archive.is webpage capture | からアーカイブ | 2015年10月17日 06:13:28 UTC | |
| すべてのスクリーンショット, | ドメインから www.gamesindustry.biz | ||
| ウェブページスクリーンショット | |||
Brianna Wu: "I see a generation with almost no innovation"
By
Rachel Weber
Head of development at Giant Spacekat explains why women in tech is about making better games
Brianna Wu, activist and the head of development at Giant Spacekat, told GamesBeat 2015 attendees that making tech more inclusive for women could help to breed the innovation that she feels is lacking from this generation of games.
"When I look at the PS4 and I look at the Xbox One I don't know what you see, I see a generation with almost no innovation," she said.
"With respect to all my friends out there shipping games on it, when I look at Forza I see the same game from Xbox 360 with slightly prettier textures and particle effects. Like there's nothing I've seen so far that couldn't have been done last generation. Same story with first person shooters. To me when we're talking about women in tech at its core this is about making better games. Aren't you all so frustrated playing the same stupid game?"
Wu also spoke about her recent visit to Oculus Connect 2 and the potential she sees in the medium for emotional storytelling.
"I left Oculus Connect a few weeks ago and I left Oculus Connect more psyched that I've ever felt in my life about the longevity and the sustainability about VR. That said I can't help but look at some of my friends that are working in this field... look for instance at Epic's tech demo, they came out with a tech demo that got rave reviews," she said.
"But what is it? it's a tech demo where you are on a train and you're killing more robots in a first person shooter. Let's trot out the same playbook yet again!"
She explained that Giant Spacekat was more interested in what VR could do better than any other technology, and it believed the answer was story. She suggested empathy was the building block currently missing from game development, and VR could offer a way to incorporate that with your motion, your eyes and the tone of your voice.
"That's really the direction that we're going."
From GamesIndustry.biz
Recommendations by Taboola
107 Comments
While there is indeed a certain lack of innovation and those 'next-gen' consoles aren't used to their full potential, the much bigger issue is the customer. I don't think any game studio runs short on ideas. The real problem is selling these ideas to the customer. Think Tribes. Some people saw the revolution of the team shooter genre by adding vertical movement. Some people loved it, others didn't. I rarely see any action games with vertical movement nowadays. Variations of that sort of movement as we see them in Assassin's Creed, Dying Light or even Just Cause (a more limited form of freedom) seem to attract a bigger audience.
In my opinion, innovation isn't a question of gender. It's a question of marketing with the last instance still being the customer. You can't sell what the customer doesn't want.
In my opinion, innovation isn't a question of gender. It's a question of marketing with the last instance still being the customer. You can't sell what the customer doesn't want.
Posted:4 days ago
Popular Comment
#2
What the bloody hell does any of this have to do with gender? I actually find this insulting.
Just because you have an agenda, it doesn't mean you have to weakly attach it to absolutely everything.
Just because you have an agenda, it doesn't mean you have to weakly attach it to absolutely everything.
Posted:4 days ago
Popular Comment
#3
Agreed. Personally, when I go to work, I'm going to work with coders, artists, designers, producers and musicians. Notice those terms have no gender. I couldn't care less what gender they are. This type of narrative is actually promoting sexism.
Posted:4 days ago
Popular Comment
#4
Right now we are in a point in which production costs (for AAA at least) are too high to take risks. That's why you see so many shooters, so many sequels, so many zombie games... You still see creativity in small studios like her's who are doing those indie games that are also present on PS4 and Xone. So I'm guessing she points the lack of creativity in big companies and big budget project.
And about improving creativity by being more inclusive to women; the more people we have on board the more points of view that we can have. And that is never a bad thing.
@Col: That may be your case, but it's not the general case. Yesterday in this very website we had news of a great female talent leaving the games industry because of how her work was not recognized just for being a woman. Saying that making activism to fight back against those prejudices is promoting sexism is like saying that making activism for the integration of immigrants promotes Xenophobia.
