Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization.

[Endoperez]

This Kind Of Thing Happens Every Day

And? A developer decides to do an admittedly meaningless, spiteful move because he doesn't like Gamergate. What about it? Is it wrong to spend one's free time to do spiteful stuff like the dev does, and Gamergaters do (writing letters)?


I noticed this Matt is a good, manipulative speaker. It's easy to want to agree with him. However, some of the things he says are his opinion, presented as facts.

'A man in black, notorious Gamergate stalker' is a guy who retweets silly Gamergate tweets and writes storify articles.
http://storify.com/a_man_in_black/how-c ... -gamergate

'I don't want to say brainwashed' - and he just did... He implies that's what is goibg on while denying that he's said it.

[EPR89]

Oh hai Anita.

Here's what she had to say about Mirror's Edge. This isn't a new video either.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/ah8mhDW6Shs?start=375

Yay!

Research and actually watching videos.

I love how everyone in the comments of the video (Phoenixwarrior141 included) still talk as if MundaneMatt said that Anita is on a personal mission to destroy Mirror's Edge 2.
Seriously, Phoenixwarrior141, why did you post this? I'm pretty sure that the video does not say what you think it says.

[Ragdollmaster]

Seriously, Phoenixwarrior141, why did you post this? I'm pretty sure that the video does not say what you think it says.

This seems to be a recurring theme

Conclusion: Poor reading comprehension and/or poor cognitive reasoning

[Phoenixwarrior141]

This Kind Of Thing Happens Every Day

And? A developer decides to do an admittedly meaningless, spiteful move because he doesn't like Gamergate. What about it? Is it wrong to spend one's free time to do spiteful stuff like the dev does, and Gamergaters do (writing letters)?

Because this shit doesn't happen often. People like (I think it was called, feel free to correct me) WeHeart (?) who organize boycotts of good developers (Running With Scissors being the most prominent one I know of).

I noticed this Matt is a good, manipulative speaker. It's easy to want to agree with him. However, some of the things he says are his opinion, presented as facts.

I hold similar opinions and I don't think of them as facts. There aren't any real "Facts" with this issue, there also isn't right or wrong. Hence why I heavily disagree with the InternetAristocrat's view on GG.

'A man in black, notorious Gamergate stalker' is a guy who retweets silly Gamergate tweets and writes storify articles.
http://storify.com/a_man_in_black/how-c ... -gamergate

I think that qualifies as a GamerGate stalker, I mean, he's pretty much everywhere related to it.

'I don't want to say brainwashed' - and he just did... He implies that's what is goibg on while denying that he's said it.

When did he say that exactly?

I have no idea what Atheism+ is, but I know how GamersPlus started. It was a thing a bot-account said. A thing Gamergate had mentioned before that several times as a possible scenario.

Atheism+ was basically what Gaming+ (If that even really exists). It was assholes coming in from Tumblr into the atheist community and shitting it up with social justice bullshit.

Http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... rom-a-bot/

So, essentially, a bot trolled the entirety of GamerGate?

Yup, I'd buy into that.

Here's what she had to say about Mirror's Edge. This isn't a new video either.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/ah8mhDW6Shs?start=375

So she said what exactly?

And regardless, until she says something otherwise, I'm not going to take whatever she says without a little bit of doubt.

AND FURTHER, she's also CONTINUING to be sensitive and "Progressive" as fuck.

A good first step to not being a shit individual when you want to be a feminist? Don't be sensitive or progressive, that will get no one anywhere except the depths of the bowels of 4Chan.

[EPR89]

So a good first step to not being a shit individual according to you is to shut up if you are not happy with things as they are now...

There is nothing inherently wrong with being progressive or sensitive. Those are not at all negative terms. Quite the opposite. Feminism and every other movement that has motives like equality at its centre are based on people being sensitive and progressive. That's the only way how things can change. And the changes feminists fight for are usually reasonable and would not change anything for people like you. All they usually want are options to reflect different approaches to gaming.

