has the Pokemon, but you still have to "download" it from an event to receive it. The only big difference is that sometimes these are replicable (through breeding) or you can trade away your initial download. It's also very rarely free, because while you don't pay directly to download, there's still an involved cost. Maybe it was putting down a reservation deposit for B/W2 to get an event Pokemon for B/W; maybe it was the admittance fee to whatever larger event the smaller give away is happening in. Maybe it's having to drive 40 miles to a Toys R Us. Very few Pokemon DLC events involved just hopping on your home's wifi and downloading it.
>The core concept is to make the customer accept not paying for the entire game upfront.
No, it's about offering things that aren't part of the full game to people who want to pay extra who get those things. If Mario Kart were unable to be beaten without downloading these DLC packs, you would have a point. But you are just whining because they have given you added value for your game for a little bit of money, and you think they should give it to you for free.
And you guys do realize of course that the argument here is not between DLC and having the content included as part of the game, right? You're choosing between having the content as DLC and not having it at all. Artists have to be paid to create assets. Programmers have to be paid to program behaviors. The companies are not going to suddenly decide to start giving you this content for free. They're going to decide that you just flat out don't want this content period.
The biggest justified complaint about DLC these days is chiefly "on-disc" DLC (where the content's already part of the full package, but locked away until you buy the DLC code that unlocks it). Lots of people got pissed at Capcom for doing that shit with Street Fighter × Tekken, and rightfully so - it was a way of pumping money out of people who bought the game while letting them believe they were paying for content that wasn’t already on the disc for which they'd just paid 60 bux.
Any other complaint about DLC comes down to personal opinions on Day One DLC and the quality of any given DLC, which are subjective. On-disc DLC is objectively bullshit and is the only kind of DLC that everyone is 100% justified in hating.
I just wanted Mario Kart to have more inversions.
Outside of the Möbius strip, stages don't seem to go past 90 degrees.
Even rainbow road! All I wanted from rainbow road was to be upside down at some point!
I don't think Mario Kart has anywhere to go anymore honestly. Seriously where do you take racing after antigravity? It's like it's slowly turning into F-Zero.
They'll think of something. They always do. With the excitement and highly possible success of this DLC, they might just go ahead and make a full-fledged Super Smash Kart.
Maybe like with F-Zero Shiggy Miggy will just decide they've reached perfection and now there's no reason to make any more.
Is it bad that I understand his logic? If there's nowhere a series can really evolve without becoming more of the same, or more of the same but worse, why make it?
but could they at least give perfection an hd re release?
Damn leak ruined the SSB4 surprise. But holy fuck that alt is killing me.
Hope none of you bought a 3DS recently. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-08-29-nintendo-announces-new-3ds-and-3ds-xl-designs-with-extra-buttons
Well, let's ask Capcom, because there's pretty much nowhere to take their two biggest non-Mega Man franchises and they'll probably make both RE7 and SF5 by the end of the decade.
>New buttons and faster CPU
>Still not a second analog, just some fucking "nub"
Great, it's the DSi all over again.
>named New 3DS and New DS LL
...Who the fuck names things over there. This is worse than fucking "Wii U". It's also going to make a new take on the Abbot and Costello classic. "Yes, I'd like a new 3DS please." "Oh, do you mean a 3DS or a New 3DS?" "Yes, a new 3DS", etc.
>then this happens
>Oh sweet, a Xenoblade port! I will totally buy it if there's extra cont-
>New 3DS only
And now I will go melt the ice caps from my gaze of rage alone.
It's funny; I just bought my XL last year... figured "Hey it's pretty late in the systems life. Pretty clear they're not going to be doing any more versions".
Hope they're smart and have "newDS" exclusive games properly labeled.
This is typically why I don't buy the second portable upgrade.
Also, they need to fire their entire branding department. These names are not so good.
Shit name aside, I am SO glad I haven't bought a 3DS now.