And about improving creativity by being more inclusive to women; the more people we have on board the more points of view that we can have. And that is never a bad thing.
@Col: That may be your case, but it's not the general case. Yesterday in this very website we had news of a great female talent leaving the games industry because of how her work was not recognized just for being a woman. Saying that making activism to fight back against those prejudices is promoting sexism is like saying that making activism for the integration of immigrants promotes Xenophobia.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Alfonso Sexto on 13th October 2015 9:03am
Posted:4 days ago
I have to also agree on this one, it is bugger all to do with a gender balance. If she sees no innovation in the industry then stop trying to make it about something it isn't and make innovative games. So far I am not that impressed with her work; revolution 60 is innovative??
Of course having a nice balance of gender in the workplace is a good thing, but neither side is better or worse for the industry.
Of course having a nice balance of gender in the workplace is a good thing, but neither side is better or worse for the industry.
Edited 3 times. Last edit by Darren Adams on 13th October 2015 9:35am
Posted:4 days ago
Popular Comment
#6
Actualy Alfonso, it is.
I could put that lack of success down to lack of marketing skills, lac of good luck, maybe the games are just shite and I can't see it. What I don't blame it on is any kind of conspiracy. It can't be sexism because I and all my team are male.
On leaving, if I made a parting shot about the industry being to blame, I'd be ridiculed and rightly so - "the industry" owes me nothing. But if I also blamed it on someone getting my name wrong, just how petty and stupid would that make me look? At least her studio had a hit and she's got something to be proud of. I've got dick all and I'm still here, so I'm afraid any bleating on her part is getting short shrift and does her wider cause no use at all.
Yesterday in this very website we had news of a great female talent leaving the games industry because of how her work was not recognized just for being a womanI've considered leaving the industry as I can't get any of my recent work recognised by anybody. If I'm male and we accept her argument that males get more attention, isn't that more insulting to me?
I could put that lack of success down to lack of marketing skills, lac of good luck, maybe the games are just shite and I can't see it. What I don't blame it on is any kind of conspiracy. It can't be sexism because I and all my team are male.
On leaving, if I made a parting shot about the industry being to blame, I'd be ridiculed and rightly so - "the industry" owes me nothing. But if I also blamed it on someone getting my name wrong, just how petty and stupid would that make me look? At least her studio had a hit and she's got something to be proud of. I've got dick all and I'm still here, so I'm afraid any bleating on her part is getting short shrift and does her wider cause no use at all.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 13th October 2015 10:08am
Posted:4 days ago
I've just taken a quick look at her game. The characters are all cute girls with skin tight clothes, long legs, tiny waists and big boobs.
I remember saying with respect to the crap male developers were getting that if women aimed their characters at women they would probably be presented with an even more unattainable body image so it's nice to be proven right.
When she made her game she had a chance to present a more realistic body image and wouldn't that have been innovative.
I remember saying with respect to the crap male developers were getting that if women aimed their characters at women they would probably be presented with an even more unattainable body image so it's nice to be proven right.
When she made her game she had a chance to present a more realistic body image and wouldn't that have been innovative.
Posted:4 days ago
Strange, coz I can see more innovation than you can shake a stick at in the independent space. Of course there ain't much money in the independent space, so the AAA studios appear to be making some relatively sane business decisions in that respect by selling generally "more of the same"... as it appears plenty people are happy with that.
Posted:4 days ago
More women = more innovation? I don't think that's how it works.
Now more women = more diversity. That I agree with. But diversity =/ innovation.
Innovation is a calculated risk on the market. I'm 100% certain there are thousands of men and women in the industry that would love to push their innovative ideas onto the market place but can't because the money department demands a checklist that looks awfully familiar to everyone. Simply having more women on the team (a good idea in itself) isn't going to make the money managers sway their green light conditions.
In truth, this is kind of all over the map. Nothing innovative because too many men and then talks about the innovative VR space.
