What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Drop by and talk about anything you want. This is where all cheese-related discussions should go
User avatar
JayBlanc
Posts: 806
Joined: 18 Dec 2011, 13:54
First Video: That thing with the thing and that stuff

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby JayBlanc » 02 Oct 2014, 13:52

What GamerGate has taught me:
If you can't win an argument on specifics, argue on general principles.
If you can't win an argument on general principles, be misleading about the specifics.
User avatar
Amake
Posts: 664
Joined: 01 Apr 2013, 00:06
First Video: Le Cafe
Location: North Sweden
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Amake » 02 Oct 2014, 13:57

That's just something you have to do when the stated principles of your cause are are massively unimportant next to the damage you do while pursuing it, while the specific things you claim to want are variously impossible, immoral or insignificant.
"I know I tend to sound like I think what I say is written in stone, but please ignore that. I assure you I'm well aware that I have no idea what I'm talking about." -Amake, 2015
User avatar
AdmiralMemo
Posts: 7342
Joined: 27 Nov 2011, 18:29
First Video: Unskippable: Eternal Sonata
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby AdmiralMemo » 02 Oct 2014, 14:09

Matt wrote:
Amake wrote:maybe hundreds of dollars in falsely earned videogame sales
Literally zeroes of dollars. Depression quest is a free game.
The browser version has always been free, yes. However, from what I recall, the Steam version was not made free until the day after Robin Williams committed suicide. I don't know how much it made on Steam, though, of course.
Graham wrote:The point is: Nyeh nyeh nyeh. I'm an old man.
LRRcast wrote:Paul: That does not answer that question at all.
James: Who cares about that question? That's a good answer.

Image
User avatar
korvys
Posts: 2112
Joined: 29 Apr 2013, 14:48
First Video: Zero Punctuation: X-Blades/Halo Wars
Location: Gold Coast, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby korvys » 02 Oct 2014, 14:36

AdmiralMemo wrote:The browser version has always been free, yes. However, from what I recall, the Steam version was not made free until the day after Robin Williams committed suicide. I don't know how much it made on Steam, though, of course.
You recall incorrectly.

There was no steam version before that day. DQ was set to launch the same day. Zoe had (publicly, on her twitter) been discussing, in the preceding weeks, whether she should have a price in steam. On one hand, making it free would mean that anyone could comment on the game, something she wanted to avoid if possible, having being subjected to harassment in the past (this was well before GG). On the other hand, charging anything (with all proceeds going to charity) had the potential to stop someone who might be helped by the game from playing it. She opted to make it free, decided she could deal with anyone who wanted to vandalise the review page for the sake of helping people.

Hours before she was ready to launch the game on steam, news of Robin Williams's suicide was broken, and she struggled (on twitter, again) with if she should launch at all, noting (correctly, unfortunately) that people might think she was cashing in on his death. She decided to launch it for the same reason as making it free. That if there was someone who might need help in the wake of this news, who might have been helped by her game, she didn't want to have prevented that for the sake of her reputation.
"Why does Sonic chill like dawgs?" - Graham
"Causation. Still a leading cause of correlation"" - Oglaf

Google+ / Twitter / Mastodon
keybase.io
User avatar
AdmiralMemo
Posts: 7342
Joined: 27 Nov 2011, 18:29
First Video: Unskippable: Eternal Sonata
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby AdmiralMemo » 02 Oct 2014, 14:57

OK, then perhaps I was wrong. I just remember the press about it being to the effect of "Depression Quest is going to be made free on Steam today due to the death of Robin Williams." That kind of implies that it wasn't free previously, but still existed. It may have simply been poorly-worded journalism that implied the wrong things to me.
Graham wrote:The point is: Nyeh nyeh nyeh. I'm an old man.
LRRcast wrote:Paul: That does not answer that question at all.
James: Who cares about that question? That's a good answer.

Image
User avatar
korvys
Posts: 2112
Joined: 29 Apr 2013, 14:48
First Video: Zero Punctuation: X-Blades/Halo Wars
Location: Gold Coast, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby korvys » 02 Oct 2014, 15:12

Bad wording is probably the case. Something like "DQ will be available on steam for free from today" would be easy to read either way, and if you thought it was available on steam before (which I thought it had, but that was just the whole greenlight thing), it would read as just the price changing.
"Why does Sonic chill like dawgs?" - Graham
"Causation. Still a leading cause of correlation"" - Oglaf

Google+ / Twitter / Mastodon
keybase.io
User avatar
JackSlack
Posts: 4572
Joined: 15 Oct 2010, 19:46
First Video: ENN, but I forget which.
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby JackSlack » 02 Oct 2014, 15:13

I'm choosing to opt out of this thread at this point, gang. There comes a point for me when I have to admit that Gamergate has been the major cause of depression in my life for literally months now, and I have to stop even thinking about it, or I am going to wind up doing something drastic.

