723 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

I doubt you are only guy called SJW here though.

it is made somewhat more ironic by my own stances on numerous issues

[Nefla]

Ah the typical female "argument" of insulting a man's sexuality. Whatever narrative you want. 

 

Oh women do play video games. Most of them are just attention whores about it and few actually care about the games they play

 

I am married thanks

Re-read the post you quoted, I never said anything about your sexuality and if you knew me you would know that I would never use someone's sexuality as an insult. What I said was you probably don't know very many women and your reply is only reinforcing that. You can't empathize with women and categorize them all into "attention whores." "My mom, grandma, and the woman I tricked into marrying me don't play video games so no women do and those that claim to are all attention whores!" If you actually knew and befriended a large number of women, you'd know that women are individuals just like men and aren't some unknowable legion of Borg.

 

I was told that Witcher has made some changes in response to criticism. Is it true that they removed the cards that could be collected for each woman Geralt slept with and admitted that the cards were a mistake? If so, sounds like CDPR is responding to feminist criticisms. I still haven't played the game as I'm not interested in playing a male character but I might play future games if they offer a chance to play as a woman.

 

ETA: Oh, well, maybe not if the game is as sexist as Panda says.

I never played the first game (no interest) but my friend pestered me into getting the second and while I enjoyed the branching story and political intrigue, I can tell you that there was a lot of fanservice and women throwing themselves at Geralt left and right and the one gay character was a really gross villain (and possible rapist) who ends up dying in a way that made me say out loud "wow, this game really hates gay people " When playing TW3 though, you could tell that they realized not only straight men play their games and they actually made the female characters...well characters (though they're still all beautiful). The fanservice is optional, you can play as Geralt's daughter for large portions of the game (and she's not a helpless damsel but a fighter). You could tell that they really tried and it made the whole thing better imo. The game itself is fantastic from the story to the characters to the interesting sidequests, to the gorgeous maps and music. I highly recommend it and can't wait for the expansion/DLC in a few weeks (and you don't need to play the other two games to understand the plot, each game has a mostly separate story)

 

I always wonder if people can guess my gender at first from my name/posts/avi.

 

 

That being said, on the internet everyone assumes you're a dude until proven otherwise.

I've always assumed you were a woman, but I admit that I don't think too hard on a poster's gender.

[BansheeOwnage]

The Witcher universe is not sexist. It is realistic.

You say that like they can't go together?

[PhroXenGold]

The setting of The Witcher is unquestionably sexist. And yet that's not necessarily a bad thing (it's not automatically a good thing either though). It can allow for many interesting storytelling opportunities and, in settings inspired by societies that were discriminatory, can add a degree of authenticity. Sexism existing in the setting is no different from fascism existing in a game set in WW2 Germany.

 

The problem is when a game (or other form of media) goes beyond containing sexism (or racism or any other form of discrimination) and moves into promoting it, presenting it as a positive thing - to take the fascism example further, if the game presented a die hard Waffen SS fanatic as a hero and his beliefs as positive, that would go beyond featuring Nazis, into promoting their ideology (which, I hope, pretty much everyone here would agree is not a good thing).

 

And The Witcher does at times (not always by any means) end up the wrong side of this line when it comes to sexism - when it goes beyond merely having a sexist world, into actually putting forward a sexist message. The sex cards in the first game are one of the more egregious example, but there are various others throughout the games. Hell, the entire "every woman wants to shag Geralt" is pretty iffy (once you get over the fact that that aspect of the character seems to have been designed by a horny 12 year old). Overall though, CDPR do seem to be moving in the right direction with regards this as from what I've heard, it's not nearly as bad as in the first game (I despised the combat in 2, so could never finish it, and so I've not bothered with 3 as by all accounts that aspect of the game is similar).

[Ryzaki]

Welp I'm glad CDPR is successful. Hopefully that'll mean they'll make games people want to see and BW will continue to make games I want to see and they'll both be successful and everyone can be happy.