I want women to succeed in this industry. I want equal treatment. I want equal credit. I want equal pay for performance/experience. But this just leaves me scratching my head. I'm hoping the larger narrative of her topic made more sense.
Now more women = more diversity. That I agree with. But diversity =/ innovation.
Innovation is a calculated risk on the market. I'm 100% certain there are thousands of men and women in the industry that would love to push their innovative ideas onto the market place but can't because the money department demands a checklist that looks awfully familiar to everyone. Simply having more women on the team (a good idea in itself) isn't going to make the money managers sway their green light conditions.
In truth, this is kind of all over the map. Nothing innovative because too many men and then talks about the innovative VR space.
I want women to succeed in this industry. I want equal treatment. I want equal credit. I want equal pay for performance/experience. But this just leaves me scratching my head. I'm hoping the larger narrative of her topic made more sense.
Posted:4 days ago
When I'm recruiting people at work, if 100% of the applicants are women, then call me lazy if you like, but there's a 100% chance that the job is going to go to a woman. Equally if 10 apply, and there are 5 men and 5 women, then there's a 50% chance. As it happens, I'm not turning women down for jobs - I'm just not getting applicants who are female! Last job we advertised (senior artist) had 8 applicants, all of which were men. A man got the job.
Ironically, on the same project, we outsourced some artwork. The best person to approach me for that freelance work was Jane Stroud from CIA. Guess what? She (and her team) got the job!
Amazing. Sounds an awful lot like.... equality...?
The volume of women in the games industry is directly proportional to the amount of women looking for work in the games industry as far as I can tell.
Ironically, on the same project, we outsourced some artwork. The best person to approach me for that freelance work was Jane Stroud from CIA. Guess what? She (and her team) got the job!
Amazing. Sounds an awful lot like.... equality...?
The volume of women in the games industry is directly proportional to the amount of women looking for work in the games industry as far as I can tell.
Posted:4 days ago
Sure... But image and the perception of something can affect applicant diversity, so
With regards to the article, there's not much information here. Perhaps GI could approach Brianna for a transcript of her talk? Or have her write a piece going over the fundamentals of it?
The volume of women in the games industry is directly proportional to the amount of women looking for work in the games industry as far as I can tell.may not be the whole story. See, for instance, this: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/opinion/sunday/what-really-keeps-women-out-of-tech.html
With regards to the article, there's not much information here. Perhaps GI could approach Brianna for a transcript of her talk? Or have her write a piece going over the fundamentals of it?
Posted:4 days ago
My comment was speaking purely from the point of experience, though - if there aren't women applying for the jobs we have, I can't really give them the jobs! :)
Posted:4 days ago
Women are 50% of the productive population, not a special interest group. She seems to be suggesting that gender is the problem with innovation and that doesn't make a lot of sense. It would be interesting to hear more about her angle as I can only see a quote.
That said, I believe more women in games could help boost innovation by increasing the economic output of the industry and introducing more highly skilled workers in general. More innovators and and a stronger economy tends to mean more risks can be taken.
We could definitely look into ways to get more of our productive population into the industry. Other creative sectors are ahead of us there for a variety of reasons.
That said, I believe more women in games could help boost innovation by increasing the economic output of the industry and introducing more highly skilled workers in general. More innovators and and a stronger economy tends to mean more risks can be taken.
We could definitely look into ways to get more of our productive population into the industry. Other creative sectors are ahead of us there for a variety of reasons.
Posted:4 days ago
First of all, innovation purely for innovation's sake is not worth much. Secondly, this reminds me of complaints of people who asked for "next-gen gameplay", completely ignoring that we came in from a rather capable last-gen (if you were willing to compromise on visuals) and neither input- nor output devices have changed significantly. The possibility space thus hasn't grown that much. It is already vast, though, as many games prove, if you're willing to look beyond AAA. How is a lack of correlation between current-gen and a significant increase in innovative gameplay a surprise, then?