Drastic here being defined probably as selling all my video games and giving a big middle finger to the very concept of 'gamer', mind, not something worse. I'm not that bad.
User avatar
korvys
Posts: 2112
Joined: 29 Apr 2013, 14:48
First Video: Zero Punctuation: X-Blades/Halo Wars
Location: Gold Coast, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby korvys » 02 Oct 2014, 15:21

Completely fair, Jack. I had to take a couple of days of twitter entirely when thsi was first starting.

I'm actually struggling myself. I've found a whole lot of really interesting new people to follow through this (those 'SJWs to avoid' lists are basically just lists of awesome people), but this means my whole feed is people who are getting harassed, or tring to help other people, and it's really depressing.
"Why does Sonic chill like dawgs?" - Graham
"Causation. Still a leading cause of correlation"" - Oglaf

Google+ / Twitter / Mastodon
keybase.io
User avatar
Metcarfre
Posts: 13676
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 13:52
First Video: Not Applicable
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Metcarfre » 02 Oct 2014, 15:25

I gave up on considering "gamer" or "geek" as an identifier long ago. The community is toxic and there's no benefit in associating with it. I'll enjoy the games and media that I do and ignore those I don't. Not worth the effort.
*
User avatar
AdmiralMemo
Posts: 7342
Joined: 27 Nov 2011, 18:29
First Video: Unskippable: Eternal Sonata
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby AdmiralMemo » 02 Oct 2014, 15:45

You folks do what you need to do. This fight isn't anywhere near over, and I don't think it will be any time soon. I can easily see how it can get draining and depressing.

I think the only reason I can press on for anything is that I have next-to-zero at stake in this fight. The only thing that even got me riled up was the attack on Maya.
Graham wrote:The point is: Nyeh nyeh nyeh. I'm an old man.
LRRcast wrote:Paul: That does not answer that question at all.
James: Who cares about that question? That's a good answer.

Image
User avatar
Tycherin
Posts: 835
Joined: 30 Mar 2011, 13:27
First Video: The Lich King's New Wrath
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Tycherin » 02 Oct 2014, 15:59

JayBlanc wrote:What GamerGate has taught me:
If you can't win an argument on specifics, argue on general principles.
If you can't win an argument on general principles, be misleading about the specifics.

To quote an old lawyer joke:
"If the facts are against you, argue the law.
If the law is against you, argue the facts.
If the facts and the law are both against you, pound the table."
User avatar
Amake
Posts: 664
Joined: 01 Apr 2013, 00:06
First Video: Le Cafe
Location: North Sweden
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Amake » 02 Oct 2014, 16:15

Amake wrote:
Rathkor wrote:Corruption is corruption, no matter the amount. All that had to be done to avoid all of this, or at least delayed it until the next major controversy, was to take the journalist, make him make a public apology, and tell people they will be reviewing their ethics policy. The Escapist actually got an increase in traffic by 10% for updating their ethics policy. Pretty much no one would be screaming about corruption if the sites had just done something that simple. Something that would happen in literally any other industry.

I'm trying to agree with you on general principles, but you keep bringing it back to the issue of Zoe Quinn. Man you're bad at this.

And also, since "corruption is corruption", I hope you're going after some of all those parents who ever bribed their children next. They should be even easier targets while you're avoiding the big budget studios that would be hard to crack but actually have an impact on peoples' lives. It's the principle of the thing, right?
"I know I tend to sound like I think what I say is written in stone, but please ignore that. I assure you I'm well aware that I have no idea what I'm talking about." -Amake, 2015
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 16:29

Deedles wrote:Seeing as I'm not on the escapist I can't answer your question about statements there and why things were done or not. I'm just wondering, seeing as I can at least ask for your personal opinion on what you wish to achieve as a part of GamerGate; What does achieving 'ethic journalism' entail?


My personal goals for 'ethics in journalism' are fairly vague and simplistic.

