Flynn

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    234

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Flynn

  1. Posted

    He had a followup tweet speculating they might have been fulfilling a quota. What a fucking turd. Man I hate that dude. He's the smug face of douchey gamers to me.

     

    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!

  4. Posted

    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.  

  5. Posted

    The VR Wii emulator is actually amazing.  

     

    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. 

     

    Just an example I saw someone else post of this:

     

    WxS7dgT.png

  8. Posted

    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
     

    The antagonism of the gaming press toward its audience stems partly from justified outrage at the horrible behavior of a small subset of it, but also from helpless resentment toward the entirety of the press’s shrinking audience—hence the self-defeating attempt to generalize the former into the latter. Rather than stressing that the vast majority of gamers are reasonable people who don’t harass women, hold reactionary, protectionist views, or start vitriolic online campaigns against the press, the websites trashed the entire term “gamer” and, to no one’s surprise, earned 10 times the enmity overnight.



    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.

  11. Posted

    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.

  14. Posted

    I honestly don't understand any narrative that tries to vilify 4chan for supporting a charity games project designed to get a potential female designer's game pitched and developed. They put up enough money to be able to have a character in the game, so they made a character. The only way they "took their support a step further" is by donating enough money to surpass that stretch goal. The Fine Young Capitalists have received no coverage from gaming outlets, so I think for 4chan their project is an example of a place where they can have a real impact on something that is not supported by the journalists they're railing against. It's not really "an opportunity to make Quinn look bad" as the article suggests, but rather a tangible positive project the image board believes they can support.

    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.

  15. Posted

    it continues, and while trying to unpack why social justice isn't bad but why they hate people who want it, they're tantalisingly on the cusp of renaming themselves SJW+

     

     

    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.

  18. Posted

    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.  

  19. Posted

    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.  

  21. Posted

    Well, if there is an issue at $10,000 then there is an issue at some value of contribution, hence wouldn't it be threshold question rather than an issue of whether or not there is a problem with contributing to Patreon and Kickstarter? If there is a problem at $10,000, it's likely that there will be a lesser problem at $9,000, and a lesser problem at $8,000, and so on and hence is a continuous function. If that's the case then isn't this a question of establishing an appropriate threshold when a contribution potentially becomes too much of an influence?

     

    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.

  22. Posted

    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.

  24. Posted

    I think you guys are so wrapped up in this whole mess that you're not recognizing just how little value Sarkeesian is providing. She's pointing out gruesome things that happen to women in games, and you guys are losing your minds over it as if this is causing scales to fall from your eyes. You're also pretending like people want to silence her because she is bringing this critique to light, because her critics are misogynists. In reality, games are brutal generally, and Sarkeesian is just cherry picking examples that fit her agenda without providing the necessary context to actually understand what these tropes mean. She'll point out a woman who is brutally murdered in Red Dead Redemption, but totally ignore an equally brutal killing that happens to a defenseless male character in the same game. Same for Assassin's Creed, where almost all of your victims are male, yet she picks out the few women who are brutally killed. Those two games just happen to be very brutal, and pointing out that some women are killed in terrible ways while ignoring all of the men killed in terrible ways isn't interesting or beneficial critique, it's a hack job. Violence against women isn't especially used to create realism, violence generally is. 

     

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

  25. Posted

    I read John Bain’s measured take on the matter and then I looked at some of Mr Fish’s childish responses which left me shaking my head in disbelief 

     

    http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s4nmr1

     

    Total Biscuit says

     

    "Internetaristocrat did the main video on this, a channel mostly dedicated to debunking SJW topics and complaining about how prevalent they are in todays media. A fair cause for the most part, though it's a fine line to walk at the best of times."

     

    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.