Posted:4 days ago
Can we call the 15 minutes please? Innovation is a discussion but can we have it with a suitable mix of other veteran indie developers of a single game male, female, transgendered individuals represented across all racial boundaries please. That or the same with people with actual established track records of AAA development and innovative titles?
Posted:4 days ago
"Aren't you all so frustrated playing the same stupid game?"
I'd be willing to consider this a misquote or just a part of her attempts at persuasion but...don't call them stupid, great games and boring games exist in every genre and denouncing any genre even at a saturation point of said genre is immature and mean spirited.
I'd like to see innovation...in a great game, innovation for the sake of it comes so often it is almost half of the games coming out in the first 2 years or so of a console. A great game that creates what has never been done before is unbelievably hard and takes time and a bit of luck.
I'd be willing to consider this a misquote or just a part of her attempts at persuasion but...don't call them stupid, great games and boring games exist in every genre and denouncing any genre even at a saturation point of said genre is immature and mean spirited.
I'd like to see innovation...in a great game, innovation for the sake of it comes so often it is almost half of the games coming out in the first 2 years or so of a console. A great game that creates what has never been done before is unbelievably hard and takes time and a bit of luck.
Posted:3 days ago
I'm very disappointed at the latent hostility in a lot of the comments on here. She makes a valid points that I don't think anyone can reasonably dispute. There isn't a lot of innovation in the current gen space (PS4, XB1). Rehashing the same old tropes in emerging markets (VR) is disappointing. I don't think anyone for certain knows that having more women in the industry will increase innovation but only a diehard troll could argue that having more women in the industry wouldn't be a good thing.
One thing I am certain of is that people who get their hackles up whenever someone talks about gender diversity in the industry do not contribute to a view that the industry is friendly towards women. I don’t see any problem with her message so I can only assume that, if someone does have a problem, it’s with the messenger. Should you find yourself in that camp then I humbly request that you do some introspection. You might just find that, quite possibly unintentionally, you may be a part of a problem.
One thing I am certain of is that people who get their hackles up whenever someone talks about gender diversity in the industry do not contribute to a view that the industry is friendly towards women. I don’t see any problem with her message so I can only assume that, if someone does have a problem, it’s with the messenger. Should you find yourself in that camp then I humbly request that you do some introspection. You might just find that, quite possibly unintentionally, you may be a part of a problem.
Posted:3 days ago
Matthew, the objection is that she's tying innovation to gender. More women = more innovation. I'm a big fan of diversity (of all kinds) because it brings more perspectives, so maybe that'll help innovation? But saying that it doesn't exist is silly - we've never had more innovation, it's just happening in the Indie scene. Innovation is slower in AAA because of the budget risks - innovation is, almost by definition, more risky than repeating something that's still popular.
Brianna frequently makes some really great points, but I don't think this is one of them.
Brianna frequently makes some really great points, but I don't think this is one of them.
Posted:3 days ago
Yes, there is innovation in the indie scene but she is specifically talking about PS4 and XB1 in her quote. By talking about the indie scene you are arguing about a point she didn't make.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Matthew Eakins on 13th October 2015 8:48pm
Posted:3 days ago
I disagree - Everybody's Gone To The Rapture and Flower are two interesting examples of next-gen Indie games, and both PS4/XB1 have good setups for getting indies onto their system as well. I don't see any reason to believe we'll see fewer indie games there than we saw towards the end of the PS3/XB360 lifecycle.
Upcoming AAA games are showing some interesting innovations as well - The Division, R6 Siege, Battlefront, Fallout 4 - all have interesting new features that are new innovations in established genres. Lego Dimensions adds physical building into the real-toys market, which afaik has never been done.
Upcoming AAA games are showing some interesting innovations as well - The Division, R6 Siege, Battlefront, Fallout 4 - all have interesting new features that are new innovations in established genres. Lego Dimensions adds physical building into the real-toys market, which afaik has never been done.