 

Oh who am I kidding. People will whine and demand each game be like the other anyway.

[BansheeOwnage]

This thread used to be entertaining. Now it's just a debate with people who seem obsessed with exaggerating the differences between men and women, because they're incapable of accepting that we're not that different, especially in any meaningful way. It would be like a white supremacist being in denial about black people not actually being fundamentally different from white people, because they're scared of the possibility that people are just people.

 

Also, sorry if that example starts a flame-war or something. I'm not the best with analogies.

[o Ventus]

No. Men and women have very different brains, differing patterns of distribution of grey and white matter for example as well as volume. men typically have more grey matter than women and different connections. Men tend to be better at spatial tasks from day one, which suggests selection pressures that led to that, which is reflected in the data on male and female brain differences. Greater spatial ability is correlated with a greater affinity for engineering. If you are genuinely interested I will post a link.

 

http://www.cam.ac.uk...rain-structures

 

Unfortunately researchers are terrified of talking about this because they are attacked by progressives claiming "neurosexism".

 

It's only a matter of time until feminists begin to claim that anatomy and physiology is sexist and serves the patriarchy.

[o Ventus]

Don't call extremists of that kind "progressive", o Ventus.

 

Extreme progress (progressivism?) is still progress.

 

As for your statement, apparently this is an interesting topic to talk about for many.

 

Maybe to pseudo-intellectuals who want to "study" people by over-examining choices made in a piece of fictional entertainment, sure, but I thoroughly detest those people because they have a tendency to gauge and guess at my intent and motivations based on the buttons I press.

 

I, for one, am interested to know why some people only play their own gender, since I find that limiting.

 

By "limiting", I assume you mean in the context of role-playing. In that case, I can't say I particularly care. If that's the reason for the topic, then by all means, because that's actually related to the game and not stupid armchair psychology like I know some other posters like to engage in.

[The Night Haunter]

Welp I'm glad CDPR is successful. Hopefully that'll mean they'll make games people want to see and BW will continue to make games I want to see and they'll both be successful and everyone can be happy.

 

Oh who am I kidding. People will whine and demand each game be like the other anyway.

Homogenization is the path to the future! Just ask EA. The sooner every game plays exactly like CoD the sooner everyone in the world is satisfied!

 

 

[o Ventus]

Homogenization is the path to the future! Just ask EA. The sooner every game plays exactly like CoD the sooner everyone in the world is satisfied!

 

 

 

Especially since EA neither has anything to do with Call of Duty, nor has published any games that even particularly play like Call of Duty (outside Titanfall, which all but fell dead in the water a month after it released).

[The Night Haunter]

Especially since EA neither has anything to do with Call of Duty, nor has published any games that even particularly play like Call of Duty (outside Titanfall, which all but fell dead in the water a month after it released).

I present.... Battlefield! The other side of the CoD coin!

[o Ventus]

I present.... Battlefield! The other side of the CoD coin!

 

 

Battlefield, a series that places rather heavy emphasis on squad-based play, comparatively slower-paced infantry fighting, and the use of vehicles (and also doesn't have any kind of Deathmatch mode, from the Battlefields I've played), is "the other side of the coin" with a series that gives no incentive to teamplay whatsoever, infantry fighting that is practically FTL with how fast it is, and features no vehicles to speak of?

 

About the only things that they share (aside from the genre) are that they both have Bay-esque campaigns and are published by widely-hated companies. That doesn't actually make them similar games.

[The Night Haunter]

Battlefield, a series that places rather heavy emphasis on squad-based play, comparatively slower-paced infantry fighting, and the use of vehicles (and also doesn't have any kind of Deathmatch mode, from the Battlefields I've played), is "the other side of the coin" with a series that gives no incentive to teamplay whatsoever, infantry fighting that is practically FTL with how fast it is, and features no vehicles to speak of?

 

About the only things that they share (aside from the genre) are that they both have Bay-esque campaigns and are published by widely-hated companies. That doesn't actually make them similar games.

