687 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Why would you spoiler the ending of a game for yourself which isn't even out?

Because ME3

[78stonewobble]

1. Actually plenty of reputable studies exist wherinwhich the affect media has on behavior is measured. Your mistake (and a lot of others') is in assuming that it's an immediate effect of X = Y, it's not. It's gradual and incremental. Consuming violent media is unlikely to make you violent. Consuming a lot violent media + a bunch of other things like an abusive household, access to weapons, behavioral problems, bullying and etc might.

 

BTWs: Just from googling media and psychology you get oodles of hits, I could furbish you with some if you'd like. It's not really in question whether or not the media has an influence on behavior/attitude/thinking, it's just a question of how.

 

 

2. Tell me. With this whole vote with the wallet mentality you've got going on. Why do you suppose these people adapt their work? Assuming they do.

3. And it's not asking someone to not sell fish as much as it is also asking to maybe sell beef too. And only if no one else is selling beef. Or beef sales are too niche and I really wanna steak and not go down that weird narrow alley with the leering faces.

 

1. And you are forgetting, that most normal people, the average person, have a multitude of input from other sources: Family, friends, coworkers, fellow students, classmates, that work to counteract any amount of input from media.

 

As you yourself say: "Consuming violent media is unlikely to make you violent. " 

 

Instead you bring up the exception to the rule, the marginalized/damaged/mentally ill person, where a bunch of other variables, need to...well roll badly... so to speak, for it to have an effect. 

 

"Consuming a lot violent media + a bunch of other things like an abusive household, access to weapons, behavioral problems, bullying and etc might."

 

Bear in mind, that I've never said that games (media) could not influence anyone ever, but that the vast majority of normally intelligent, sane people, do not fundamentally change their point of view or moral standards due to a game or any amount of games. 

 

So what is your point? Should we arrange our society according to the lowest common denominator? Books must all be printed so that the most nearsighted person can read them? 

 

2. For profit... Otherwise they are bad business men and women. 

 

PS: And I'm still half "communist" on certain areas... Eg. I think it's fundamentally morally wrong to make a profit of other peoples misfortune and sickness (hospitals, medicinal companies, insurance companies should be state owned). But where personal taste enters the equation I really do believe that there should be no limits (other than actually being accountable for product quality and safety). 

 

3. If it were asking alone, I would have no problem... but then as you continue... again the world should somehow start to revolve around your subjective taste. I want beef. I deserve beef. They really should give it to me. 

 

Why isn't there a zombie mod for xcom? I want it, I deserve it... People should really make that for me and likeminded individuals. 

 

Sometimes, the world just doesn't care about our piddly ass tastes and problems. 

[straykat]

Personally, I didn't turn into a violent thug UNTIL I stopped playing games in my mid teens and just acted like a spiteful ****** to impress real friends and social circles.

 

I got better later, stopped caring about others... and oddly enough.. played more games.

[Iakus]

I haven't ever said it was wrong, to include women in the advertising, if women were a substantial part of the customers or the intended customers. 

 

However, if a company feels itself pressured to include a woman in the advertising, even if women aren't a substantial part of the customers or the intended customers, due to a loud minority or public peer pressure...

 

Then I think it is wrong, because it gives an undemocraticly big representation to the minority.... Their oppinion is worth more... They're worth more as people... 1 persons oppinion is worth 10 other people's oppinions. 

 

And that kind of thinking, was best left in the 30's... And saddens me that humanity really still can't see what is right from wrong, even in the socalled civilized countries. 

Except a part of the draw for this game is being able to make your own character.  Hair, eyes, nose, etc.  And gender.

 

So why shouldn't there be a female SOoe Survivor alongside a male one, if only to show "look at the possibilities you can have with your character!"

[KaiserShep]

Why would you spoiler the ending of a game for yourself which isn't even out?

 

Curiosity and impatience, really. Plus, I don't really trust Bethesda to blow my mind, so I don't think it would've mattered much to me either way. 

[Mr.House]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

[Kierro Ren]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

 

[KaiserShep]

Lol…oh my.

[78stonewobble]

Except a part of the draw for this game is being able to make your own character.  Hair, eyes, nose, etc.  And gender.

 

So why shouldn't there be a female SOoe Survivor alongside a male one, if only to show "look at the possibilities you can have with your character!"

 

Where have I said there shouldn't? 

 

EDIT: To clarify, once again...

 

If fallout 4 want's to draw women in?... Go for it...

 

That the makers of "stripper mancave sim 2016", should feel pressured to appeal to women and/or include them... Is what I have a problem with...