Posted:3 days ago
Popular Comment
#21
Congratulations on winning male developer bingo! So far we've had:
"Why does everything have to be about gender?"
"I don't see sexism so sexism doesn't exist."
"I hire the best person for the job."
A f**king gamergate video!
"I'm a struggling male game developer so what is she complaining about?"
The reason gender opinion pieces continue to be expressed, (and more importantly published), is exactly because of comments like these.
"Why does everything have to be about gender?"
"I don't see sexism so sexism doesn't exist."
"I hire the best person for the job."
A f**king gamergate video!
"I'm a struggling male game developer so what is she complaining about?"
The reason gender opinion pieces continue to be expressed, (and more importantly published), is exactly because of comments like these.
Posted:3 days ago
I'm surprised at the lack of follow-up. When someone says speaking of the PS4/XBO "I see a generation with almost no innovation", the logical follow-up is "Well, what does innovation look like to you?"
She sees the potential in VR, but that's technology that's still a ways away yet. What was the last innovative technology she enjoyed?
She sees the potential in VR, but that's technology that's still a ways away yet. What was the last innovative technology she enjoyed?
Posted:3 days ago
"Aren't you all so frustrated playing the same stupid game?" Obviously not. GTA, COD, FIFA, ... sales figures beg to differ.
The same argument was made also when "gen 3" came out. Visual quality is a large portion of the the AAA experience. The AAA experience is what people put money down for. The "gen 4" offers a lot to make bigger and more beautiful games and we are just about to see true next gen releases.
The same argument was made also when "gen 3" came out. Visual quality is a large portion of the the AAA experience. The AAA experience is what people put money down for. The "gen 4" offers a lot to make bigger and more beautiful games and we are just about to see true next gen releases.
Posted:3 days ago
@Col
And please, #Gamergate videos? really? what's next? an MRA article?
"if there aren't women applying for the jobs we have, I can't really give them the jobs!"Maybe we should wonder then why they aren't applying, if sexism is not such a big deal as some people suggest...
And please, #Gamergate videos? really? what's next? an MRA article?
Posted:3 days ago
I didn't post the gamergate video mate. Until I read about it on the comments here I wasn't even aware of it.
To be honest, if you wanted to get into the why's and what-nots of the lack of women in the games industry, I think you're looking at the wrong end of the journey. As I said, I can't give jobs to women if there are no women doing the jobs I'm hiring for. That's not actually the fault of the games industry - that's a fault of developed culture as it stands at the moment. The lifestyle and 'taste' that is sold to female audiences, and the way they may not be as encouraged as men to be interested in engineering subjects at school and the like. In other words, if the average age of a person in the games industry is 25, then the problem lies approx 23 years before the point the jobs that aren't being applied for by women are being advertised.
It's essentially the same as a plague. If a disease wipes out 90% of people, is it the fault of the final 10% of people that they're the only ones left?
Perhaps it's a binary point of view - I am a programmer after all - but safe to say, in my house, Maths is a big deal for both my daughter and my son. As a side note, I will be encouraging them BOTH away from the games industry (too unstable), but I'd like to think that they both end up doing jobs which were based around sciences and/or engineering.
[edited due to typo]
To be honest, if you wanted to get into the why's and what-nots of the lack of women in the games industry, I think you're looking at the wrong end of the journey. As I said, I can't give jobs to women if there are no women doing the jobs I'm hiring for. That's not actually the fault of the games industry - that's a fault of developed culture as it stands at the moment. The lifestyle and 'taste' that is sold to female audiences, and the way they may not be as encouraged as men to be interested in engineering subjects at school and the like. In other words, if the average age of a person in the games industry is 25, then the problem lies approx 23 years before the point the jobs that aren't being applied for by women are being advertised.
It's essentially the same as a plague. If a disease wipes out 90% of people, is it the fault of the final 10% of people that they're the only ones left?
