A gamer, a game developer.
I play and discuss.
It would be nice if she would highlight good examples, but I don’t think she really has to. As that’s not the purpose behind the videos. It’d be nice if positives were highlighted far more than they are when topics like this appear, as they’re tangible examples of a direction that could be followed. They present an action.
But hey, her videos aren’t going to be perfect. It’s a criticism, a solid one, but not one that is really that big of a deal considering that it doesn’t really negate her point. And I don’t see how they’d make her point stronger.
For the ones supposedly proven by science, I think they’re currently open to debate. If we’re talking influence, it’d be absurd to say media doesn’t influence us, the clearest example of this would be advertising. That’s the entire purpose of advertising.
Whether or not these depictions of women influence men or boys to behave a particular way, has been theorised to be both true as well as false. We know media influences, but to these extremes, and to a healthy mind, we don’t know.
If someone was putting these critiques together in a reasonable format, then they’re valid and to be discussed. Problem is, they often aren’t. And if they are, on the rare occasions that they are, any worthwhile discussion is often drowned out by anger and aggression.
It’s not being called to be banned. The underlying request, is that more choices are presented, because these are tropes. They’re tired and familiar. Some new, something different. That doesn’t mean that they should no longer exists, but they fact that they are present so often, means that something new should be presented as well.
Also, there are very few decent criticisms of her work. Most talk about cherry picking, but that’s the entire point. The videos are to highlight tropes against women, nothing more.
Some ask that it should show men, but that isn’t the point of the videos. They’re simply created to show tropes against women, that’s all. They’re there to highlight games, which have common themes and common representations of women.
Thing is, she is criticising games, people are criticising her character. There’s a bit of a difference there. I’m pretty sure she has nothing against people criticising her work, but she just wants it without all of the name calling and threats. Those are not criticism, and they’re not critiques of her work.
Also, your second point is bullshit. These are consumer goods, with that, they’re open do criticism and feedback like any consumer product.
People are pretty great people. Rational, intelligent people are great to talk to.
The people who won’t have an active and useful conversation, are the ones misusing the labels.
Look, most people want sexy.
If you look into feminism, there’s a huge part about embracing sexuality. Sexy is fine. Speak to feminists, they like sexy.
It’s fine to have audiences, too.
The crux of this whole argument, is that people want more content diversity. That’s about it in a nutshell.
There’s a whole lot more nuance, but you need to at least be fully aware of what is actually being asked before you can argue against it.
Perhaps this will happen, but it doesn’t need to happen yet.
If you watch the videos, the tropes being shown are there. It can’t be denied. Let’s review and digest. There’s a bunch I disagree with, but I’m okay holding onto my guns for now, as any level of rationale discussion will get drowned out.
It’s not just some people closing down the debate from the supporting side that are the problem in having this discussion now, but the fact that the loudest voices in opposition are offering really weak arguments or just being rude.
If she is using video footage created by others (a claim I have heard a couple of times), I would want this to be addressed as soon as possible. But the rest, I can wait.
Her videos are more a case of pointing out what is there, so for now, there’s no a whole lot to critique at this point.
She’s not trying to unite folks. Her series is to highlight tropes, that’s all. What you take from that is entirely up to you.
She will also add her opinions on where she stands, those being (from what I gather): are to support greater diversity in games, and not to rely on tropes that are sexist, objective and dated.
A lot of folks have watched the videos, and have become more aware of these tropes. In response, they would like to see greater variety, too.
To me, the what they have mentioned is something that anyone with even an ounce of rationale would support. So I don’t see a great deal of weight behind this whole petition/letter.
It’s nice, sure, but it’s reactionary and it’s fairly shallow.
I’m sure it’ll make a bunch of people happy for a little bit, but it’s not changing anything.
Unfortunately, it’s understandable…
- Localization (even if they re-use the old one, it needs to be reviewed again) (8+ weeks – longer if redone entirely)
- Asset creation (not everything is text) (4+ weeks)
- Integration (6+ weeks)
- Testing and Localization testing (14+ weeks)
- Bug fix and regression cycles (above)
- Marketing (cost)
- Packaging (cost)
- Delivery and distribution (cost)
- Re-submission to Nintendo, and license cost (cost)
This is taking into account only 1 or 2 languages. Depends how many they’d want to do. But you can x2 the cost + time based on the amount of languages added. It comes to quite a lot of money.
Would it sell? Yeah, probably. But would it sell enough to not only cover costs, but to make a profit making it worthwhile to produce in the first place? Obviously S-E doesn’t think so.
It makes the world go around… and around… and around… and shit I’m KING OF THE GOD DAMN WORLD.
One correction: He’s actually been making games for quite a while before, on large development teams. Just Braid was his first successful solo effort.
I can’t justify one unless I’ve moved back to the U.K., or another supported country. Otherwise, it’s just too much hassle. Which is a shame, because I love my DS.
Yes, Blow actually had some fairly constructive feedback.
Still can’t buy into the 3DS until it’s region free.
I think the idea the naming of the new 3DS is iffy, I think fact that it’ll split the userbase is lining up for some trouble, but it’s hard to deny that the console is pretty solid.
No, seriously, I do.
I know why this is done, I know why it’s attractive to consumers and the audience. I mean, they’re cute looking toys.
But I also know that it can be used to thin content, because additional revenue can be generated.
I’m shiny, too.
Eh… J. Blow… kinda expected that this is what he’d be saying. The guy doesn’t really seem to have much of an interest in how certain people play or what they enjoy, but, like many, he tends to have plenty of opinions about those people.
I want to see The Witness, but he’s just too single minded, or at least that’s how he comes across via Twitter.
I don’t think there is any harm in being transparent, right?
It’s not saying that people can’t do whatever they want with their money, just that they disclose what could be considered relevant. In the event that a reporter interviews someone they support via Patreon, I think that disclosure would be suitable.