Well this is just my personal experience, but older BF games where far different from modern ones (especially the robbers vs cops one that is kinda new, hardline?), and they've been moving more towards the CoD style run around and shoot, but I don't play FPS much so take it as you will, I just enjoyed 1941 much more than BF3.

[Ryzaki]

Homogenization is the path to the future! Just ask EA. The sooner every game plays exactly like CoD the sooner everyone in the world is satisfied!

 

 

 

Wouldn't that be shooter? Even if it was true? XD

[Donk]

I always wonder if people can guess my gender at first from my name/posts/avi.

 

 

With such beauty, I knew you had to be a woman..

[The Night Haunter]

With such beauty, I knew you had to be a woman..

Hey men can beautiful too! Wait... hmm..... alright maybe not.

 

 

j/k Maybe (:

[Ieldra]

Maybe to pseudo-intellectuals who want to "study" people by over-examining choices made in a piece of fictional entertainment, sure, but I thoroughly detest those people because they have a tendency to gauge and guess at my intent and motivations based on the buttons I press.

This can be a valid method in social research. Competent researchers, however, will be aware of the limitations of their methods and not make exaggerated claims. I don't know much about social research, but in the field I'm working we're expected to elaborate on the limitations of our methologies so it becomes completely clear what our studies do and do not claim. A very common flaw of those faux experts you're talking about is to ignore the input of the subject, basically claiming they know more about how you feel and think than you do. That is indeed obnoxious, and I share your dislike of the type. At the very least, in order to legitimately claim such a thing, much closer contact and much more detailed knowledge is needed than is possible over the internet.
 

By "limiting", I assume you mean in the context of role-playing. In that case, I can't say I particularly care. If that's the reason for the topic, then by all means, because that's actually related to the game and not stupid armchair psychology like I know some other posters like to engage in.

The reason for the topic is that someone assumed we're all playing ourselves in a fantasy world when we play a game like DAI, and consequently, his observation that there are many female Inquisitors conflicted with the known fact that most players of video rpgs are men (it is still a fact as far as I'm aware of). Which led to the often-asked question why male players play female characters, and from there it all spiralled out of control as these topics tend to do.

@all:
Another interesting question related to this is: how muchs self-inserting do you actually do? I can say for myself that my "main" characters tend to share some fundamental values with me, and that there are character traits almost none of my characters ever have because I dislike them too much IRL. However, that still leaves quite a range, and I don't think I've ever perceived any of my characters as "just me in a fantasy world". I always take the lore into account that makes the fictional world different from the real world, and how that influences my characters-

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

It's only a matter of time until feminists begin to claim that anatomy and physiology is sexist and serves the patriarchy.

They already have. This is referred to as "neurosexism".

[Panda]

@all:
Another interesting question related to this is: how muchs self-inserting do you actually do? I can say for myself that my "main" characters tend to share some fundamental values with me, and that there are character traits almost none of my characters ever have because I dislike them too much IRL. However, that still leaves quite a range, and I don't think I've ever perceived any of my characters as "just me in a fantasy world". I always take the lore into account that makes the fictional world different from the real world, and how that influences my characters-

 

Close to none. I think I can somewhat call one of my Shepards self-insert with how I played her, I think it might be cause her personality and choices were close to mine in the end. Usually I think about personality of my character and bit of backstory before making them and then going with that and I want to play game with making different choices and different kind of characters so I make my characters quite different from each other, gotta have both paragon and renegade characters

[Ieldra]

Really? It was only a matter of time before racism accusations were made against-
 
https://en.wikipedia...hilippe_Rushton
 
And his compelling race vs. IQ research- "Rushton was a proponent of that idea that racial differences in IQ are partially related to genetic inheritance. Research areas includes brain size, effects of inbreeding depression on IQ, and effects of admixture"

Read the section "Opinions". Not that it should matter for the evaluation of his scientific work, but calling him a racist appears to be somewhat correct.