Well I was planning on porting my 3DS to an XL (I like my ambassador status) Looks like I'll wait a bit longer till I upgrade.
>Bioshock on iOS is $15
So you get a port that is probably sloppy for $5 less than normal retail, and at any given time you can probably find a deal that brings the PC version down to $10 or far cheaper.
What a waste of time.
Is the second analog stick too small? Should they have kept the Wi-Fi switch?
Also, spoilers for Xenoblade, if you haven't played it.
Until people play it, we won't know how much of a difference it makes. Plus I'm sure the Circle Pad will still be compatible otherwise.
Remember when Nintendo said they wouldn't make the same mistake as the DSi and wouldn't redesign the 3DS? Then defended the 3DS XL by saying it was just bigger, not a redesign? Then defended the 2DS by saying it was simply an alternative? And now they're saying "fuck it, we Apple now" by not even hiding that it's a redesign now.
So, gog now has movies as well?
Too bad those are only videogame related documentaries.
And the Bronie one.
Nintendo has been releasing updates and new systems for their portable line every 2-3 years sense the GB pocket was introduced.
The fact that people seem to be surprised by this and calling it an apple move has me baffled.
This is going a bit overboard though. It's only been 3 years since the 3DS's launch, yet we've had the 3DS, the 3DS XL, the 2DS, and now both the New 3DS and New 3DS XL. All of which are being sold at the same time with no discontinuations planned so far. Compare that with the GBA which got one redesign two years after launch which replaced the original, and another two years after that when the DS had already been around for a year on its own.
Not to mention the fact that they DID say 3DS would not have a redesign and they wanted to get it right on the first try. So as far as that goes they DID fuck up.
they underestimated some of the needed functions and what they could do with the platform. Wonder if it will be able to run flash natively.
>Nintendo has been releasing updates and new systems for their portable line every 2-3 years sense the GB pocket was introduced.
Original 3DS - 2011
3DS XL - 2012
2DS - 2013
New 3DS (which actually comes in two different models) - 2014
The timeframe for these updates is unusually short, you can't deny it.
There is a new 3DS on the way?! And I just payed good money to have my old one fixed!
Well thats the old T4 luck for yah...
Also any pics yet?
Oh, that's something I missed: the 3D viewing has been improved so that you can view 3D from any angle without having the nauseating "blur" by using the front camera to track the head. If this works well it will take care of a major issue the 3DS currently has.
Not to mention it's not too far from what Apple does with its new updated devices every year. Plus like Apple, a lot of the different versions of the 3DS are marketed as "alternatives" depending on people's preference or budget. (Macbook Pro/Macbook Air)
Huh, I like the snes throw back colors but I dunno...
That stick looks kind of tiny and whats the sd card size limit?
Saints row: Gat goes to hell
Saw this half asleep. Had to check it again to make sure I'd not dreamed it.
Wow! This looks really awesome, but I just boxed up my 360 awhile ago... Not sure if I want to get it back out, even for one chance to play as Gat.
There's a PS4 and Xbox One version in the works.
>The new system's Web browser comes with an automatic child safety filter. It can only be disabled by entering a credit card number and paying a 30 cent fee.
Nintendo, what are you doing?
Not to be that guy, but why would you browse porn on your 3DS anyway?
For that matter, why would you browse the Internet in general on the 3DS?
Beta testing group for Mighty Number 9 starts tomorrow for those who backed the game.
Only one level for now. Level 5.
Oh, plus free Gunvolt download to backers too.
>Watchdogs mod on GTA 4
Sony's success at this point is largely thanks to their image.
I wonder if there's carry-over from your SR4 save.
Like can you import your Boss to show up in the game even though in this one you play as Gat & Kinzie.
Like as far as I know the NextGen rerelease edition of SR4 "re-elected" comes with GooH along with all the original SR4/dlc content.
>Video games have evolved from toys to a complex, engaging experiences and narratives
>But please don't criticize it like other art forms, because it hurts our feelings
The same argument swings both ways.
