![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Nov. 13th, 2014
Tropes vs Women in Video Games
Nov. 13th, 2014 04:29 pmYou know what? Screw it. I'm just going to post the "Tropes vs Women in Video Games" videos right here. Up to now, I'd only watched the first one back when it was first posted last year, and didn't really feel the need to watch the rest, because she wasn't telling me anything I didn't already know, but I went ahead and watched the rest of them today.
( Multiple Youtube videos behind cut )
So let's just be clear here. Whether you agree with the above videos or not, keep in mind that this, in large part, is the sort of thing that GamerGate supporters[1] are trying to suppress through the use of rape/death threats and "doxxing" against people like Ms. Sarkeesian. This is what GamerGate doesn't want people to see. (But, actually, it's about ethics in games journalism, amirite?)
I've played several of the games that are depicted in the above videos, such as Red Dead Redemption. RDR is probably my favorite game made by Rockstar. Still, with that said, I'm not even going to begin to try to deny that what Ms. Sarkeesian says is true about RDR or any of the other games shown. I'm not going to try to mitigate it or rationalize it or justify it or whatever. She's right, plain and simple. I may not be Sarkeesian's biggest fan in the world, but I still think she's right in what she's saying here. Shit's terrible.
But is it really as bad as she makes it out to be? A few months ago, I probably would have told you no, it's not. But in light of all the recent GamerGate bullshit, I'm much more inclined now to believe that she does indeed have a point, that maybe it really is that bad, and that the misogynistic asshats in the GamerGate movement are a direct consequence and example of this sort of thing (and that, ultimately, perhaps I need to reassess my own less-than-favorable opinion of Ms. Sarkeesian herself, primarily because most of the "proof" that supposedly "debunked" her that I read in the past all came from the same sort of assholes who are now GamerGate supporters, and I'd simply took that shit at face value until now).
I'm not saying that video games made these people into misogynistic asshats, any more than I believe violence in video games "trains" people to be terrorists or serial killers or whatever. I just think that, in this case at least, people who were already misogynistic asshats are simply using this whole thing as an excuse to be even bigger misogynistic asshats, that's all.
[1] - Unless, of course, you buy into the bullshit that it's not actually GamerGate supporters sending those threats and doxxing women and such, but really some kind of ridiculous false flag thing staged by anti-GamerGate people.
( Multiple Youtube videos behind cut )
So let's just be clear here. Whether you agree with the above videos or not, keep in mind that this, in large part, is the sort of thing that GamerGate supporters[1] are trying to suppress through the use of rape/death threats and "doxxing" against people like Ms. Sarkeesian. This is what GamerGate doesn't want people to see. (But, actually, it's about ethics in games journalism, amirite?)
I've played several of the games that are depicted in the above videos, such as Red Dead Redemption. RDR is probably my favorite game made by Rockstar. Still, with that said, I'm not even going to begin to try to deny that what Ms. Sarkeesian says is true about RDR or any of the other games shown. I'm not going to try to mitigate it or rationalize it or justify it or whatever. She's right, plain and simple. I may not be Sarkeesian's biggest fan in the world, but I still think she's right in what she's saying here. Shit's terrible.
But is it really as bad as she makes it out to be? A few months ago, I probably would have told you no, it's not. But in light of all the recent GamerGate bullshit, I'm much more inclined now to believe that she does indeed have a point, that maybe it really is that bad, and that the misogynistic asshats in the GamerGate movement are a direct consequence and example of this sort of thing (and that, ultimately, perhaps I need to reassess my own less-than-favorable opinion of Ms. Sarkeesian herself, primarily because most of the "proof" that supposedly "debunked" her that I read in the past all came from the same sort of assholes who are now GamerGate supporters, and I'd simply took that shit at face value until now).
I'm not saying that video games made these people into misogynistic asshats, any more than I believe violence in video games "trains" people to be terrorists or serial killers or whatever. I just think that, in this case at least, people who were already misogynistic asshats are simply using this whole thing as an excuse to be even bigger misogynistic asshats, that's all.
