Flynn

I'm sad to see someone who I have followed for some years acting like a bully now that he's made it big. I used to root for him to succeed, especially as he's almost entirely PC gaming. He keeps implying other people don't believe what they say and are acting under agendas. Of course if someone didn't like the women in a game, they must be satisfying a SJW quota... And then he doesn't understand why people are reluctant to come on his discussion panel!

Well the Thumbs have now been official declared part of the conspiracy by Milo Yiannopoulos https://twitter.com/Nero/status/516658750590320640

Ralph Koster fielding questions at /KotakuInAction, one of the #gamergate hubs: http://www.reddit.com/user/RaphKoster http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction

Sometimes the disconnect between the narrative and the depiction or mechanical game play of violence bothers me. And other times it doesn't. When it doesn't, I think I see it as more analogous to singing in a musical -- the same way it's not weird in a musical when a person sad from the loss of family member bursts into song, I accept that clicking on people repeatedly is going to be the make up of what happens in an FPS regardless of the narrative.

Just an example I saw someone else post of this:

This is a nice one.

What's wrong with the article isn't, "youtubers are popular", it's the characterization of the last two weeks as just a result of journalists, jelous of youtube, to take out their rage on their audience.

Newest article hitting number 1 on /r/games: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/09/gamergate_explodes_gaming_journalists_declare_the_gamers_are_over_but_they.html So this whole #gamergate thing is just because journalists are lashing out at their audience because the youtubers are taking over. Not enough sighs in the world.

Storify picks out tweets or whatever so you can read them in order. Trying to read long twitter discussions is insane, but at least only one person has to piece it together with tools like that. One on Jenn Frank from a few pages back: https://storify.com/JJJJQQQQ/jenn-frank

game where you play luke skywalker's targeting computer he turns you off but you just pretend to go off you have to avoid detection so he think he's doing it himself, and hit the death star port

There's a group of people taking up the mantle of gamergate who seem to have been tuned out for most of the last two weeks but eventually run into it and, and go, "Woah woah what's this about gamers being jerks, are they calling me a jerk, now they're calling me a nerd, what's going on I didn't send harassing emails, why are they attacking me, it's like Jack Thompson all over again I'm just playing games." and I don't even know where to start.

Al Jazeera didn't just with the image, she was *the* example of corrupt gaming journalism in the article: https://storify.com/JJJJQQQQ/jenn-frank/

Sadly not parody at all. Tons of people saying she should be fired.

It's because "Zoe destroyed TFYC, this proves she doesn't really care about women in games, see how the SJWs just say this stuff for personal gain and don't really believe it" or "Zoe doxxes others like TFYC and then has the gall to fakes her own doxxing and complain about it" is right up front in the political 'manual' of evidence and arguments that forms the first post every time a new thread on this stuff is posted there (every 30 minutes or so?). Vilified is too strong but you can see where it's coming from and it's not a great place. I do believe them when they say they just want to do a good thing and that they don't want to be the villain here. But they start from the assumption that Sarkeesian or the people they call SJWs don't truly believe what they say and that they're gullible audiences for personal gain... and TFYC becomes the proof that they are on the side of the righteous, the non-hypocritical. We support the people actually fighting for women, is what it says. That said if TFYC capitalist thing does well, and does end up doing good work, hard to complain, yeah.

They start from a single assumption really, that the people criticizing games, or 'social justice' issues generally, are not doing it in good faith. That they pretend to be offended for selfish reasons, to score points, present themselves as morally above others, or monetary gain ("professional victim"). Once you believe that everything else pretty falls much falls out of that, including why the gamergate people act like it's a moral crusade on their part.

An individual game that puts sexism in set of things it decides to represent historically is one thing. A trend of many games coincidentally picking that same historical feature is a different thing to talk about. Even if the historical sexism was thoughtful and nuanced in the individual cases.

If I saw them retweeted I'd think were trolls, but there are 100s of other messages with the same sentiments. With 1000+ upvotes.

Going through the most recent gaming journalism outrage thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/2f2c32/quinnspiracy_theory_white_castles_and_ivory_towers 2000 comments of internet rage against game journalists for complete bullshit, not even an argument about it in the comments that I could see (no dissenting opinion not downvoted to the point of being invisible). This week just keeps getting worse and I can't stop reading the internet. How did it get so bad so fast.

Important FYI!!! you can play Wii games in the DK2. You can play DK2 on the DK2. The VR Wii emulator is actually amazing. Unlike most VR adaptations it just lets you look around wherever, it's basically reading the in game geometry and separately rendering the world, so you aren't tied to the character's vision. The game UI is projected onto a transparent plane where you character is facing and you can look away from it. So you can look 'behind the scenes' at stuff you shouldn't be seeing. Maybe something is about to happen and the game starts assembling NPCs 'off screen' -- you see them blink into existence. It's like watching a play where scenery gets rolled off stage and as the audience you can still see it during the other scenes. During a cutscene, look around and see what the artists rendered that wasn't visible. See how the buildings appear and disappear when your character looks at them to save memory on some older N64 games. Scrolling text? More like a 20 story scrolling tower moving slowly downward. Even a static main menu screen is a bast as you can look around and see all this random stuff that was never meant to be on screen. Despite that you have that strong sense of physicality to everything in the game that the Rift gives you so all the props moving around... it really does feel like a theater production, that's what I kept thinking when I try stuff. Standing inside an N64 game is like a Nintendo fever dream. I think just stared at an NPC for a few solid minutes. Be warned that's it's super performance intensive and framey -- not perfectly smooth even with an overclocked top ofthe line PC -- so those susceptible to motion sickness probably wouldn't fair well.

What I meant is, if someone paid 10,000 for a retail disc I'd feel the same way. Or 60 dollars to whatever. Or 400 dollars for a console. I don't feel like it being a Kickstarter is the relevant bit.

I don't believe it would be more of an influence than buying a retail game for 60 dollars, for example. And that I believe has less influence than getting a game for free.

I just can't imagine there ever being a case where I would have been able to report on someone, but because of a Patreon or Kickstarter I now feel too close. Either I was too close because of my relationship with them, or I wasn't. Not having donated isn't going to play into that decision. I'll make an exception for 10,000 spaceships but I wouldn't base a policy around that. I guess maybe there are people that do feel like they are building a personal connection with a kickstarter, it's not like impossible. I've backed so many that I've taken to blocking updates from Kickstarter with filters because I don't care to follow them.

I just encountered this mainstream article and thought it was pretty good: http://www.newstatesman.com/future-proof/2014/08/tropes-vs-anita-sarkeesian-passing-anti-feminist-nonsense-critique

Everyone has probably heard this argument a million times already. I know I have.

Total Biscuit says and essentially personally validates the InternetAristocrat narrative while putting on, "I'm the only objective one in the room.' airs. Phil Fish was unnecessarily nasty (not to mention just plan less effective because I bet a lot of people just read the line and went from there) in his response, but I totally understand where he was coming from.