Other artforms have media possessing strong violent and sexualized content, and while there are plenty of detractors and critics, anyone saying that such content sholuld not exist would be seen as the kookiest of kooks. One may criticise the artist and his/her works, but never tell the artist what to do.
Meanwhile, for some reason the same does not apply to videogames.
If games were art, then by defintion the people producing them have the right to stick to their artistic vision, even if you and me don't agree with it.
Mutant Football League is not dead!
Man what a zombie, it just wont give up.
>We stop upholding “fun” as the universal, ultimate criterion for a game’s relevance. It’s a meaningless ideal at best and a poisonous priority at worst. Fun is a neurological trick. Plenty of categorically unhealthy things are “fun”. Let’s try for something more. Many of the alternatives will have similarly fuzzy definitions, but let’s aspire to qualities like “edifying”, “healing”, “pro-social”, or even “enlightening”.
Games should no longer be judged by their quality as games! It's all about the MESSAGE! If you disagree, you're the reactionary privileged devil that we must eliminate!
>If our medium is designed for people to stay secluded for dozens of hours while having their egos stroked, then we reap what we sow in terms of the kinds of people who emerge from this pastime. We need to consider the very real possibility that the offensive behavior displayed by gamers in recent weeks is not unrelated to the artifacts they rally around (which I doubt are especially obscure). These people didn’t come from nowhere to fight about nothing. They came from games to fight about games. They’re organic results of the medium we’ve all played a role in cultivating, and they won’t go away if the medium doesn’t change significantly
>We make and play fewer linear games about one person saving the world. Take a look at the people terrorizing games culture lately: they're almost all tyrannical brats with messianic delusions. Where do you think they’re learning this behavior from?
>Despite the skepticism the games press shows at every opportunity, it *really* looks like violent games *do* make us more aggressive and less empathetic. If researchers are repeatedly suggesting this and then we complain that the vilest people in our communities are too aggressive and not empathetic enough, aren’t we partially to blame for our general eagerness to make and play games that have these overall effects on people?
>We understand that there is a link between this medium that terrorists see themselves as defending and the terrorism itself.
>we make and play games that we have no reason to be ashamed of
Jack Thompson 2.0, now behind the indestructible shield of social justice. This is the new age of "videogame criticism". Enjoy!
Problem here, when it comes to /v/ and other gaming extremists, they think criticism means censorship. Like, when a new video of Tropes vs. Video Games gets uploaded, a copy of Dead or Alive Volleyball cease to exist. Saying you don't like something doesn't mean you hate the thing 100%. And similarly, admitting a game you like has issues with female portrayals or whatever doesn't mean you still can't enjoy it. You just realized it's not perfect and if the developer realizes that, than maybe he or she will do better next time.
Regarding Tropes vs Video Games, I seriously don't understand the extreme hate for it. The whole series has been badly characterized as "Sexist pigs! How can anyone play this sexist trash! Ban! Ban! Ban!" When it reality, it's just a women citing all these video games that use these outdated tropes involving women. She doesn't make these videos to incite a riot; it's to get developers to think outside the box and portray women better.
On "artistic vision," much of the complaints aimed at video games are rarely about that. Ubisoft didn't exclude playable female character in the latest Assassin's Creed game, or use another bland, white protagonist in Watch_Dogs because of "muh vision." Ubisoft did those things because it's the safest and easiest thing to do, when marketing a game. And honestly, I haven't seen any articles from Kotaku or Gamespot about why "dev X" should never work in the industry again, because he dressed another female game character in a bikini.
Perhaps you could cite the Stanley Parable, for when the game changed its image of a young, black child being burned alive. But that change made through threats; just comments from players who saw the image as problematic. And if the creator agreed with the criticism, than maybe we should stop acting like every decision an artist made is infallible.