But yeah, sure. Call them shit individuals and claim that their motives are either wrong, or unnecessary, or bad, or whatever else you have called them in this thread so far.

[Phoenixwarrior141]

So a good first step to not being a shit individual according to you is to shut up if you are not happy with things as they are now...

No, it's a good first step to not be sensitive to every naysayer on the planet and equate all who don't worship you like a god to harassers just to degrade them and put them on the level that social justice assholes can use to massacre them.

Is it that hard to understand?

There is nothing inherently wrong with being progressive or sensitive. Those are not at all negative terms.

Never said they were. I said that avoiding them is a good first step to getting change everyone can agree with.

Quite the opposite. Feminism and every other movement that has motives like equality at its centre are based on people being sensitive and progressive.

So, being sensitive to any naysayer and then feeding your victim complex so the radicals who agree with you can lynch all who don't agree with you just because you cried when someone said "Please, fuck off"?

Got it.

That's the only way how things can change.

Or you could, you know, be moderate and approach the gaming community with the saying "We don't want to ruin what already exists. We want to add more things to it" (Which is good in my book).

Which would probably get far more positive reactions then going "MISOGYNY" and boycotting everything.

And the changes feminists fight for are usually reasonable and would not change anything for people like you. All they usually want are options to reflect different approaches to gaming.

No, they want to change what already exists instead of adding more variation (Without changing the already existing products).

[Endoperez]

No, it's a good first step to not be sensitive to every naysayer on the planet and equate all who don't worship you like a god to harassers just to degrade them and put them on the level that social justice assholes can use to massacre them.

So, being sensitive to any naysayer and then feeding your victim complex so the radicals who agree with you can lynch all who don't agree with you just because you cried when someone said "Please, fuck off"?

This is YOUR stance.
And by that I mean that this is what you are doing at the moment.

You are saying all who don't worship you and your opinions on games are stupid progressive harassers that internet trolls should massacre. For what? For saying "Please, I just want to see more characters like X".

If you think feminists are bad for doing this, then you should also agree that you are just as wrong. And if your stance is wrong, it can't actually prove anything because since your proof is the same as the thing it proves wrong.

That's the only way how things can change.

Or you could, you know, be moderate and approach the gaming community with the saying "We don't want to ruin what already exists. We want to add more things to it" (Which is good in my book).

I've actually had this exact stance in the past. Well, except that I didn't see myself being painted by the MISOGYNY brush, but the IGNORANT brush. (Pro-tip: they were right about me.)
Here's the problem with that sort of thinking: Why is it a problem that some people don't do a smart thing? It shouldn't be. They are making a mistake, maybe, but making mistakes is not wrong. I mean, it's kinda useless, and it's not the best way to do things, but why should someone else gets all worked up because of it?

If these people whose stance you don't agree with were moderate, you could basically ignore them. It would have made me more comfortable, which is why I was saying they should be moderate.

Telling other people HOW they should act so I AM MORE COMFORTABLE is selfish, it makes you a jerk.
Telling other people that they are wrong for other reasons wouldn't be. You're teetering between the two, constantly - saying feminists are wrong for REASONS (which usually make little to no sense), and then saying they are too radical, wanting to change things which don't matter, they should be moderate and more polite about it all.

Well, one is the right way to do things (but your arguments can still be wrong, and often are),the second is just selfish whining.

No, they want to change what already exists instead of adding more variation (Without changing the already existing products).

How about a silly song as a rebuttal?



Also, did you know that Mrs Sommers is well known as a critic of feminism? That'd make her biased. Would that mean she shouldn't criticize feminism, like feminists shouldn't criticize games, because of bias?

[Endoperez]

"[Y]ou are allowed, in GG, to have divergent opinions so long as you disempower them. If you seek to create change within the movement and the wider gaming world, however, this will be treated with disdain and possibly met with exile. "

https://storify.com/Quinnae_Moon/one-of-us

This is what I tried to say about modetation, but in longer, difficult words.
It's about GG, but also about gamer group culture. One can belong to that without being in GG.

[Phoenixwarrior141]

This is YOUR stance.
And by that I mean that this is what you are doing at the moment.