 

Which we're 90 percent of the way to, if someone says "the industry (as a whole?) should include women"... and to me still as absurd as saying that this fishing sim seem needs to appeal to hunters or vice versa or they are non inclusive/discriminating against fishermen/hunters. 

[Iakus]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

So, a female Fisto exists, eh?

[Kalas Magnus]

assume the position

[Galbrant]

I'm ready for curie!

[straykat]

A walking fleshlight, with a flamethrower.

 

Classy.

[78stonewobble]

A walking fleshlight, with a flamethrower.

 

Classy.

 

That IS the dream... 255 shades of charcoal coming up... 

[9TailsFox]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

[Panda]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

 

Nah nothing new, Saint Row did it earlier ^^;

[Fredward]

1. And you are forgetting, that most normal people, the average person, have a multitude of input from other sources: Family, friends, coworkers, fellow students, classmates, that work to counteract any amount of input from media.

 

As you yourself say: "Consuming violent media is unlikely to make you violent. " 

 

Instead you bring up the exception to the rule, the marginalized/damaged/mentally ill person, where a bunch of other variables, need to...well roll badly... so to speak, for it to have an effect. 

 

"Consuming a lot violent media + a bunch of other things like an abusive household, access to weapons, behavioral problems, bullying and etc might."

 

Bear in mind, that I've never said that games (media) could not influence anyone ever, but that the vast majority of normally intelligent, sane people, do not fundamentally change their point of view or moral standards due to a game or any amount of games. 

 

So what is your point? Should we arrange our society according to the lowest common denominator? Books must all be printed so that the most nearsighted person can read them? 

 

Cuz what I said here:

 

This is true, interactions with people around you have substantially more influence on your attitudes and opinions than the media does. And if you consistently interact with the people who 1) shared similar attitudes and predispositions to begin with (as you would imagine you'd get with a family or people who grew up in the same town/city/country/timeframe] and 2) are exposed to the same kind of media on a daily basis it becomes a self-reinforcing loop. Everyone sees the same things and everyone just agrees that this is how things are/have always been because that's what you keep hearing.

 

Dissenting voices used to be able to be shushed quickly cuz they just had no one to be dissenting with and so nothing changed. Now, a nice side effect of technological advancement is that you can hook up with a bunch of other dissenting views and yell till someone listens. Now in this instance we're yelling about gender representation in games and its effects on what is considered 'acceptable' for females to do, like playing games or being a hero. Or at least that's what I'm yelling about. If you never see any female heroes pop up in the media you consume on a daily basis from the day you're born and the people around you don't either it reinforces the idea that 'you aren't supposed to do that.'

 

I'm going to assume you don't reject the idea of gender stereotypes/roles completely right? We take them in with mother's milk. We get them from our parents, they get it from their parents and etc. Now recently with the introduction of mass media these stereotypes we grew up with became relative truths, as they are wont to do when you don't hear dissenting voices but the important bit is that these ideas then in turn shaped the media [when it initially showed up, see for instance: 1950s ads] which then goes ahead and does its part to shape the next generation, along with the parents.

 

Now if no one says anything to disagree nothing would change. We'd all labour under this cloud of how things are thinking that because it is  it has  to be. And it doesn't. Women can play games, women can be heroes and preferably the media should support this message so that our kids can be exposed to more than one version of what the 'correct' way of being is. People's minds have to change somewhere and the media is a good tool for helping it to change. And it doesn't have to fundamentally shift people's ideas of good and bad, right and wrong it just needs to introduce a different perspective and have them decide for themselves.

 

2. For profit... Otherwise they are bad business men and women.

 

So when they change their work to adapt to a changing marketplace aren't they just being good businesspeople?

 

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

 

Mmmm, yus gurl werk.

 

EDIT: To clarify, once again...

 

If fallout 4 want's to draw women in?... Go for it...

 

That the makers of "stripper mancave sim 2016", should feel pressured to appeal to women and/or include them... Is what I have a problem with...

 

Which we're 90 percent of the way to, if someone says "the industry (as a whole?) should include women"... and to me still as absurd as saying that this fishing sim seem needs to appeal to hunters or vice versa or they are non inclusive/discriminating against fishermen/hunters. 

 

And just to clarify my stance: I wouldn't have an issue with that. If you wanted to make a Stripper Mancave Sim 2016 you SHOULD be allowed to do that. My objection stems from games that put forward the idea that they're somehow reflective of some aspect of reality, of human potential or of what could/should be only reflecting a niche view. To be a hero you need to have a wang. You don't. SMS2016 makes no such claims and should thus carry on.

 

[Iakus]

Actually, that looks like it came from a strategy guide.

 

Not to burst any bubbles, but are we sure that isn't a typo?