But enough of my opinion. This quote sums up the entire #GamerGate shit well:
>Anita Sarkeesian is not a threat to gaming by any stretch of the imagination. In my opinion her presence is highly beneficial, and it also reflects videogames' growing cultural acceptance. It shows that videogames are being taken more seriously, that they are gaining cultural legitimacy. This is something that many of us have been pushing towards for a very long time, and to have this weird little subculture jump out to try and 'defend' gaming from its own natural maturity is in equal parts heartbreaking and farcical. They will fail. They will fail for the same reason that Jack Thompson failed - because gamers are growing older every year, games culture is steadily spreading out across the mainstream, and it cannot be forced into a box by a vocal minority. They are a shower of Cnuts trying to hold back a tide they can't even conceive.
Disagreeing with self-proclaimed social justice activists on ANYTHING AT ALL gets you labeled a reactionary nutjob simply because said people exist at all. It doesn't matter what you say, it doesn't matter if you're polite and rational in your argumentation, disagreement means you're the enemy. This is POLITICS.
Politics and "videogame journalism" are an awful combination. Remember how the gaming press already likes to side with the industry to the detriment of the consumer? Remember them dismissing any and all ME3 criticism as entitled whining? Remember them spinning DmC criticism into a "hate campaign by anti-fans"? Remember them dismissing xbone criticism as paranoia and luddism? That is "videogame journalism".
Expect a lot more of that. After all, the industry may hate its consumers but when the consumers are reactionary misogynist white male e-terrorists it's entirely justified! People complain about a game? TERRORIST GAMERS strike again! People call a company out on shitty business practices? Another HARRASSMENT CAMPAIGN!
The big joke here is of course that /v/ was totally on board with the /pol/ "degeneracy" narrative until about two weeks ago; now anyone saying what was accepted as normal for YEARS is a shill or double-agent. If "GamerGate" were resolved right now I'd give /v/ maybe a month until the "social justice is always enemy propaganda" phrases return.
Eh, while the backlash against Sarkeesian is truly retarded I wouldn't quite call her beneficial either. She's entitled to say what she wants, and does sometimes make some good points, but there's a lot to dislike her for even as a feminist. She's money grubbing or at the least horribly inefficient, clearly doesn't do the research and even blatantly makes shit up sometimes, the broad theme for each of her videos is true but it's still low-hanging fruit that she doesn't do justice because of her faulty logic and examples, uses inductive rather than deductive reasoning to criticize games, has a fairly binarist and even backward view of gender roles despite her feminist credentials, overall poor presentation of ideas, seems to have Jack Thompson-esque ideas about violence in videogames, and so on. And that's not getting to the lots of Sarkeesian fandumbs who will jump down your throat if you dare bring any of this up.
Admittedly, there are plenty of people out there who believe she's completely in the right without considering any points against her views *cough aaron diaz cough*
But the truth is, she's been labeled as sex-negative by many feminists and isn't completely affiliated with the new-school thinking of body acceptance and freely accepting sexuality.
(The kind that think being a stripper is wrong - while many feminists in media freely encourage to do so if one truly wants without the stigma of viewing the female sex negatively).
There's plenty of valid arguments against Sarkesian's thoughts, and I heavily disagree with some points even if I DO concede the portrayal of women in media are remarkably lacking.
That said, jesus christ nobody deserves the level of abuse she's gotten, I mean come on.
It's ironic, because /v/'s hilarious levels of buttmad are largely responsible for her getting so much attention. If they didn't throw a shitfit every time teh evil feminists say something, Anita Sarkeesian would've just been another annoying Youtuber like Tobuscus or Amazing Atheist and eventually fade into obscurity, instead of being catapulted into media stardom and winning all these bullshit awards. Hell, she might not have even gotten funded at all, and that would've been the end of it, but /v/'s obsession with creating their own boogiemen is just dragging the spotlight onto their sexism.
I know this comic is oversimplifying things a little, but I find it pretty apt.