I want disclosure if articles contain conflicts of interest. (personal relationship, financial, etc.)
I want clear distinctions between editorialized content, reviews, criticism, and personal opinions.

That's all I'm asking for.
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 16:35

Deedles wrote:But why? If you make a contact with someone and they turn out to be someone you get along with and could be friends with, why do you have to choose between your job and a friendship? If that friendship is brought up whenever relevant(like if you're reporting on a game that said friend is making, or that a company they're part of is making) then why is it necessary to have to close yourself off from potential friendships? Especially in a time and place in history where loneliness and being alone is a big issue? That doesn't seem very ethical to ask of anyone, if you ask me.


Because try as you might, if you're writing an article about a friend or a loved one, you'd be hard pressed to present yourself in an objective and clear manner. This is the sacrifice you must make as a professional journalist. You must recuse yourself from relationships that will threaten your objectivity if you have to write about them. You are there to report unbiased information.

You CAN have friendships, and many do, but you shouldn't write about them if your content ends up benefiting or harming them in a financial way for example.
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 16:41

Deedles wrote:But that's what my whole previous post is trying to explain, journalism isn't unbiased anywhere. Gaming journalism is not more or less so, and it's about a hobby, not something as important as how the country should be run.

So you can't be sure about objectivity, ever, unless all you ever right is vague articles about how you don't really know anything for sure, and never actually say anything, other than the specs on a console, or the release date of a game.

As human beings we are subjective, and as has been stated several times, there is no way to use language to be 100% objective. Someone will always feel unfairly treated, or unfairly represented, or like a game wasn't represented well, be that because they found the language too damning or too praising.


I don't think anyone is advocating for robots to basically spill over nothing but cold hard facts.

But at the same time realize that disregarding ethics and objectivity is very damaging if you are presenting yourself as neutral voice, and many of these game journalists are.

It's intellectually dishonest to people who might not agree with you, or hold close relationships with you.

Gaming journalism is not more or less so, and it's about a hobby, not something as important as how the country should be run.


You are engaging in a logical fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_o ... _privation

This interesting article always comes to mind when thinking about it:
http://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/0 ... in-africa/
User avatar
Amake
Posts: 664
Joined: 01 Apr 2013, 00:06
First Video: Le Cafe
Location: North Sweden
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Amake » 02 Oct 2014, 16:45

Solution: Don't take the news you're told at face value, like you were taught in high school. Especially not reviews of popular entertainment.

Wow that was easy.
"I know I tend to sound like I think what I say is written in stone, but please ignore that. I assure you I'm well aware that I have no idea what I'm talking about." -Amake, 2015
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 16:48

JayBlanc wrote:What GamerGate has taught me:
If you can't win an argument on specifics, argue on general principles.
If you can't win an argument on general principles, be misleading about the specifics.


I wish you would actually outline my post and point out inaccuracies or false information that I could clear up for you. I made some pretty bold statements that you've seemed to completely ignore.

Instead you go on your own merry way making claims you don't really elaborate on.
User avatar
Amake
Posts: 664
Joined: 01 Apr 2013, 00:06
First Video: Le Cafe
Location: North Sweden
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Amake » 02 Oct 2014, 17:00

Crocochow wrote:
JayBlanc wrote:What GamerGate has taught me:
If you can't win an argument on specifics, argue on general principles.
If you can't win an argument on general principles, be misleading about the specifics.


I wish you would actually outline my post and point out inaccuracies or false information that I could clear up for you. I made some pretty bold statements that you've seemed to completely ignore.

Instead you go on your own merry way making claims you don't really elaborate on.

Not to suggest you may have mixed up your sock puppet accounts or anything, but which post of yours are you suggesting Jay Blanc's post is a response to?

It's pretty disingenuous to try to conveniently change the topic from the suggestion that you're conveniently changing the topic, at any rate.
Last edited by Amake on 02 Oct 2014, 17:02, edited 1 time in total.
"I know I tend to sound like I think what I say is written in stone, but please ignore that. I assure you I'm well aware that I have no idea what I'm talking about." -Amake, 2015
User avatar
hascow
Posts: 134
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 15:58
First Video: Clubbing Your Friends

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby hascow » 02 Oct 2014, 17:01

Crocochow wrote:
Deedles wrote:Seeing as I'm not on the escapist I can't answer your question about statements there and why things were done or not. I'm just wondering, seeing as I can at least ask for your personal opinion on what you wish to achieve as a part of GamerGate; What does achieving 'ethic journalism' entail?