You are saying all who don't worship you and your opinions on games are stupid progressive harassers that internet trolls should massacre. For what? For saying "Please, I just want to see more characters like X".

If you think feminists are bad for doing this, then you should also agree that you are just as wrong. And if your stance is wrong, it can't actually prove anything because since your proof is the same as the thing it proves wrong.

No, not all of them. I said that if you want to make games with female characters so long as Gameplay > Females, and you don't be to pretentious about it.

That would be fine with me.

The general rule is that you shouldn't change what exists, but add more games with female characters. So long as the game isn't shit you shouldn't get flak for it.

I've actually had this exact stance in the past. Well, except that I didn't see myself being painted by the MISOGYNY brush, but the IGNORANT brush. (Pro-tip: they were right about me.)
Here's the problem with that sort of thinking: Why is it a problem that some people don't do a smart thing? It shouldn't be. They are making a mistake, maybe, but making mistakes is not wrong. I mean, it's kinda useless, and it's not the best way to do things, but why should someone else gets all worked up because of it?

Point?

If these people whose stance you don't agree with were moderate, you could basically ignore them. It would have made me more comfortable, which is why I was saying they should be moderate.

I wouldn't ignore them, I'd be able to approach them with an actual argument.

Telling other people HOW they should act so I AM MORE COMFORTABLE is selfish, it makes you a jerk.

That's what feminists do though.

Telling other people that they are wrong for other reasons wouldn't be. You're teetering between the two, constantly - saying feminists are wrong for REASONS (which usually make little to no sense), and then saying they are too radical, wanting to change things which don't matter, they should be moderate and more polite about it all.

I'm more or less with both of those. They are wrong (In some cases, name: GTA V vs. Target), but being less radical would help with everyone, gamers might actually accept their ideas when it isn't forced onto them.

You can't force change onto people. It never worked in history, it won't work now.

[Phoenixwarrior141]

http://steamcommunity.com/app/271590/di ... 1418239179

[Endoperez]

No, not all of them. I said that if you want to make games with female characters so long as Gameplay > Females, and you don't be to pretentious about it.

That would be fine with me.

Can you find a single feminist saying that having female characters is more important than gameplay?

If these people whose stance you don't agree with were moderate, you could basically ignore them. It would have made me more comfortable, which is why I was saying they should be moderate.

I wouldn't ignore them, I'd be able to approach them with an actual argument.

I don't think that would help anyone. No offence meant, but we haven't got anywhere in this thread (or the one before, or the one before),so...

Telling other people HOW they should act so I AM MORE COMFORTABLE is selfish, it makes you a jerk.

That's what feminists do though.

Good one!
It is part of what they do. For some, it's the majority of what they want to change. However, there is a small difference from what you are doing. They focus on the areas where women as a whole are made uncomfortable, or even harassed, as the norm. Objectification, women portrayed as weak and useless, and so on - a problem that persists in all sorts of fiction in a variety of ways.

But, I have to agree, depending on how they go about it, it would make them jerks.

I'm more or less with both of those. They are wrong (In some cases, name: GTA V vs. Target), but being less radical would help with everyone, gamers might actually accept their ideas when it isn't forced onto them.

You can't force change onto people. It never worked in history, it won't work now.

I haven't really read much into the GTA/Target thing. However, isn't that more or less the most radical thing "feminists" have caused so far? A single store chain has stopped selling a single game.

Change CAN be forced, and wars have been fought over change. I hope this won't go anywhere that far, though.

As for your latest link... isn't that the moderate view you asked for? He's wondering if he can personally enjoy the game, and not demanding anything of anyone else.

[Grayswandir]

http://steamcommunity.com/app/271590/di ... 1418239179

That entire thread feels like troll bait that really doesn't go anywhere or prove anything either way since both sides resort to insulting each other over the internet.

It pretty much goes from "Should I feel bad for playing this game cause of violence against women?" and then devolves into thinly veiled uses of "filth" and half-assed remarks about how its okay to like GTAV even though its terrible. They're purposely trying to create an argument.