Gosh you guys. It's almost like Sarkeesian's commentary is causing gaming culture to have a discussion about what it really wants and expects from games. If only there was a term for when someone who examines media and looks at the ramifications of what's being said, puts forward opinions and philosophies which a reader can take or leave at their discretion but which cause them to think harder about what they're taking in.
Oh, right. It's "criticism."
Criticism came come from all sides to any subject. Including those who are already criticizing.
Occasionally, you'll find people who get too emotional about the whole thing and ruin it for everyone. Pretty much like what's happening here, what with the hacks, threats, demonizing sides and so on.
Yeah, and that's the thing. When it's just criticizing a critic because you disagree with their opinions, that's super cool, and how criticism works. It's a dialogue. When people try to force her to shut up through fear and bullying because they're threatened by the entire idea of her having the discussion--whether that be because you're uncomfortable with the point she's making or because you're uncomfortable with who she is as a person or because she's a woman--you're the bad guy.
And "bullying" includes harassment and personal attacks guys. I hate to tell you that. But even if you condemn the people who have been making rape threats and death threats, if you're trying to make it to where she's not able to talk anymore by assassinating her character rather than addressing her arguments, you're still trying to censor her. And that not only makes you a dick, it also makes her look more and more right--because if you actually had legs to stand on in this argument, you wouldn't be resorting to personal attacks to "win."
Why the hell do you people only become active when it involves this stupid feminism nonsense.
We can never have a perfectly good thread discussing the qualities of a new video game being so active, its only this stuff that gets the rapid hits. Moral indignation all over the place like rocket fuel.
I have done nothing of the sort. People who rely on threat and heated logical fallacies will always be the thorns in the bramble of discourse. I have yet to have seen this woman's video, so I cannot yet critique it or the ideas behind it.
But in any case, I do believe people should be able to make what the games they want to be played, and any sort of censorship, quota, or enforcement on the direction is a stifling act. We've seen the effects of pandering throughout all of entertainment history and its effects rarely strike a lasting tone, no matter who is being pandered to. The people who make what they want to see, what they want to read, hear or play. These are the things that leave an imprint on our collective spirit, if you don't mind my waxing. Those are the things that make a cultural impact. Where that leads, what cause it supports, what message it portrays, is all up to the creators themselves and how willing they are to create from their spirit.
>But in any case, I do believe people should be able to make what the games they want to be played, and any sort of censorship, quota, or enforcement on the direction is a stifling act.
Which would be a valid point except that no one, including Sarkeesian, has suggested such a thing. A bunch of manchildren think that's what's happening because they're a bunch of geeks who have so internalized their victimhood complexes from childhood that they think everyone's out to persecute them, or that the only reason people like Sarkeesian would be commenting on this stuff would be to take away their toys.
No one is trying to take away anyone's toys. They're trying to start having discussions about how better toys can be made in the future. And you know what? If you just really enjoy games that have been identified as sexist or awful or whatever? Those are never going to stop being made. For the same reason that Michael Bay movies keep being made. Because there are a lot of people out there who also like that shit.
When Film Critics look at ways that directors can be more like Ingmar Bergman than Adam Sandler, it does not stop Adam Sandler movies from being made. Why are video game nerds so insecure and so paranoid that they think that's what's going to happen with video games?
>For the same reason that Michael Bay movies keep being made.
Let me extrapolate from that statement: In the future, something like Serious Sam (gameplay-focused, no story to speak of, protagonist is a straight white man, plot is "one man saves the world from horde of evil others"; in short, everything certain people claim is responsible for the existence of evil gamers) will be considered outdated garbage for idiots, only still existing because of angry privileged undesirables who are holding us all back and should stop existing ASAP. After all, "fun" is a harmful concept, and only games that are "enlightening" and convey the correct "message" are worthy of praise.
The undertone of "if you enjoy [the wrong kind of movie] you are uneducated trash" already exists among movie critics. Do you want that to extend to videogames? Do you want videogame critics to preach more of the "these games are reactionary garbage and you should be ashamed for liking them" narrative, now with a vastly extended scope? According to the "gamers are over" people, videogames cannot be allowed to be just games*; if they do not actively promote the correct values, they are harmful and enable evil people (and if you disagree, you're obviously evil yourself).