My personal goals for 'ethics in journalism' are fairly vague and simplistic.

I want disclosure if articles contain conflicts of interest. (personal relationship, financial, etc.)
I want clear distinctions between editorialized content, reviews, criticism, and personal opinions.

That's all I'm asking for.


How can you distinguish between reviews and personal opinions when, by nature, reviews have to be subjective, as the person reviewing the game has their own tastes and preferences?
User avatar
Matt
LRR Crew
Posts: 9742
Joined: 14 Mar 2004, 00:19
Location: Victoria, BC
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Matt » 02 Oct 2014, 17:08

Also, every major site I can think of already distinguishes between review / preview / op-ed / and news.

-m
Image

I am not angry at you.
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 17:41

hascow wrote:
Crocochow wrote:
Deedles wrote:Seeing as I'm not on the escapist I can't answer your question about statements there and why things were done or not. I'm just wondering, seeing as I can at least ask for your personal opinion on what you wish to achieve as a part of GamerGate; What does achieving 'ethic journalism' entail?


My personal goals for 'ethics in journalism' are fairly vague and simplistic.

I want disclosure if articles contain conflicts of interest. (personal relationship, financial, etc.)
I want clear distinctions between editorialized content, reviews, criticism, and personal opinions.

That's all I'm asking for.


How can you distinguish between reviews and personal opinions when, by nature, reviews have to be subjective, as the person reviewing the game has their own tastes and preferences?


That is a very good question. In a sense, it really depends on your definition of reviews and opinion pieces? I see a lot of reviews that basically function as persuasive essays and a lot of opinion pieces that are just throwing shit at a wall.

One thing that I really liked is how RPGCodex did their top 70 RPG picks. They had multiple community members weigh in on a game title and ranked it according to the community's preference.

You can reasonably implement something similar to this in general game reviews, where multiple writers with different tastes and preferences will shape a larger review by examining it through different perspectives. How does this FPS appeal to a person who doesn't generally play FPS games? How does this appeal to a hardcore Call of Dooty (heh) fan?

If your answers are "Well, one hates it, and one loves it" then you're doing yourself a disservice because within the context of game reviews specifically you can actually be very technical and criticize mechanics without having tastes and preferences completely shape the review.

You can analyze writing and storytelling from a cohesive point of view that takes into accord the content of the rest of game (eg. does this science fiction game actually respect its own internal logic and fiction?) outside of the player. You may disagree with a game's overall story, but you can still respect it for how it chooses to deliver sound and imagery, tie mechanics towards exploring that narrative point, and how it handles player agency regarding that goal for example. You can also objectively review game buggyness, technical specs like the engine it runs on, and things like options menu and UI.

I will concede that it is completely impossible to rule out personal bias in a review, but a strive towards harder objectivity is definitely obtainable. Statement 1 and Statement 2 are also self fulfilling in their own right. You can make the distinction that this is a game review, but with the disclosure that it's being reviewed by a person who doesn't particularly care for this genre.
User avatar
Crocochow
Posts: 15
Joined: 01 Oct 2014, 20:53
First Video: None because I am just a shill

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Crocochow » 02 Oct 2014, 17:44

Amake wrote:
Crocochow wrote:
JayBlanc wrote:What GamerGate has taught me:
If you can't win an argument on specifics, argue on general principles.
If you can't win an argument on general principles, be misleading about the specifics.


I wish you would actually outline my post and point out inaccuracies or false information that I could clear up for you. I made some pretty bold statements that you've seemed to completely ignore.

Instead you go on your own merry way making claims you don't really elaborate on.

Not to suggest you may have mixed up your sock puppet accounts or anything, but which post of yours are you suggesting Jay Blanc's post is a response to?

It's pretty disingenuous to try to conveniently change the topic from the suggestion that you're conveniently changing the topic, at any rate.


I would like him to try his hand at burning up my great big wall of text here:

viewtopic.php?p=741543#p741543

Instead of using circular logic to ignore it.

le sockpuppet face
User avatar
JackSlack
Posts: 4572
Joined: 15 Oct 2010, 19:46
First Video: ENN, but I forget which.
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby JackSlack » 02 Oct 2014, 17:52

Crocochow wrote:One thing that I really liked is how RPGCodex did their top 70 RPG picks. They had multiple community members weigh in on a game title and ranked it according to the community's preference.