As for the theories, I'm not an expert but while the theory on genetic similarity and altruism appears plausible given the information in the article, the theory on intelligence and race looks dodgy to me. It goes against a few widely accepted theories and even with the little information from the article, I'd be inclined to question his methodology in social research and would require a close and critical look at the details before I accepted it. Have you read his work? Calling it "compelling" just from the article is not justified.
 

That said at birth, men and women both have the same ability to accomplish math and engineering skills at the same level with the right tools, teaching, and encouragement. To say otherwise is sexist. 
 
http://www.pbs.org/n...the-gender-gap/

Actually, the article does not claim that. If I may quote: "Inherent differences between the genders can explain some, but not all of it, she says." What it does claim is that the hurdles women face if they want to get into traditionally male fields are mostly cultural and social. This is notably different from your attempt at paraphrasing the results, and consistent with another study result: that most schoolchildren and students (99%) never reach the limits imposed by their genes in education, which means that genetic differences begin to account for differences in competence only in the top 1st percentile.

As for the other article, I'll get back once I've given it a closer look.....OK, one of main results is "higher variability in math performnace in males compared to females corresponds with measures of gender inequality". You would expect such an outcome in any scenario where gender equality or its absence has a significant influence on the distribution of math competence between genders. So we can conclude - assuming that the statistical methods used correct for confounding influences - that gender inequality is an important factor contributing to the difference. You can not conclude it is the only factor. [reading on]. Here's the main conclusion: "We conclude that gender inequality, not greater male variability, is the primary reason fewer females than males are identified as excelling in mathematics at the high and highest levels in most countries." This is very significant, and it's indeed a slap in the face of the more extreme essentialists, but the statement also has its limits.

 

BTW, thank you for posting the link, especially for the second article. That was interesting reading. I didn't think it was possible to gather evidence this signficant.

[Fredward]

@all:
Another interesting question related to this is: how muchs self-inserting do you actually do? I can say for myself that my "main" characters tend to share some fundamental values with me, and that there are character traits almost none of my characters ever have because I dislike them too much IRL. However, that still leaves quite a range, and I don't think I've ever perceived any of my characters as "just me in a fantasy world". I always take the lore into account that makes the fictional world different from the real world, and how that influences my characters-

 

Basically exactly the same. There might be some things I never do and my characters happen to not do them either, sometimes their motivations and justifications align with mine sometimes they're radically different but I still do some level of self-insertion in not  doing X. The characters are never me though, they have distinct personalities and reasons for being and doing. Different experiences. I actually find the idea of playing a self-insert fundamentally off kilter somehow. When I consider it my brain just goes 'bzzzt, does not compute.'

[Majestic Jazz]

So, now being progressive means not playing Caucasian women?

And people wonder why even reasonable, fair-minded people occasionally react with scorn to this obsession with representation. This is actually worth a considerable rant, but it's not worth the energy I'd have to expend to write one. This isn't progressive, this is ideological narrowmindedness, exactly the opposite of progressive.

I play what I want. If that happens to be the character I've posted, that's a personal preference and not a political statement. This incessant politicizing of everything gets on my nerves.

http://www.flamewarr...shtm/issues.htm

But am I wrong about white women dominating videogame female characters as opposed to black female characters?

I think we get a better representation of black males than we do with females in videogames.

My statement was an honest observation. Take it how you want black women are VERY underrepresented in videogames.

People talk about seeing a female character being used in Bioware marketing cause women are underrepresented as opposed to everything being male but nobody says about black wome. (Or other races) being underreepresented as opposed to white women.

Fair assessement.

[Ieldra]

Close to none. I think I can somewhat call one of my Shepards self-insert with how I played her, I think it might be cause her personality and choices were close to mine in the end. Usually I think about personality of my character and bit of backstory before making them and then going with that and I want to play game with making different choices and different kind of characters so I make my characters quite different from each other, gotta have both paragon and renegade characters

Did you have extremes of blue and red? I found the extremes to be StupidShep (blue) or Assh*leShep (red), and neither appealed to me.