Perhaps it's a binary point of view - I am a programmer after all - but safe to say, in my house, Maths is a big deal for both my daughter and my son. As a side note, I will be encouraging them BOTH away from the games industry (too unstable), but I'd like to think that they both end up doing jobs which were based around sciences and/or engineering.
[edited due to typo]
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Col Rodgers on 14th October 2015 10:23am
Posted:3 days ago
Well Jonathan, your idiot bingo is exactly the type of comment that I would expect when you have no rational answer to questions asked here. Classy, real classy.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out....
Don't let the door hit you on the way out....
Posted:3 days ago
Further to Col's point, I have a young daughter who is very interested in maths. The three of us and my mother in law were all sitting around the kitchen table, and my daughter mentioned something about something she found difficult...and before any of us could answer my mother in law said something along the lines of "don't worry about it, Maths isn't for girls anyway".
My wife, who is a medical doctor with an additional first-class honours in another biological science, unsurprisingly (given her mum's attitude) considers maths her weakest subject, and never for a second considered going into the physical sciences or engineering. She is at least self-aware enough to realise that she probably inherited this aversion from her upbringing / environment.
So, here I am, sitting trying to encourage my daughter to be interested, and the major women in her life are practically broadcasting into her head, subliminally "DON'T LIKE MATHS". You could argue all day long about what started this cultural aversion, but what's clear to me is that *women themselves* have an enormous part to play in fixing it. Women who were , through no fault of their own, raised to not consider maths and physical sciences "for them" can recognise the pathology at work here and help to break the cycle, because frankly, nothing influences a little girl more than her mother.
My wife, who is a medical doctor with an additional first-class honours in another biological science, unsurprisingly (given her mum's attitude) considers maths her weakest subject, and never for a second considered going into the physical sciences or engineering. She is at least self-aware enough to realise that she probably inherited this aversion from her upbringing / environment.
So, here I am, sitting trying to encourage my daughter to be interested, and the major women in her life are practically broadcasting into her head, subliminally "DON'T LIKE MATHS". You could argue all day long about what started this cultural aversion, but what's clear to me is that *women themselves* have an enormous part to play in fixing it. Women who were , through no fault of their own, raised to not consider maths and physical sciences "for them" can recognise the pathology at work here and help to break the cycle, because frankly, nothing influences a little girl more than her mother.
Posted:3 days ago
Thanks for your post Nick. This is why I feel its not good enough when we hear; "I don't see why we talk about gender" or "maybe girls just aren't interested".
We should see gender differences, they exist and challenge why it is that historically females may not go into maths or feel confident with it. Both the male (and as you rightly point out) the female influences need to question it and change attitudes and its great to see encouraging fathers in this thread.
Whilst we all have choices in life with regards to what we study and what we want to pursue, a lot of those choices are shaped by external influences.
We should see gender differences, they exist and challenge why it is that historically females may not go into maths or feel confident with it. Both the male (and as you rightly point out) the female influences need to question it and change attitudes and its great to see encouraging fathers in this thread.
Whilst we all have choices in life with regards to what we study and what we want to pursue, a lot of those choices are shaped by external influences.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Adam Campbell on 14th October 2015 11:58am
Posted:3 days ago
If we assume that women and girls are more interested in moving up a social ladder than men who tend to be blissfully unaware of that kind of thing and prefer more physical or concrete ways of demonstrating their power then I would imagine the games they prefer to play would reflect that.
I think if you make those games the market is there and largely untapped and the Kim Kardashian game proves this.
I would consider that innovative however I have no clue if it was designed or made by men, women or even if the idea was Kim Kardashian's herself.
Targeting a different demographic with a new idea naturally brings about innovation but simply saying hiring women to work on existing genres does the same really is ideological nonsense.
I think if you make those games the market is there and largely untapped and the Kim Kardashian game proves this.
I would consider that innovative however I have no clue if it was designed or made by men, women or even if the idea was Kim Kardashian's herself.