[Phoenixwarrior141]

Can you find a single feminist saying that having female characters is more important than gameplay?

Gone Home would be a good start.

I haven't really read much into the GTA/Target thing. However, isn't that more or less the most radical thing "feminists" have caused so far? A single store chain has stopped selling a single game.

But not a single copy of that game, for reasons completely devoid of reason or rational thought and if anything, the stepping stone to fuck up more games once Steam get's on the bandwagon of "We'll pull games now".

Good job Tumblr!

Change CAN be forced, and wars have been fought over change. I hope this won't go anywhere that far, though.

No, it can't. Years after change has been forced people have clung to the old ways and traditions. Post slavery is perfect proof of that.


Meanwhile, here's an off topic diatribe on my view on women in gaming:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfrUFdfXYHg

(Please, for the love of everything. I'm focusing on the women in this case for a dumbed down version of the events that came in. Men came in with them, women were there before them.)
Women came into gaming after it stopped being nerd exclusive and actually became somewhat mainstream. They went "Let's see what everything's about" and ran into gaming.

With them came Tumblr.

The VAST majority of the new gamers (I only mentioned women to stay on point as much as possible) were fine, they weren't jocks and they were certainly OKAY with how gaming was. The Tumblrettes did not.

So, they tried to fuck it up.

When gaming became mainstream, more women came in then the geeks (That included women). Again, back to the FG example. They came in because this looked fun, and then decided that we needed to make way for the (Occasionally) entitled women.

Essentially, a side-effect of popularity happened. People came in and some of those people tried to shit it up.

These aren't the events that happened exactly, it's just a dumbed down version of the events that happened. And why it happened in the first place.

Moving on from a somewhat hypothetical and dumbed down version of the events that occurred...

This place isn't a place for men or women exclusively. It's a hobby for GAMERS and GAMERS exclusively. You aren't entitled to be a gamer because you're a chick. You aren't entitled to not be shat on by the internet because you're a chick. You aren't entitled to your own fucking game because you're a chick. You aren't entitled to fucking special treatment because you're a chick.

You earn those entitlements, not be given to them because you're female.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hwDf2CW3-4

Common mistakes in SJW arguments:

1: "Game X doesn't have women. Therefore it's misogynistic!" You've made this argument before. This is misrepresentation or lack of representation entirely. Regardless, the game isn't misogynistic because of it.

2: "Game X has skimpily clad women. Therefore it's misogynistic!" There is a minor point here, but simply appealing to men (Since hardcore gaming is a predominantly male activity) doesn't make the game auto-misogynistic. Simply not appealing to women. Of course, if tits turn you off and make you feel misrepresented and hated, you're too sensitive for something that "Toxicity" is a large part of.

3: "I'M BEIN HARRASSED!!!!1!!!!" Well, it would help if you didn't make the same arguments as above. Rounding all developers and gamers to misogynistic because we wouldn't let you shit up another inclusive hobby.

And by "Inclusive hobby" I mean that it is a fandom of people that have set up, that isn't mainstream and made of people who like it. That not just anyone can join.

And, regardless. You don't deserve special treatment, you haven't earned that privilege. You earn it by being a good person and by being a good gamer.

[Grayswandir]

"Game X has skimpily clad women. Therefore it's misogynistic!"

I know, I keep bringing up Dead or Alive (A new version is coming out soon). But it surprises me that I haven't seen anything about how misogynistic the series is/isn't. I'll see the occasional quote or comment here and there when the game comes up, but is it considered "too easy" because its low hanging fruit? Its basically letting it all hang out there. They've just released the Christmas Costume Pack, which is the female (and some of the male) characters in reindeer costumes or barely wrapped in ribbon.

Hell yes.

I suppose you could consider this "bait", but I am honestly curious.

[Phoenixwarrior141]

It's not talked about because it's too blatant, or maybe it just got missed.

Meanwhile, I got 5 minutes and a sexy video. Great times ahead.

(I don't regret posting that in the slightest)