Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization.

Anything else
User avatar
Dammasta
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 1:15 pm
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow, face down in the dirt.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Dammasta » Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:54 am

As a developer, if you're scared of someone writing bad things about your games, you must not be very confident in your game making ability.

Bethesda withholding games from reviewers makes them look pretty bad, if they actually made the game really well, they shouldn't have to worry about negative reviews too much right? I mean sure, there are going to be reviews that don't like the game, but that's just because everyone has differing opinions on what they like in a game.

Bethesda boohooing over bad reviews really shows their immaturity as a developer, I hope they see this.

User avatar
Ragdollmaster
Posts: 2343
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 11:49 am
Location: Island of Lugaru

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Ragdollmaster » Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:21 am

I'm not even going to bother to read through all these posts so I apologize if some other sane soul has already pointed this out, but independent reviewers are in no way, shape, or form under obligation to try and review a game 'objectively.' The very suggestion is absurd. Short of a game being free of unintentional programming glitches and bugs, there is really no way to quantitatively assess the overall 'quality' of a game. When you go to a review site and you see them rate a game X out of 10, the reviewer is more or less rating their overall subjective enjoyment of the game. There are zero things wrong with saying, "This game was fun at the core, but it was pretty hard to appreciate it because of boobs flopping around all over the place which went against the flow and broke immersion, frankly it made me uncomfortable to play and I probably won't play it again."

And in breaking news coming in all the way from 2009, yes, a lot of major review sites are shills and most developers probably aren't fans of that. The best way to tell if you'll enjoy a game is to play it yourself or watch a gameplay video of it. It's really silly to listen to someone tell you that Call of Duty 17: The Dutying went so far above and beyond in the campaign and the extra $120 of maps is very much worth it, because that's obviously crock; conversely, certain aspects of a game can just really strike a nerve with some reviewers and they'll get so hung up over one or two "flaws" (which other people may enjoy) that they won't point out the redeeming qualities. Or hell, sometimes the reviewer will just be objectively incorrect because they'll say something like "You can't do X in the game" or "Doing X requires all these tedious steps" when in reality, maybe they just didn't pay attention to the fucking tutorial.

Also, in even more breaking news coming in from the start of time, video game "journalism" is a fucking joke, why do people still act surprised at the way the industry has "become" when really, it's pretty much always been like this.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Endoperez » Thu Oct 16, 2014 12:40 pm

Guys, what's your honest opinion about a plan to stop journalists from publishing their reviews until AFTER they release dates of games. That's right - on release day, the only information available on a game would be what the developers and publishers give out.

From a customer's point of view, would this make games journalism more or less useful?

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Thu Oct 16, 2014 12:45 pm

Less.

Since you'll probably get the most sales on day one, the more people who buy the better.

That's why press copies exist, to inform the person before release.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Endoperez » Thu Oct 16, 2014 2:21 pm

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:Less.

Since you'll probably get the most sales on day one, the more people who buy the better.

That's why press copies exist, to inform the person before release.
That's what I thought too.

GamerGate's Operation Krampus fights against press copies, and calls for Christmas boycott.


It's a pity I found out even more ridiculous stuff in the meantime, because I found even more ridiculous stuff in the meantime, and someone HAS to be crazy for this to be true. Either it's me, or I really saw a bunch of people agree that social justice warriors are:
"A controlled revolution. One that does what these people want, targets their political enemies, achieves their political goals. The Russians had this happen to them in 1917. The Germans in 1918."

They can't be serious? Why are there people acting as if they're taking that seriously? :shock:

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Thu Oct 16, 2014 5:55 pm

People are stupid, that's why this forum exists.

Anyways.

Seems as though GamerGate is going on a crusade against the SJWs.

I wonder how they'll handle this.

GET ME MORE SODA

User avatar
Dammasta
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 1:15 pm
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow, face down in the dirt.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Dammasta » Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:37 pm

This is more showing of developer's immaturity, if they honestly think holding back reviews till their games actually come out...

1. Have game developers given up on trying their very best to make good games? Reviewers aren't heartless monsters out to destroy your game with no mercy (there are a few exceptions to this, but as a majority). The only reason they would do this is because a developer is worried that people are going to read bad reviews about their game and not buy it. Maybe a solution would be to actually make your games as good as you possibly can? Then you don't really have to worry about bad reviews! (Unless you're just shit at making games)

2. Do game developers just consider all their customers to be brainless cattle? People who will just buy a game without looking at the review first? Maybe some do this, but I personally like to find out as much about a game as possible before I buy it. I'll look up multiple reviews, gameplay videos, and ask friends if they've played it yet. Pushing back review dates, yet again, is just plain stupid.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Endoperez » Fri Oct 17, 2014 1:17 am

It's not developers that are against press copie, only Gamergate.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:49 am

Endoperez wrote:It's not developers that are against press copie, only Gamergate.
For no reason, at all.