Targeting a different demographic with a new idea naturally brings about innovation but simply saying hiring women to work on existing genres does the same really is ideological nonsense.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by John Owens on 14th October 2015 10:57am
Posted:3 days ago
@Cod
Yeah I know you didn't, that part was meant to whoever did it and not you. sorry about that ;)
Yeah I know you didn't, that part was meant to whoever did it and not you. sorry about that ;)
Posted:3 days ago
I think her comments are kind of mixing up game innovations with game revolutions. Innovations don't have to be huge sweeping changes. Many game genres are borrowing aspects from other games. Shooters have crafting in them RPGs have shooter elements in them. In terms of big AAA development you can't expect a studio and a publisher to want to take a huge risk on something that is completely brand new. On occasion you get things that break out of the mold like Mirrors Edge (which to be honest just removed guns from a shooter and created game mechanics around that) but you can't expect a studio / publisher to take risks like that consistently.
Now on the other hand look at a game like GTA. In terms of game mechanics that game hasn't changed a ton, but the innovation that has taken place with the engine is nothing short of amazing.
I did a little research on Brianna Wu and quite frankly given her small body of work (all I saw was an iOS game) I don't feel like she has any credibility to criticize the industry. I am all for having more women in the game industry, as long as they are qualified for the job. My thoughts are on the lack of women in the game industry and to some degree tech in general is just an indication that it is a field that men are more interested in than women.
Why is the conversation about this always to 1 sided? Are we ever asking why there aren't more women mechanics? Why their aren't more women landscapers? So the whole concept of women working in X industry is one that generally cherry picks the data.
Now on the other hand look at a game like GTA. In terms of game mechanics that game hasn't changed a ton, but the innovation that has taken place with the engine is nothing short of amazing.
I did a little research on Brianna Wu and quite frankly given her small body of work (all I saw was an iOS game) I don't feel like she has any credibility to criticize the industry. I am all for having more women in the game industry, as long as they are qualified for the job. My thoughts are on the lack of women in the game industry and to some degree tech in general is just an indication that it is a field that men are more interested in than women.
Why is the conversation about this always to 1 sided? Are we ever asking why there aren't more women mechanics? Why their aren't more women landscapers? So the whole concept of women working in X industry is one that generally cherry picks the data.
Posted:2 days ago
Paul I agree with you. I am sick of people shoe-horning their politics into business.
Posted:2 days ago
Very good point Col. It objectifies men too suggesting they are all just "in it together trying to keep the girls out". Which is utter nonsense.
Posted:2 days ago
@Alfonso "That may be your case, but it's not the general case. Yesterday in this very website we had news of a great female talent leaving the games industry because of how her work was not recognized just for being a woman."
You are talking about the lady with the Chinese Room? I read an article about that but I could not tell from the article what exactly made her come to that conclusion. She has health problems and she should be focused on that. From what I read it sounds very bad. Chinese Room made a deal with Sony to bring their game to PS4 which in and of itself is a great recognition of the entire studio. There are many smaller studios out there that don't get that level of support. I bet there are many man-only shops that wish they had Sony's support.
Her comments seem to me to be without context and at this point I have a knee-jerk reaction against the whole games and sexism thing because I think the whole thing has gotten completely out of proportion. In 2015 there is nothing stopping a bunch of women developers from forming their own studio and showing all us guys how games should be made. Are there some jerk men in the industry? Yea -- there are jerk men in every industry. Go outside for a few hours you may run into an jerk man. On the contrary are their jerk women in the industry? Of course, being a jerk isn't monopolized by men. Anyone of any persuasion can be a jerk.
I am all for more women in any industry, just as long as they are qualified for the work. I am sure there are many men out there that haven't gotten credit for their work, unfortunately they didn't have the gender card to play.