You can reasonably implement something similar to this in general game reviews, where multiple writers with different tastes and preferences will shape a larger review by examining it through different perspectives. How does this FPS appeal to a person who doesn't generally play FPS games? How does this appeal to a hardcore Call of Dooty (heh) fan?

If your answers are "Well, one hates it, and one loves it" then you're doing yourself a disservice because within the context of game reviews specifically you can actually be very technical and criticize mechanics without having tastes and preferences completely shape the review.

You can analyze writing and storytelling from a cohesive point of view that takes into accord the content of the rest of game (eg. does this science fiction game actually respect its own internal logic and fiction?) outside of the player. You may disagree with a game's overall story, but you can still respect it for how it chooses to deliver sound and imagery, tie mechanics towards exploring that narrative point, and how it handles player agency regarding that goal for example. You can also objectively review game buggyness, technical specs like the engine it runs on, and things like options menu and UI.

I will concede that it is completely impossible to rule out personal bias in a review, but a strive towards harder objectivity is definitely obtainable. Statement 1 and Statement 2 are also self fulfilling in their own right. You can make the distinction that this is a game review, but with the disclosure that it's being reviewed by a person who doesn't particularly care for this genre.


I said I'd bow out, but I do have to jump in on this.

I see this as a very limited view of critique, and one that I hope we don't limit ourself to. It's the review as consumer advice column, and it's a very old mode of games criticism that I am thrilled we've left behind, instead preferring a more holistic model that allows for things such as using a game to discuss wider issues, integrating mechanical analysis into narrative analysis, and otherwise thinking about the game as a thing within the world rather than as just a set of code that somehow stands apart from it.

It's not quite my greatest hill to die on (That's the burgeoning indie-game scene, which has basically been the only thing in gaming I've found interesting for years now) but it's up there. This is the kind of criticism that film, art, books and just about every other medium has done, and the pushback against it in gaming has been deeply, profoundly disappointing to me.

I get that there's a place for the kind of 'would you like this game' review, just as there's a place for Leonard Maltin. But I think criticism is capable of more, and I want to see more of it.
User avatar
korvys
Posts: 2112
Joined: 29 Apr 2013, 14:48
First Video: Zero Punctuation: X-Blades/Halo Wars
Location: Gold Coast, Australia

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby korvys » 02 Oct 2014, 17:53

Aren't you basically describing Metacritic? A (weighted?) average of multiple reviews, and more importantly, links to those reviews? By trying to iron out bias by combing reviews from multiple people, you remove nuance, and create a situation where game makers will basically dumb down their games, and take no risks to create the widest appeal.

Frankly, I want subjective reviews. I want to know if a person likes it or doesn't like it. I want to know why they thought a mechanic worked or didn't. I look to reviewers that have tastes that match my own, as they are likely to have the same reaction I would. I'm not interested in how reviewer X can describe the mechanics, I want to know if they liked the mechanics, cause that's what I need to know to be interested in a game.

An obvious example would be someone like Movie Bob. He may be a left leaning SJW type, to frame him as many GGers have, but so am I. So his impression of a movie means a lot more to me than the guy who can look at the movie completely objectively (if that's even possible).

If you really want fair reviews, and objectivity on a general scale, you need more, and different, subjective voices. You need as many voices as you can get, providing all sorts of views. You need websites that say "Gamers are dead". You need sites that say the opposite, you need sites that ignore it all.
"Why does Sonic chill like dawgs?" - Graham
"Causation. Still a leading cause of correlation"" - Oglaf

Google+ / Twitter / Mastodon
keybase.io
User avatar
Amake
Posts: 664
Joined: 01 Apr 2013, 00:06
First Video: Le Cafe
Location: North Sweden
Contact:

Re: What is Adam Baldwin thinking?

Postby Amake » 02 Oct 2014, 18:14

Crocochow wrote:I would like him to try his hand at burning up my great big wall of text here:

viewtopic.php?p=741543#p741543

Instead of using circular logic to ignore it.

le sockpuppet face

What is there to respond to? If any of that is true I wish you luck in your crusade against bad journalism that in no way involves Zoe Quinn's personal life. I recommend turning to Rolling Stone magazine, they probably want to crack a genuine conspiracy and save the day like in the Stephen King novel "Firestarter".
"I know I tend to sound like I think what I say is written in stone, but please ignore that. I assure you I'm well aware that I have no idea what I'm talking about." -Amake, 2015

Return to “General Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests