1165
1166

► WTF Is... - Hatred ? [strong language] (youtube.com)

Iciciliser が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Tactful 328ポイント329ポイント  (157子コメント)

From Keith Stuart at The Guardian:

But the galling thing about this game isn’t its content, which is ridiculously juvenile fantasy violence, but the ease with which Destructive Creations (even the studio name is a cheap gag), has been able to exploit the ongoing culture war between entrenched “hardcore” gamers and liberal critics. Witness the following oft-quoted statement from the studio website:

"These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure."

It is so obviously laser-targeted at certain communities of gamers currently feeling marginalised and threatened as game developers broaden their horizons and explore new themes and audiences. It is the cynical appropriation and encapsulation of a million furious games forums comments about “social justice warriors” – feminists, white knights and beta males – ruining the industry by handwringing over sexist tropes and poor representation. Hatred presents itself as a cause, a flag to wave against the perceived over-politicisation of game content. Hatred is making a stand.

But a stand against what? Against a smattering of mainstream Triple A titles that have chosen to contextualise the violence they portray? A stand against small indie studios looking to explore the possibilities of games beyond the madding crowd of military shooters, sports sims and fantasy brawlers? A stand against cultural critics now examining games with the same lenses through which they have viewed movies and music for 50 years?

Hatred is not a rebellious game. It is an isometric third-person twin-stick shooter that adheres to the conventions of that ancient genre with obsequious rigidity. Its understanding of anarchy is a teenager’s bedroom delusion, a comedic supermarket sweep of deadbeat pulp horror cliches. It is the slasher film, the death metal band, of games – providing the same sort of production line viscerality to the kids who think Slipknot and the Saw movies are cool and transgressive. It is as dangerous and provocative as telling your mum you’ve brushed your teeth when you haven’t.

Link to full piece: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/29/hatred-gaming-controversy

[–]horsecockharry [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

While I agree with the article, he called Slipknot a death metal band, and this upsets me more than it should.

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Haha, fair enough. He's a games writer not a music writer :p

[–]CyriusBloodbane [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Real death metal isn't a teenager's bedroom delusion type thing either. I didn't even get into death metal until I was like 25.

[–]FSMhelpusall 53ポイント54ポイント  (34子コメント)

That is painfully one-sided.

I do think that it compares to the slasher film, the death metal band. It only remains transgressive for as long as hand-wringing and morally decrying anyone who enjoys them as a deviant to be shunned from society endures. Once that's gone, it's no longer transgressive is it?

Who still considers Elvis Prestley as 'edgy', nowadays?

[–]Tactful 37ポイント38ポイント  (31子コメント)

What's the other side in your opinion, if this is one-sided?

Do you not think that Hatred is a controversy-baiting game?

Do you not think the people buying hatred will be either buying it because it's banned, or buying it to feel "edgy"? Young kids wanting to play "the game that twitch banned!!!" etc?

The point of the article is that the Hatred devs think they are transgressive, but they aren't. It's just rubbish and nonsense packaged in weak controversy.

[–]FSMhelpusall 36ポイント37ポイント  (19子コメント)

The other side is that it blames the company and the buyers, trying not to mention a certain controversy by name while alluding to it with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, instead of the media who overreacted to a very meh game.

Ironically, they -are- transgressive though. Not because of anything innate to the game, but when there's a moral panic around it, and people are talking about how terrible it is and how anyone who plays it is a horrid scumbag...

[–]Tactful 12ポイント13ポイント  (15子コメント)

I'm not really seeing this "moral panic". I had a flick through and most of the articles I skimmed said essentially the same stuff.

[–]FSMhelpusall 27ポイント28ポイント  (14子コメント)

When Twitch changes its rules in the wake of a coming game, that is a moral panic. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be the need to ban it. Consider it censorship, consider it not, a company made a sudden quick decision to change its policies just because this game is coming out.

That, is a moral panic.

You might say they didn't want to be associated with the game by having it streamed... ANd the question becomes: Why? Because, well, there's a moral panic and shaming of those who will play it. And those who will host it, perhaps.

[–]Tactful 18ポイント19ポイント  (4子コメント)

Twitch is a business. Twitch is funded in part by advertisers. Advertisers don't want their adverts rolling alongside Adult-Only content. Therefore Twitch made a conscious business decision to reclarify their rules regarding the streaming of adult-only content.

I don't consider that a "moral panic", I consider that a very logical business decision to stop potential loss of ad revenue.

It's absolutely not "censorship" though. Twitch is a private entity and its users have no rights to use the tools provided to stream any sort of content inherently. For a long time Twitch has had very specific restrictions on streaming including use of alcohol and other substances, a dress code, and the banning of specific sexualised content.

[–]SaitoHawkeye 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

Why is it a panic?

Why not just a judgment of taste?

[–]Karmaisforsuckers [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Twitch changed its rules to stop people streaming pornography.

[–]FSMhelpusall [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Everyone knows this is a targeted thing for Hatred. Witcher 3 has full frontal and it's rated M, so gets played.

[–]p_j_w [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

When Twitch changes its rules in the wake of a coming game, that is a moral panic.

You don't know what a moral panic is, do you?

[–]Clevername3000 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Twitch has had rules against AO rated games for years. Maybe Hatred pushed them to publicize it because of its notoriety, but I doubt it was some sort of catalyst. That's circumstantial at best and bordering on conspiracy at worst.

[–]FSMhelpusall [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The rule happens the same day that Hatred sends media copies to reviewers w/o embargo, and you call it a conspiracy...

[–]Grandy12 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Could you define the term 'moral panic'?

Because so far, I get the feeling your reaction towards Twitch decision could be just as easily labeled a 'moral panic' against a perceived censorship, as well as shaming them for the decision.

[–]CressCrowbits 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

The controversy of which I assume you allude to was predated by this game and the controversy that initially surrounded it.

[–]FSMhelpusall -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Doesn't stop the author from ham-handedly shoving it in, does it?

[–]A10050 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm buying it because I like senseless violence.

[–]yyderf [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

i think it is one-sided article, because while developer may somehow encourage the controversy, Polygon, Kotaku, Steam and newly, Twitch, are feeding that controversy all by themselves. And twich is only one company, that we can understand why they would do this (even if fallout if it was allowed would be much less), media with click-baiting titles and how many articles? 8 from polygon were mentioned in video? media were responsible for it being actual controversy and not only something nobody cared about. It is painfully obvious that small developer from Poland, with their first game I might add, couldn't stir up all of this by themselves.

[–]POW_HAHA -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

Why are you saying they think they're transgressive but they aren't? Weren't you saying that they were intentionally looking for this reaction and knew exactly what they were doing?

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

They think they are being provocative and transgressive, but in reality the majority of critics and consumers understand this and frame the game as such. They haven't "tricked" anyone. They're like trolls who are bad at trolling - they still get downvotes, but everyone knows what they're doing and nobody buys it.

[–]POW_HAHA [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

They think they're being provocative? Are you kidding me? Have you seen the reaction to the game? Maybe people are saying they figured the developers out now, but when the trailer was released, there were many people legitimately outraged by it, and there still are.

I really don't know why you're in denial about such a silly and small thing, but it's kinda funny.

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Yes, a small group of people are "outraged". I wouldn't say the media in general is "outraged" though.

Have a flick through Google News, you'll see a few reviews, a few opinion pieces, and lots of posts about Twitch's restrictions on adult-only content. Not exactly a hot-bed of "moral outrage".

If you actually read the articles you'll see that most pubs think it's a bit of a joke, or will openly describe it as controversy-baiting.

Coca Cola featuring people of all different races singing together in a 1971 mass media advert is provocative. An episode of LA Law broadcasting the first gay kiss on television in 1991 was provocative.

Hatred is... well, it's "controversial" in quotes. It's as provocative as a child doing a shit in the school bathroom sink. It certainly provokes a reaction, but that reaction is mostly "really? well that's dumb."

[–]POW_HAHA [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Dude, if it wasn't provocative then we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. Do you even know what the word means?

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

The definition of the word 'provocative' is:

causing anger or another strong reaction, especially deliberately.

I don't feel angry. I also wouldn't describe my reaction as particularly strong. It's more underwhelming, and I'm finding it interesting talking to people about it.

I'm not really interested in having a debate about the definition of words with you. You can call it "provocative" if you want, it doesn't change any of my core points or those of the articles I've linked.

[–]POW_HAHA [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Hahaha, you're already cherry-picking definitions.

It's ok if you don't want to have a debate, i was just confused as to why you were in denial about something like that.

[–]UnoriginalRhetoric [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Its also 100% correct.

There is a reason that every single target by 'movements' like Gamergate are progressives. Its about politics first and foremost.

[–]FSMhelpusall [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The same reason as why every single target of backlash to the D&D satanic panic were religious fundamentalists and/or similarly minded soccer mom types.

[–]kittlekites 53ポイント54ポイント  (48子コメント)

Let me get this straight; It's galling to try to appeal to a subset of gamers expressing a specific sentiment, because he thinks those gamers are being "cynical?" And this quote starts with the word "galling" and ends with "It is as dangerous and provacative as telling your mum you've brushed your teeth when you haven't."

If anything, this just supports the thought that being outraged or offended by this product is akin to being annoyed with the kids who skateboard down your street in clothes you think look stupid.

[–]Tactful 190ポイント191ポイント  (15子コメント)

He didn't say "gamers are being cynical", he said the studio behind Hatred is cynical for directly appealing to a very specific slice of the gaming population during the apex of an online culture war.

He is right. It is cynical. This game was clearly made with intentions to rile up, to create controversy, to piss of afformentioned "liberal critics", and to cater to 2edgy4me people who want to "play the game that Twitch banned!" etc.

[–]pattycigs [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

All the comments bragging about buying the game to "stick it to [x]" I've seen can pretty much be summed up by "I fell for the marketing."

[–]ThePlanckConstant [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Although it still feels kind of good that I'd be able to buy this game if I'd want to.

[–]nope_nic_tesla [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

During the height of the Chick-Fil-A same-sex marriage controversy I saw someone say, "If the best thing you can do for your cause right now is to buy a chicken sandwich, you've already lost."

Can't help but feel the same here.

[–]caribou_doodoo [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

And yet storefronts like GoG refuse to sell the game.

[–]Valnar [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

There is a ton of stuff GoG is refusing to sell. Do you call them out for instance on not selling board games?

Not selling hatred is a business decision for them because they feel they wouldn't benefit having selling it.

[–]poo-poo [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's like the kmart next to Walmart refusing to sell something. People will just go to steam to buy the game.

[–]hotcod 77ポイント78ポイント  (20子コメント)

He's not calling the gamers cynical but the developers who were looking to exploit the sentiment of that group by playing up aspects of their game. That the game doesn't actually live up to that in reality is what he is calling galling.

All of which I can understand as someone who was highly critical of the game as it was being presented to us by the devs. I would have at least had to respected them if they'd delivered on it. Instead we get what is apparently a complete damp squib that seems to have drowned out what little controversy it might have mustered in it's own mediocrity.

In other words no matter where you stand, if at all, on the whole "cultural wars" thing it seems the take away from Hatred is that the dev played both sides of it to drum up PR for an otherwise unremarkable game.

[–]Tactful 56ポイント57ポイント  (4子コメント)

In other words no matter where you stand, if at all, on the whole "cultural wars" thing it seems the take away from Hatred is that the dev played both sides of it to drum up PR for an otherwise unremarkable game.

Exactly this. It shouldn't matter how you feel about social progressiveness in video games - this dev made a bad game and is selling it on the back of artificial trangessiveness. It's boring at best and disgusting at worst.

[–]FSMhelpusall 13ポイント14ポイント  (14子コメント)

If that's the case, then the media are gullible fools who fell for it.

You realize that this mirrors exactly what was done in the 90s, with Carmageddon, Mortal Kombat, the original GTAs, etc though?

Would you blame Netherrealm, etc for it, or the media?

[–]PepeSylvia11 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

We're including Reddit as the media right? Cause this is at the top of /r/Games for the exact reason the company wanted.

[–]TheSwaguar [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

If that's the case, then the media are gullible fools who fell for it.

What a naive thing to say. The media didn't fall for anything. They made a lot of money off of the controversy because controversy results in page views. More page views = more money. If I were them, I wouldn't care that the game got free press as long as I benefited from it as well.

I'd be willing to bet that sites like Polygon were highly exaggerating their "genuine revolt" towards the game. "Look at how shocking and disgusting this game looks!" is a much better story than "Look at how bad and cringey this game looks!".

[–]hotcod 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Difference is that those games were what they presented themselves as being. Hareted is not and that makes it cynical in a way those game simply aren't. Setting all that aide I think if it had been the game they said it was that the criticism of it in the media would not only have been warranted but important because, well, of course I would I agreed with it. Does that make me gullible? I don't think so as I don't think there was any obvious reason to doubt their intent. Did you?

[–]SamWhite [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Difference is that those games were what they presented themselves as being.

As well as being good.

[–]FSMhelpusall -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

What are you talking about? Hatred was presented as a 2edgy4u twin stick shooter about killing innocent people and that's what it is.

[–]hotcod [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The whole premise of the article you were criticising is that the game was presented as being something more than it turned out to be. Fine if you disagree with it but it would have saved us all some time if you'd realised what we were actually talking about earlier.

[–]CressCrowbits -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

But those studios didn't deliberately court it, it happened then probably against their wishes.

Nowadays the same newspapers that printed panic articles about the original gta give glowing reviews and full page adverts for gtav. Hatred is just a repeat of the original Postal - a crappy game trying to ride on the coat tails of a panic that no longer exists.

Some websites, blogs and forums might criticise Hatred, but I wouldn't be surprised if they don't get the mainstream popular press attention they so desperately crave.

[–]FSMhelpusall 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you don't think they knew what they were doing, I think you've being naive.

Furthermore, articles on Hatred have appeared on the Guardian, the IB Times, and a few other mainstream sources, so yeah, the mainstream is paying attention.

[–]Clevername3000 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But then so are the gamers. The media had the same amount of access as we did to this game. The difference is they're paid to give an opinion, and the developers knew how to exploit that.

[–]Grandy12 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

So, let me get this straight, you're proposing that both the media are the victims, because they fell for the ruse, and because they are the victims, they are the main culprits of the ruse?

[–]FSMhelpusall [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No, because there's nothing inherently evil about these games. As TB himself says, movies have Human Centipede and Serbian Films, which are shock films, the former definitely for its own sake.

It speaks more to the maturity of film-goers that Netflix hosts horrid things like that without shame, than it does for gaming media to get the vapors and require a fainting couch.

In short: It's provocation, but it's provoking people who shouldn't be acting like this to this game anyway. It's taking advantage of a personality flaw.

[–]Wazula42 29ポイント30ポイント  (5子コメント)

If anything, this just supports the thought that being outraged or offended by this product is akin to being annoyed with the kids who skateboard down your street in clothes you think look stupid.

It is. It's just unfortunate that some gamers are so easy to manipulate that all you have to do is go "the MAN doesn't want you to play this game!" and thousands will flock to it, no matter how mediocre it is.

[–]AggressiveToothbrush [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Reminds me of that Simpsons gag when Bart becomes part of a boyband:

Bart: Hello, Springfield! Now here's a song that your Principal Skinner doesn't want us to play!

Audience: Boo!

Principal Skinner: That's not true! This assembly was my idea. I like your inoffensive brand of pop-rock!

Bart: Screw you, man, we're gonna play it anyway!

[–]CressCrowbits 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sjws hate it! Get the game they tried to ban from steam!

[–]Valnar [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Here are 5 simple tricks SJWs don't want you to know!

[–]Aycoth -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's exclusivity. Exclusivity made ordinary people into millionaires overnight and in a lot of cases, framed the meteoric rise to success. Look at Gmail, Facebook, Minecraft, all started with some level of exclusivity, and that's a major reason at why they became popular

[–]HerbaciousTea [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

the galling thing about this game isn’t its content ... but the ease with which [they] have been able to exploit the ongoing culture war...

They're saying the galling thing is the media frenzy.

[–]notsoinsaneguy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's one thing to get annoyed at people who are doing what they want. It's another to get annoyed at a game developer who advertises his product as a way to annoy people with certain opinions. I don't know about you, but when people go out of their way to try to get on my nerves, just the fact that they are even trying to bother me bothers me.

[–]abomb999 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No, it's galling at how easily the media reacts because they are a bunch of culture warriors. What's interesting to me is that instead of the bill oreillys, whom I despise, it's the hillary clintons and overprotective helicopter parents, whom I also despise that the media is targeting.

[–]triedtostayaway [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It really is a pretentious article. I don't care about this game, I just think all this discussion about some dumb game is funny and that's the sole reason I'm here. But man, I love how he presents the games as solely existing because of some assumed false dichotomy of presumably conservative, male "hardcore" gamers and liberal media, and then he goes directly to the type of dismissive left-wing analysis that he sets up as being nonexistent. Then again, it is the guardian.

[–]multivacac [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But Slipknot != Death Metal. Maybe he didn't mean to make that connection, but it sounds like someone presuming to know what something is about without really looking into it.

[–]jimbobhickville [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm offended that he equates Death Metal with Slipknot.

[–]Kingoficecream 14ポイント15ポイント  (32子コメント)

gamers currently feeling marginalised and threatened as game developers broaden their horizons and explore new themes and audiences.

Against a smattering of mainstream Triple A titles that have chosen to contextualise the violence they portray? A stand against small indie studios looking to explore the possibilities of games beyond the madding crowd of military shooters, sports sims and fantasy brawlers?

lol, Holy shit that horrible usage of emphasized quotations and weird editorialized narrative. That is not why gamers are feeling marginalized at all. It's more along the lines of a large number of "progressives" having taken it upon themselves to decry gamers (some of whom are already social pariahs) as sexist/misogynist. It's very obvious where the guardian stands on this.

*I'm just going to go ahead and add in that it isn't just sexism, but violence of course as is the case here, that just wasn't the first thing that comes to mind when talking about "marginalized" given some recent events.

[–]TheInternetCanBeNice [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think he really hits the nail on the head here:

But really, Hatred is just a silly shooting game that seeks to tap dance between self-deprecating parody and pseudo-anarchic posturing so that it captures all sections, moods and arguing positions of its target demographic. Postal was here 18 years ago, Carmageddon before that, Death Race before that, all hoping to draw the same idolatrous response from the same sorts of alienated adolescents feeling frustrated, isolated and powerless at the world.

These days it's really hard to explain to people what the early 90s hysteria online with gamers trying to prove that games are not for kids was like. Sega's ad campaigns would often hint that the Super Nintendo is a kids toy with Mario, but the Genesis was a serious gaming machine for serious gamers who wanted to play stuff like Mortal Kombat.

There were honestly boards were grown men would decry the Super Nintendo version of Mortal Kombat as "not real" or "kid stuff" because it didn't have blood. The Sega version, that one had blood. It was serious business and for serious gamers only.

This same impulse is what Destructive Studios is tapping into. They're counting on angsty 12 year olds believing that just because a game shouldn't be played by toddlers it's a "adult" game.

Games can be violent and still worth while, but lets be real here. This game is marketed like a Slipknot album.

[–]kingmanic [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That is not why gamers are feeling marginalized at all.

It specifically is; it's the unease of the idea that the core game market isn't them anymore. I think thought those folks badly miss-aim their concern. aiming it at 'feminism' when it's mobile gaming which is shifting the focus. The money there is significant and we may see a lot of the publisher shift attention.

It's more along the lines of a large number of "progressives" having taken it upon themselves to decry gamers (some of whom are already social pariahs) as sexist/misogynist. It's very obvious where the guardian stands on this.

You really bought into the story the specific demographic telling without realizing the stories came out because those assholes flooded their inboxes with juvenile bullshit about some indie dev. The articles were a reaction to that bullshit.

[–]BobRossNTV 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

the fact that that quote is actually from the dev just makes this even more of a cringe fest.

i'm not upset that this game is glorifying killing innocent people, i'm upset that they'd make something so shit.

at least unlike Avengers, this is getting lambasted by the public. fuck if the average person would know anything about art, but i guess it takes something being obscene for them to recognize how shit boring and unneccesary violence is.

[–]Tactful 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

This isn't really related to this specific situation but I totally agree. The majority of video games are about committing violence and recently I've started to find that really really boring.

Don't get me wrong, some of my favourite games involve violence as a core gameplay mechanic, I just wish more people would make more games about things other than just shooting dudes to progress to the next bit of the story. I really enjoyed Gone Home for instance, and am looking forward to Firewatch when that launches.

Just my personal opinion too obviously. People should be able to enjoy whatever experiences are their preference.

[–]BobRossNTV 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Same here, I really enjoy Half Life and Hotline: Miami, but i at least feel the latter had a purpose to the ultra-violent nature of it.

[–]Tactful 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hotline: Miami is more like a real-time puzzle solving game to me anyway. The violence is just background noise, it's about clearing a room of enemies using well times clicks.

[–]CFGX -1ポイント0ポイント  (13子コメント)

This is the biggest load of horseshit. DC didn't exploit anything, they literally sat back while the media went FUCKING INSANE over this game and said "yea, ok, we're still here"

The media made a monster, and now they're trying to whitewash their role in it.

[–]Tactful 11ポイント12ポイント  (12子コメント)

The devs knew exactly what they were doing, hence their quotes, the framing of the initial trailer, and their ongoing relationship with the press.

If you don't believe that then I don't know what else to say.

[–]Kuoh -4ポイント-3ポイント  (11子コメント)

Yeah the devs totally knew that putting mild violence in a trailer was going to cause "progressive" sites to cause a huge moral panic about the game. I don't know why they ever bother to make the game, with that knowledge of the future they should be buying lottery tickets.

[–]Grantly [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Mild violence? That trailer was graphic. Everyone I showed it to was super uncomfortable after seeing it.

[–]Tactful 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, they did. The entire game was designed to create controversy.

I thought everyone realised that, it's pretty obvious. This is literally a quote from the devs:

"These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure."

[–]Sithrak [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I have an idea for the next game of said studio - a game about being sexist and being mean to feminists or whatnot. Huge success, marketing budget=zero

[–]cvillano [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

pretty shit article obviously written by someone who doesnt know much about the medium he's commenting on

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

It's actually quite a good article (hence the upvotes) written by Keith Stuart, a notable games writer who has been writing about the medium for over two decades.

[–]cvillano [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

the article is 100% agenda and narrative pushing, no one who thinks objectively wants to read an article attempting to spin the story behind Hatred. This guy is trying (failing) to spin the narrative so it's no longer about SJWs and shitty games media making themselves look foolish crying hysterics about a mediocre game, but to instead pin blame on the 3edgy5me "gamer" that these people try to portray gamers as - it's painfully obvious.

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's an opinion piece, so yes it contains this man's opinion.

I'm sorry you feel that way but I disagree with your interpretation. I think he pens a fairly accurate portrayal of this dev studio and the sort of consumers who will legitimately purchase this mediocre game.

I mean, he literally calls out offended "liberal media" outlets in the article as a part of the problem. He illustrates the situation very clearly in my opinion. I'm sorry you don't feel that way, but I don't think you are "thinking objectively" about this situation based on your comments.

[–]Doomsayer189 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I wish this "they're not a real gamer" shit would stop already. Writing about games is literally that guys job, but apparently since he disagrees with /u/cvillano he's a total outsider.

[–]cvillano [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

and a single solitary tear dripped down /u/doomsayer189's face

idgaf about his "gaming cred" - just that he's knowledgeable about the subject he reports on, which it appears from this article that he's not. So in this case, I'm saying he's not a good journalist.

[–]cookiesbro [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Yeah and he loses any credibility because he writes for the guardian. Slamming slipknot as well, okay mate you get that many members together in a band and make cohesive music that sounds just as good live. Cunt/10.

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Great analytic skills there mate, good one. It's an apt comparison in context, which is why you can only call him a cunt after removing all the context and cushioning.

[–]cookiesbro [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I don't have time for cunts who get mad at fictional violence, wasted energy much like this, bye pal.

[–]IThoughtThisWasDigg [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

tl;dr a journalist basically hasn't played a game since the NES days.

[–]Tactful [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Actually he's a very notable games writer who has been playing and writing about games for over two decades.