[1] - Unless, of course, you buy into the bullshit that it's not actually GamerGate supporters sending those threats and doxxing women and such, but really some kind of ridiculous false flag thing staged by anti-GamerGate people.
"Why Dota Sucks"
Nov. 13th, 2014 05:45 pm(EDIT)
1. Why I Am a Dota Expert
2. The Crude Birth of a Genre
3. The Camera
4. Scope, Scale, and War
5. Auto-Attacking
6. The Chess Pieces
7. Complexity Through Choice
8. Balance
9. Dota Obscura
10. Dota and Teamwork
11. Why Dota is "Toxic"
12. Why Dota is Acclaimed
13. Why Dota is Popular
Conclusion
And it's finished. I'll probably be going back and rereading this thing as a whole and then editing this post into a much more in-depth sort of thing at some point. Don't know when I'll get around to that though, and it'll probably be a while. (EDIT 2) Or, you know, never. (/EDIT 2)
(/EDIT)
Michael Lowell doesn't post often, but when he does, it's almost always worth a read (and this is just the part one introductory stuff, with more parts to come later). In this case, he articulates many of the reasons why I, personally, feel that "professional e-sports" is such a damn joke, and why games built entirely around "e-sports" are not necessarily as good as the self-proclaimed "experts" say they are. I've never played a MOBA game myself, so I couldn't tell you if they were genuinely good or bad, and I don't claim to be able to do so either. All I can tell you is that I have, and will always have, zero interest in playing such games, because the very concept of a "multiplayer online battle arena" holds no appeal to me whatsoever. Hell, I would play (and, indeed, have played, quite extensively*) a MMO game before I would play a MOBA game, and as I have said many times in the past, I generally loathe most MMO games.
* - Though, admittedly, I still play STO almost exclusively as a singleplayer game, aside from the occasional multiplayer PvE Borg invasion events, and I am glad that the game is designed well enough that it allows me to do so in an enjoyable manner. I tried a PvP event once, and only once, and I hated it so much that I warped out before it had barely even gotten underway.
1. Why I Am a Dota Expert
2. The Crude Birth of a Genre
3. The Camera
4. Scope, Scale, and War
5. Auto-Attacking
6. The Chess Pieces
7. Complexity Through Choice
8. Balance
9. Dota Obscura
10. Dota and Teamwork
11. Why Dota is "Toxic"
12. Why Dota is Acclaimed
13. Why Dota is Popular
Conclusion
And it's finished. I'll probably be going back and rereading this thing as a whole and then editing this post into a much more in-depth sort of thing at some point. Don't know when I'll get around to that though, and it'll probably be a while. (EDIT 2) Or, you know, never. (/EDIT 2)
(/EDIT)
Michael Lowell doesn't post often, but when he does, it's almost always worth a read (and this is just the part one introductory stuff, with more parts to come later). In this case, he articulates many of the reasons why I, personally, feel that "professional e-sports" is such a damn joke, and why games built entirely around "e-sports" are not necessarily as good as the self-proclaimed "experts" say they are. I've never played a MOBA game myself, so I couldn't tell you if they were genuinely good or bad, and I don't claim to be able to do so either. All I can tell you is that I have, and will always have, zero interest in playing such games, because the very concept of a "multiplayer online battle arena" holds no appeal to me whatsoever. Hell, I would play (and, indeed, have played, quite extensively*) a MMO game before I would play a MOBA game, and as I have said many times in the past, I generally loathe most MMO games.
* - Though, admittedly, I still play STO almost exclusively as a singleplayer game, aside from the occasional multiplayer PvE Borg invasion events, and I am glad that the game is designed well enough that it allows me to do so in an enjoyable manner. I tried a PvP event once, and only once, and I hated it so much that I warped out before it had barely even gotten underway.
*facepalm*
If your game (or genre) is one where "toxicity" is an actual thing, and you're feeling the need to hand out tangible rewards to players just for displaying basic human decency toward other players, then that says quite a lot about your game (or genre) and the people who play it.
If your game (or genre) is one where "toxicity" is an actual thing, and you're feeling the need to hand out tangible rewards to players just for displaying basic human decency toward other players, then that says quite a lot about your game (or genre) and the people who play it.