If you are sick of bullshit elitism in gaming already, have fun when "professionals" will be routinely engaging in it.
* before you construct the obvious strawmen, read the article linked in >>189841
>Why are video game nerds so insecure and so paranoid that they think that's what's going to happen with video games?
Because of Jack Thompson and people who agree with him (and those are no longer limited to "outsiders"; see >>189841). If you believe that you always need written laws to "ban" something, you don't understand how society works.
Because disagreeing with criticism gets you lumped in with crazies who think death threats are an appropriate response. It also makes you part of the evil establishment that needs to be destroyed at all costs, since you wouldn't disagree in the first place if you weren't opposed to progress.
Because said crazies are the responsibility of the entirety of "gamers", but the same logic does not apply to the other side. As long as you're on the right side of history, it's perfectly fine if you attack people instead of their message, talk about murder, or post your enemy's personal information in public. No need to tell those people to stop, it's only harassment if the other side does it.
Because videogames are becoming a political battleground and if you refuse to take a side you're automatically an enemy agent. If you say that it's only about the games for you, you are enabling terrorism/degeneracy.
At this point, "gamers" are Useful Idiots, serving as puppets in a political conflict. Pay no attention to the people behind the curtains, this is totally about "making better games" or "fighting corruption"; no hidden agendas on either side, just videogames. It's just coincidence that the demarcation line is congruent with that of the usual "social justice" vs "healthy society" war. Not political at all, oh no, just keep fighting for the correct side to "save gaming".
>At this point, "gamers" are Useful Idiots, serving as puppets in a political conflict. Pay no attention to the people behind the curtains, this is totally about "making better games" or "fighting corruption"; no hidden agendas on either side, just videogames. It's just coincidence that the demarcation line is congruent with that of the usual "social justice" vs "healthy society" war. Not political at all, oh no, just keep fighting for the correct side to "save gaming".
You sound like the people who think Obama is coming for their guns.
Yeah, it's not like /v/ and the like had been busy drinking the "social justice is the cancer that is killing gaming" /pol/-aid for years and has only recently changed tactics (it's a temporary thing); or how the gaming press has banged the "if you disagree with Anita Sarkeesian you are part of the problem" drum again and again.
Yeah, but which side is the lizard people and which side is the Illuminati? That's the real question.
There is no conspiracy, it's the same conflict of interests we've already seen before in other contexts, only with videogames as the battlefield.
Or do you seriously claim that social justice issues in general are just one big conspiracy theory?
I don't think it's even a social justice thing, few of the involved have any real philosophical standing or intent for real discussion.
90% (if not more) of the people bitching on /v/ are just the usual bunch who just want to be contrarian and cause a ruckus on the internet. The motto of that place isn't "trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls" for nothing.
Likewise, 90% (if not more) of the media coverage is just planned clickbait hunting for what's hot and controversial because talking about games alone doesn't pay the bills anymore. I seriously doubt the Kotaku staff cares THAT much if a niche japanese game has girls with big boobs.
I'm slightly mystified how Jack Thompson has come up in this conversation considering the man's been a complete irrelevance for nearly a decade (and was widely considered deluded and unhinged even at his most influential), and, near as I can tell, nobody's proposed banning anything. Loath as I am to sink into this internet drama, I am intrigued at how big a shadow Thompson's cast over the /v/-side of this brouhaha, as they seem keen to resurrect the anti-gaming boogieman to serve as some kind of rally point.
