Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

Yeah lets ignore thomas was alone, spec ops: the line, loneliness, and several several things.

Could someone find an entire write up of what he said?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

That's about all I got as well.

Apropos: I am really looking forward to the PC release of GTAV.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Peregrine and Hybrid please tell me your thoughts on that.

My thoughts are that it's a 10+ minute video, and I hate videos. If you can find a transcript that's actually readable (unlike that incoherent mess you posted) then I might look at it, otherwise I'm not going to support the annoying trend (on all sides of the debate, and everywhere else on the internet) of reading your article out loud in front of a camera instead of posting it in text form like a sensible person.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

That's about all I got as well.

And something that he is also a nazi in someway and that it is good to have an agenda all the time and to be biased in your reviews and get paid for it is a good thing.

Yepo.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Apropos: I am really looking forward to the PC release of GTAV.

My god the possibilities with modding O.o

Also read this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/features/12306-Female-Game-Developers-Make-Statements-on-GamerGate.2

I see their point, but I do believe that they are again generalizing and only listening to hearsay instead of, I don't know, being objective?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
What i got from that Video is Biased journalism is good, all GTA players must be tortured, gamers are all narcissistic dew drinking idiots, and Depression quest is gods gift to man.

I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

That game is so broken it is hilarious.

Also :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y419veD7M9w

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

I think trigger warnings would be great for games. Just play the ones with the most warnings

Also Milo is apparently going to release more GameJournoPros emails soon

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

I think trigger warnings would be great for games. Just play the ones with the most warnings

Also Milo is apparently going to release more GameJournoPros emails soon

There have been quite a many already amassed and thus far the other side is digging themselves to an early grave.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Well I dislike the name and phrase trigger warning. (It makes it sound new and odd, but it's not odd at all.) The idea is decent one. You wouldn't post a NSFW picture without labeling it. We label things that we worry might offend it's just a nice thing to do. I mean unless you want to surprise and shock someone, but then you should have a point to make or something.

nomotog wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Well I dislike the name and phrase trigger warning. (It makes it sound new and odd, but it's not odd at all.) The idea is decent one. You wouldn't post a NSFW picture without labeling it. We label things that we worry might offend it's just a nice thing to do. I mean unless you want to surprise and shock someone, but then you should have a point to make or something.

I think that is a stupid idea.

Why would I want players to know that something is coming? That destroys suspense and gets rid of all the tension. Right before a monster boom you are hit with a warning saying. "This scene is graphic."

That would be game breaking.

If you were told about where every jump scare occurred it would make the game stupid.

I think it should be put at the beginning of the game. But not before a cutscene or a major event or any gameplay bit.

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Well I dislike the name and phrase trigger warning. (It makes it sound new and odd, but it's not odd at all.) The idea is decent one. You wouldn't post a NSFW picture without labeling it. We label things that we worry might offend it's just a nice thing to do. I mean unless you want to surprise and shock someone, but then you should have a point to make or something.

I think that is a stupid idea.

Why would I want players to know that something is coming? That destroys suspense and gets rid of all the tension. Right before a monster boom you are hit with a warning saying. "This scene is graphic."

That would be game breaking.

If you were told about where every jump scare occurred it would make the game stupid.

I think it should be put at the beginning of the game. But not before a cutscene or a major event or any gameplay bit.

If a game includes a graphic sex scene half way through it, you really want to know that before you play it in the common room. You put these warnings on things because they are useful, They let you know if you want to consume this media or if there is a particular way you want to consume it.

Isn't that what ESRB is for?

 Cheesecat wrote:
Isn't that what ESRB is for?

Basically. The ESRB label is like a industry mandated trigger warring. (It could be done better. I mean just listing sex, nudity, blood is kind of vague. You want the context of these elements not just a check list of if they exist or not.)

ESRB warnings are there to allow consumers to make informed decisions. Trigger warnings, as they exist on places like Tumblr, are the tools of professional victims.

The ESRB is more than detailed enough and ratings in Australia are already problematic with games being banned from sale or forced to change for ridiculous reasons. There is no way they need to be made more detailed, cumbersome or stringent, certainly not to cater to "trigger warning" nonsense.

Back to the topic on hand (but yes, trigger warnings are stupid)

Not sure if these have been posted yet
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/23/good-morning-orthodoxy-1/
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/24/good-morning-orthodoxy-2/
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/25/good-morning-orthodoxy-3/
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/30/good-morning-orthodoxy-4/

That is the part I was referring to.
I still have no idea what he means starting at 7:25. Maybe the problem was not oral English here?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
ESRB warnings are there to allow consumers to make informed decisions. Trigger warnings, as they exist on places like Tumblr, are the tools of professional victims.

Very true. People seem to think they have an inalienable right to be protected against things that might offend them. I prefer the kind of country where you can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't doesn't break the law. You're free to listen or not to. No where in America's Constitution does it say "Freedom from not being offended." That's the price of free speech, you may see or hear things you don't like. Deal with it.
If someone thinks something is wrong in the gaming industry, then work to fix it, but don't try to cry victim or throw up laws to make everyone do things just how you want them. And don't shame others because they have a different point of view.

That's where the SJW comes in. They shame and force others to their viewpoint.
I for one agree that the games tend to be sexist and masochistic, but not the degree the SJW's do. I'm not going to villainize a whole group of people because they like to watch beautiful women or prefer to play male characters. I'm not going to force game makers to be politically correct. What I can do is try to shift people's opinions.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

No, you just have absolutely no clue what trigger warnings are about. It has nothing to do with "offending" people, it's about not bringing up memories of traumatic experiences without warning. For example, a discussion of racism in the recent murders might say "trigger warning: police abuse" because there's a fairly good chance that some of the people interested in that discussion might have been the victim of police abuse and don't want to be surprised by reminders of it. Adding a trigger warning lets the reader determine whether or not they want to deal with it or not before reaching it. It's really no different than adding a NSFW tag to a post so that people know to be careful about where they read it.

 Yonan wrote:
The ESRB is more than detailed enough and ratings in Australia are already problematic with games being banned from sale or forced to change for ridiculous reasons. There is no way they need to be made more detailed, cumbersome or stringent, certainly not to cater to "trigger warning" nonsense.

Do you understand the difference between labeling the content of a game and banning games based on that content? One involves giving customers an informed decision about what they buy, the other involves letting the government choose for the customer. I'll gladly admit that Australia has problems with censorship, but those problems aren't universal.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Very true. People seem to think they have an inalienable right to be protected against things that might offend them. I prefer the kind of country where you can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't doesn't break the law. You're free to listen or not to. No where in America's Constitution does it say "Freedom from not being offended." That's the price of free speech, you may see or hear things you don't like. Deal with it.

Oh good, another person who doesn't understand what freedom of speech means. You have the right to say (almost) anything you want without the government punishing you for it. You do NOT have the right to say anything you want without being criticized by other people. If someone says "I'm offended, you're a " then it is NOT a free speech issue.

And don't shame others because they have a different point of view.

So what exactly is the difference between the "SJWs" not wanting to be offended and your demand to stop shaming people as if there's a right to be protected against things that might shame them?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Why are the warnings "pathetic"? I thought it'd sort under "being a decent human being".

While we're at it, how is sexual abuse, police brutality, and murder "innocuous things"?

Read the post above Peregrine's. It explains it pretty well.

But it doesn't make sense. No one's being prevented from saying what they want, so how is this a free speech issue all of a sudden?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Read the post above Peregrine's. It explains it pretty well.

Only if by "explains it well" you mean "complains about freedom of speech when the issue has nothing to do with freedom of speech". But it does get bonus points for the hypocrisy of complaining about people acting like they're entitled to not be offended while simultaneously acting like there's a right to not be shamed. You don't usually get that argument in a typical "freedom of speech means you can't tell me that you don't like what I say" post.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Why are the warnings "pathetic"? I thought it'd sort under "being a decent human being".

While we're at it, how is sexual abuse, police brutality, and murder "innocuous things"?

I've seen people go as far as saying you should put up "trigger warnings" up to including curse words, if your fertile (Don't want to hurt those with infertility) sexuality (Incase asexuals are reading this), any sort of violence (Including self-defense up to including light taps), food (..I'm not so sure on this one, thin shaming? They were just talking about pictures of fried chicken so I'm unsure on what this would try and trigger)

I suppose I've been jaded by Tumblr, while Trigger Warnings would be good on sites that are supposed to be safe zones (Like say, violence or extreme noise on a PTSD support group site would be a valid trigger warning area), my issue is that people seem to want trigger warnings within each and every post on the internet in case of triggering someone.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Why are the warnings "pathetic"? I thought it'd sort under "being a decent human being".

While we're at it, how is sexual abuse, police brutality, and murder "innocuous things"?

I've seen people go as far as saying you should put up "trigger warnings" up to including curse words, if your fertile (Don't want to hurt those with infertility) sexuality (Incase asexuals are reading this), any sort of violence (Including self-defense up to including light taps), food (..I'm not so sure on this one, thin shaming? They were just talking about pictures of fried chicken so I'm unsure on what this would try and trigger)

I suppose I've been jaded by Tumblr, while Trigger Warnings would be good on sites that are supposed to be safe zones (Like say, violence or extreme noise on a PTSD support group site would be a valid trigger warning area), my issue is that people seem to want trigger warnings within each and every post on the internet in case of triggering someone.

Which, as you say, isn't a problem with the concept, it's a problem with idiots using it in a counterproductive manner.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I like how he wants to be warned by reviewers if he'll find something offensive in a game.

I'm guessing he could find offense in most things (except Depression Quest GOTY)

This comes back to the nonsensical notion of "trigger warnings", where you put up a warning over innocuous things that might "offend" someone. Of course, no one has the right to not be offended, making these warnings all the more pathetic.

Why are the warnings "pathetic"? I thought it'd sort under "being a decent human being".

While we're at it, how is sexual abuse, police brutality, and murder "innocuous things"?

I've seen people go as far as saying you should put up "trigger warnings" up to including curse words, if your fertile (Don't want to hurt those with infertility) sexuality (Incase asexuals are reading this), any sort of violence (Including self-defense up to including light taps), food (..I'm not so sure on this one, thin shaming? They were just talking about pictures of fried chicken so I'm unsure on what this would try and trigger)

I suppose I've been jaded by Tumblr, while Trigger Warnings would be good on sites that are supposed to be safe zones (Like say, violence or extreme noise on a PTSD support group site would be a valid trigger warning area), my issue is that people seem to want trigger warnings within each and every post on the internet in case of triggering someone.

Which, as you say, isn't a problem with the concept, it's a problem with idiots using it in a counterproductive manner.

A viewpoint of a topic can be devastating to it's use however if used harmfully for a long period of time, because after a while it will be seen as "Oh it's just that thing these Toxic groups use to try and gain superiority over one another" Rather then it's intended usage for safe zones as people will shy away from it's usage just to avoid being labelled part of said toxic groups

I do not get this whole point about trigger warning. I mean:

 MWHistorian wrote:
People seem to think they have an inalienable right to be protected against things that might offend them. I prefer the kind of country where you can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't doesn't break the law. You're free to listen or not to. No where in America's Constitution does it say "Freedom from not being offended." That's the price of free speech, you may see or hear things you don't like. Deal with it.

Yeah, you have the right to be rude. Does that mean being nice is bad? Nobody is forcing you to be right, but why would you pick on other people because they are nice? If people uses trigger warning, it is at best considerate, at worst useless. So, I see no reason to be against it. Indifferent to it, if you think they are useless? Okay. Actually opposed to it? Why on earth would you want to do that?

 MWHistorian wrote:
I'm not going to villainize a whole group of people because they like to watch beautiful women or prefer to play male characters.

Pretty much nobody is doing that. Those who are “villainized” are those that dismiss and ridicule and belittle the criticism of games. I am pretty sure someone saying “I like to watch beautiful women but I agree that the lack of equivalent male eye-candy is a bad thing”, or “I prefer to play a male character, and therefore I empathize with players that do not get to play they favorite gender most of the time” would not be villainized.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta.

Actually, for some reason, Bayonetta is very much liked by some feminists. I know about nothing about the game, so I have no idea why. The problem very, very rarely comes from the content of a single game anyway. It usually comes from trends.