[AlanC9]

I saw that on the FO4 wiki too, FWIW.

[Iakus]

I saw that on the FO4 wiki too, FWIW.

Yeah, but there's no citation.  The info could have come from anywhere.

[AlanC9]

Yeah. If the source is the strategy guide and the guide has a typo, then the wiki's just repeating the bad info.

[Daemul]

Never trust strategy guides, there's so much misinformation in them. You'd think that since they're approved by the devs that all the information in them would be correct, but that is never the case 

[Ahglock]

Actually, that looks like it came from a strategy guide.

 

Not to burst any bubbles, but are we sure that isn't a typo?

 

It could be accurate as well, though so what?  I think far too many people here only think romance=sex scene.  If there is a story line along the lines that synthetics are people too it would make some sense for their to be a robot romance. Making it a sex bot like edi makes the question too easy IMO.

[78stonewobble]

1. Cuz what I said here:

 

2. I'm going to assume you don't reject the idea of gender stereotypes/roles completely right? We take them in with mother's milk. We get them from our parents, they get it from their parents and etc. Now recently with the introduction of mass media these stereotypes we grew up with became relative truths, as they are wont to do when you don't hear dissenting voices but the important bit is that these ideas then in turn shaped the media [when it initially showed up, see for instance: 1950s ads] which then goes ahead and does its part to shape the next generation, along with the parents.

 

3. Now if no one says anything to disagree nothing would change. We'd all labour under this cloud of how things are thinking that because it is  it has  to be. And it doesn't. Women can play games, women can be heroes and preferably the media should support this message so that our kids can be exposed to more than one version of what the 'correct' way of being is. People's minds have to change somewhere and the media is a good tool for helping it to change. And it doesn't have to fundamentally shift people's ideas of good and bad, right and wrong it just needs to introduce a different perspective and have them decide for themselves.

 

 

4. So when they change their work to adapt to a changing marketplace aren't they just being good businesspeople?

 

 

Mmmm, yus gurl werk.

 

 

5. And just to clarify my stance: I wouldn't have an issue with that. If you wanted to make a Stripper Mancave Sim 2016 you SHOULD be allowed to do that. My objection stems from games that put forward the idea that they're somehow reflective of some aspect of reality, of human potential or of what could/should be only reflecting a niche view. To be a hero you need to have a wang. 6. You don't. SMS2016 makes no such claims and should thus carry on.

 

1. I acknowledge the affect, but I don't acknowledge your right to judge for others, what is the "right" point of view and morals, because that is ... again... pushing your own agenda and subjective point of view and morals on others. 

 

Eg. there is nothing wrong with that effect, except when it is for something you don't personally like. 

 

2. No, I don't disagree with that... I disagree with people thinking they have found the one and only true way of living and thinking and wanting to make others conform to these subjective ideals. 

 

There is a huuuuge difference between: 

A: I like x because so and so... and other people can take it or leave it. 

B: Everyone should conform to x, the industry should do x, if you don't do x, then you are y... 

 

Personally I think religion is for borderline nutjobs... I don't ring doorbells to inform people they are living their life wrong. I don't stand myself up in the street with a sign, saying everyone should think like that, but if people ask me about my oppinion I give it and if people publicly state that religion is the best thing ever (seek feedback) I will give them my oppinion. 

 

3. And I never said people couldn't disagree... I'm saying there's a difference on how you disagree. How forcefull you are and how inclusive oneself is... 

 

4. Yes... if that is why they are doing it and not just due to... well, lets call it as it is, harassment from a vocal minority, who are then given an undemocratic and demographically disproportionate big voice, which ironically is exactly committing an x'ism. 

 

5. I think we agree most of the way actually... just line drawing and methods we disagree on.

 

Well, you don't have to buy those games and you do have to be pretty stupid to actually mistake any ingame character or society with reality... I mean just because I play a game with smurfs, does not mean I believe everyone are smurfs and even if someone thought that for a second the illusion would only last until confronted with reality. 

 

And what about games for people who think you need a wang to be a hero or just like games where that is the case? 

 

Idiots obviously, but are we really so far pressed we can't allow them, or any subniche, to have their games? 

 

Are we gonna be inclusive by excluding people? 

 

6. But some people here say that the industry should change. SMS2016 certainly does nothing to include women. It's actually scaring them away (it's not just that it isn't for them)... They really should change or quit... 

[Jaison1986]

Bioware needs to add a sexbot into ME:A like FO4 did.

 

Really, now... we have androids that look exactly the same as humans, and of all robots that we could romance, we romance a Mr Handy? Might as well let us romance dogmeat then.