Edit: Other things:

A brief history and how we got here, starting with Gone Home (Warning, just what I heard. NOT FACTS):

Gone Home came out at a time when liberals, spearheaded by Anita Sarkeesian (Butchered her name again), where going about gaming accusing gamers of misogyny, the people behind this whole thing were generally horrible human beings who were pushing an agenda on us (Supposedly Nathan Grayson being the lead developer on Gone Home, which profited on hot button issues and got relatively okay reviews). This would lead to the creation of #GamerGate, where Zoe Quinn would be exposed for being nothing but would eventually shed light on how the websites we love are simply SJW fucks pushing agendas on us.

While GamerGate is okay, it's lead by MRAs and the most vocal part of it is MRAs, though the average gamer would side with them because SJWs MAY come into the community and shit it up like they did with Atheism+. They don't make arguments any better then the feminazis, the difference is that Feminism is a cause you can get behind, GamerGate, is not.

Gone Home would profit because of the homosexual plot (Literally) and got somewhat okay reviews by reviewers.

Zoe Quinn probably did nothing, and if she did that's no longer important, we learned that whether the developers fell to SJWism because of Zoe or if they chose Zoe to fawn over at random (Or reasons unknown), all we know is that Zoe plays a minimal part in this and instead the journalists are just SJW fucks, not much else to them. The thing is that the entire scandal brought light to the issue of SJW corruption (Rather then relationship corruption) in journalism. Without it we would not be responding like we are right now, at least if you follow it as closely as me. The entire issue though is a cluster-fuck, a lot of information (Even now that the most intricate parts have been removed) is missed and in the end all you really have to know is that GamerGate was formed in response to SJWism in gaming (However it got here is unknown, just know that it's here), Phil Fish being one of the few game developers who manages to SJW all he likes and get away with it for some reason, and is going on a crusade against SJWs, Gaming+ and whatever evil shit transpires next. Doxxing, attacking, trolling and even acts of cannibalism. God it's fucking hilarious.

Brief Note: If Anonymous decided to back out, shit has hit the fan harder then it ever could.

Summary:

SJWism is in gaming now, GamerGate is probably just as bad, it's a cluster-fuck.

And it's too much fucking fun.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Endoperez » Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:30 am

That's stupid.

"People had opinions, so Gamergate is against being a good person."

SJW is not evil. It's rude good. Claiming it's evil makes your argument ridiculous.

Gaynor not Grayson.

You didn't mention journalistic integrity, just anger at SJW... who 'someone' is attacking.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:03 pm

Endoperez wrote:That's stupid.

"People had opinions, so Gamergate is against being a good person."
GamerGate is making arguments similar to what the SJWs make, that's all you really need to know where they stand.
SJW is not evil. It's rude good. Claiming it's evil makes your argument ridiculous.
SJWism is like feminism. It's ruled by narcissistic cuntbags who decided it was a good idea to make the world better for them, attracts good people behind it's noble banner is represented by over-vocal, pretentious assholes who use this a fucking high horse.
Gaynor not Grayson.
My mistake.

You didn't mention journalistic integrity, just anger at SJW... who 'someone' is attacking.
That's intentional. Since the journalists have no integrity because they are SJW fucks.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Endoperez » Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:33 pm

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:
SJW is not evil. It's rude good. Claiming it's evil makes your argument ridiculous.
SJWism is like feminism. It's ruled by narcissistic cuntbags who decided it was a good idea to make the world better for them, attracts good people behind it's noble banner is represented by over-vocal, pretentious assholes who use this a fucking high horse.
QED.

"How dare they make the world a better place! Assholes, the lot of them, for caring."

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:58 pm

Endoperez wrote:
QED.

"How dare they make the world a better place! Assholes, the lot of them, for caring."
At the expense of others and accomplishing nothing?

Sure.

The cause itself is good, the people behind it?

Fuck them all, especially if Tumblr is part of it.

User avatar
Vespabros
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:35 pm

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Vespabros » Sat Oct 18, 2014 4:33 pm

I don't think the game should get points off for over sexualization of women in games. In fact, I'm going to take it a step further and say that they shouldn't get any flak for misrepresenting women in games at all. Why do people expect that games, made by men, predominantly for men, should represent women properly in games? Men don't identify with women.

conversely, magazines like cosmopolitan or vanity fair don't represent men properly. It doesn't represent the male point of view or male interests, and neither do video games who's target demographic is males. Men aren't women, and because of this, we don't represent women or their interests in our games. Go figure.

If women and white knights are really upset and want women to have a "correct" portrayel in video games, they should make video games.

User avatar
Glabbit
Posts: 4917
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 8:38 am
Location: A mile away, with your shoes!

Re: Polygon gives Beyonetta 2 a 7.5 because of sexualization

Post by Glabbit » Sat Oct 18, 2014 4:59 pm

Vespabros wrote:I don't think the game should get points off for over sexualization of women in games. In fact, I'm going to take it a step further and say that they shouldn't get any flak for misrepresenting women in games at all. Why do people expect that games, made by men, predominantly for men, should represent women properly in games? Men don't identify with women.

conversely, magazines like cosmopolitan or vanity fair don't represent men properly. It doesn't represent the male point of view or male interests, and neither do video games who's target demographic is males. Men aren't women, and because of this, we don't represent women or their interests in our games. Go figure.

If women and white knights are really upset and want women to have a "correct" portrayel in video games, they should make video games.
Ha. I like you.
I completely disagree with you, but I respect this solid opinion.

Post Reply