As I recall, the great debate back when Thompson was thumping every pulpit he could grab boiled down to two very simplistic propositions:
A: Games influence people
B: Games do not influence people
Thanks to Thompson barging into this debate, claiming that videogames shot JR and other such unpleasantries, I think some wires got crossed and the following metric burnt itself into many a gamer's mind:
"Everyone who believes B is One Of Us"
"Everyone who believes A is The Enemy"
But when you stop to think about it, Proposition B is fundamentally silly, isn't it? I mean, if games didn't influence us, then what's the point in playing them? It's not like they're just flashy stimuli sparkling at our dulled Cro Magnon minds, they need input and they give feedback as a reward. The people who subscribe to this metric are amongst the first to denigrate "casual" games like Angry Birds and Temple Run, so they clearly enjoy investing in game worlds and involving themselves with a fictional space. That is a form of influence, it's what makes gaming so enjoyable, it sucks you in. So why not use that investment to convey a message? As anon said above, nobody's strapping anybody into a chair and forcing them to play games like these.
There are people who claim that videogames as they have been since the beginning and as they are now are the reason some gamers are crazy assholes. Saying "playing the 'wrong' videogames makes you evil" is almost identical to Thompson's claims.
>nobody's proposed banning anything
The people supporting the above claims aim to brand videogames they classify as evil as socially unacceptable. That is the coonclusion one has to derive from their claim that videogames drove gamers to become "terrorists".
>So why not use that investment to convey a message?
Thanks for this false dichotomy. Let me quote the relevant part again:
>We stop upholding “fun” as the universal, ultimate criterion for a game’s relevance. It’s a meaningless ideal at best and a poisonous priority at worst. Fun is a neurological trick. Plenty of categorically unhealthy things are “fun”. Let’s try for something more. Many of the alternatives will have similarly fuzzy definitions, but let’s aspire to qualities like “edifying”, “healing”, “pro-social”, or even “enlightening”.
This calls for judging games ONLY by the message they convey. Judging a game by its quality as a game? Reactionary and anti-social!
Here's something for the people who believe they won't be attacked for staying out of this:
>Because this is war, and the truth is there’s no balanced reporting. There’s no “hearing both sides.” If you’re not speaking out with us or fighting for us, then you’re not some reasoned logician who is letting cooler heads prevail— the truth is you don’t give a shit about the women in the industry. You don’t care about the casualties. And you are part of the problem.
Can you cite me a quote or two from a few of the leaders of this "movement" who is trying to make it to where video games are judged solely on their message when they say so? Right now it just sounds like reactionary nonsense when you say it, so I'd like to see the actual data you're using to support your belief in this scenario.
Why yes, of course, obviously video game journalists want to ban video games.
It's quite extraordinary. For years these people have misinterpreted criticisms of video games as attacks on them as human beings. Now the media has collectively snapped and started criticising them as human beings, they misinterpret it as an attack on video games. The sheer amount of mental dislocation needed is really rather breathtaking.
I can't be bothered to do homework on an inconsequential media spat, there's war in Eastern Europe and my parents are coming round next weekend. I should have known better than to engage with this subject, all its participants are obviously insane.
So how about them vidya games, then?
>This isn't a conspiracy, nice derailment attempt.
...except when treating it like a conspiracy plays into your persecution complex.
People with shared interests working together isn't a conspiracy.
Sometimes you realize that there are people who take all this platform wars shit seriously. And it just hurts your soul so much.
This is why you people worried about MUH POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TAKIN' OVER MUH GAEMS are full of shit, though it does a good job at condemning the utter idiocy coming from both sides including the Tumblr crazies in due order.
I still don't understand why people went ballistic over TotalBiscuit over a statement that basically was "calm the fuck down everybody. Hell, if anything, all the devs siding unconditionally and explosively with Quinn gave more fuel to the fire.
>In politics, no party is ever without fault.
You sound like someone who gleefully and frequently engages in the Golden Mean Fallacy, in that case.
No matter what side you're on, there will always be a supposed ally who makes some really stupid statement and objecting to that will get you labeled an enemy.
According to /pol/ (and /n/ years before) I am both "MRA scum" and "feminazi" because I dared to not 100% side with either.
Life is rarely nice, simple and binary, that is all.