You are talking about the lady with the Chinese Room? I read an article about that but I could not tell from the article what exactly made her come to that conclusion. She has health problems and she should be focused on that. From what I read it sounds very bad. Chinese Room made a deal with Sony to bring their game to PS4 which in and of itself is a great recognition of the entire studio. There are many smaller studios out there that don't get that level of support. I bet there are many man-only shops that wish they had Sony's support.
Her comments seem to me to be without context and at this point I have a knee-jerk reaction against the whole games and sexism thing because I think the whole thing has gotten completely out of proportion. In 2015 there is nothing stopping a bunch of women developers from forming their own studio and showing all us guys how games should be made. Are there some jerk men in the industry? Yea -- there are jerk men in every industry. Go outside for a few hours you may run into an jerk man. On the contrary are their jerk women in the industry? Of course, being a jerk isn't monopolized by men. Anyone of any persuasion can be a jerk.
I am all for more women in any industry, just as long as they are qualified for the work. I am sure there are many men out there that haven't gotten credit for their work, unfortunately they didn't have the gender card to play.
Posted:2 days ago
In 2015 there is nothing stopping a bunch of women developers from forming their own studio and showing all us guys how games should be made.Giant Spacekat was founded by Brianna Wu, Frank Wu and Amanda S. Warner.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfa4ErkfttQ
I am not a games critic to say its lacking innovation. If they spent 500K on this, it does not show.
Posted:2 days ago
Paul I agree with you. I am sick of people shoe-horning their politics into business.The two are almost-always entwined, either subtly or overtly, and not just in gaming. But nevermind.
Posted:2 days ago
@ Morville
You and people like you are making them entwined and thus doing so making the problem worse. The rest of us just want to work in a meritocracy.
You and people like you are making them entwined and thus doing so making the problem worse. The rest of us just want to work in a meritocracy.
Posted:2 days ago
Ohhhhh, burrrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnn.
You're being a bit silly now, I think. Bye bye.
/ignore.
You're being a bit silly now, I think. Bye bye.
/ignore.
Posted:2 days ago
I do find it interesting that comments on this subject always seem to fall into two distinct groups to my ears. Always. And despite each article running to a thousand posts apiece, I think I can summarise it all in a couple of sentences.
1) Developers, publishers, etc. that are actually hiring people in the gaming industry:
"We don't discriminate, we'll hire the best person for the job but we do acknowledge more women and/or minorities wouldn't hurt so are receptive."
2) Bloggers, Critics, "Thinkers", Agitators, People who want to be involved in policy making but aren't:
"It's all shit and the industry is full of bigotry and oppression. And it's all white mans fault. You need me to fix it and if you don't agree I will ridicule you."
The interests of both parties I think speak for themselves.
(edited for spellign)
1) Developers, publishers, etc. that are actually hiring people in the gaming industry:
"We don't discriminate, we'll hire the best person for the job but we do acknowledge more women and/or minorities wouldn't hurt so are receptive."
2) Bloggers, Critics, "Thinkers", Agitators, People who want to be involved in policy making but aren't:
"It's all shit and the industry is full of bigotry and oppression. And it's all white mans fault. You need me to fix it and if you don't agree I will ridicule you."
The interests of both parties I think speak for themselves.
(edited for spellign)
Edited 3 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th October 2015 12:55pm
Posted:2 days ago
What about, games companies are just hiring the best candidate they see while also acknowledging that their are also social influences biases and elements of nature. For example women tend to have less confidence in maths and science despite their aptitude, which might be explained by higher levels of testosterone in males benefiting from the current method of teaching (and being a former competition mathematician, I know a thing or two).Because the people at the doing end know all that. 35 years ago when I was at comprehensive school, whilst the lads were doing double metalwork, the girls were doing double cooking. That's all changed now and in 10-20 more years I expect the landscape will look very different. All this deep thinking, introspecitve claptrap doesn't need to go beyond that observation. When more skilled women are available, more skilled women will get hired.
I'm not going one to one with your other points, you seem to want to overthink and analyse everything in micro detail and I just haven't got the time or inclination as it's not needed.
Posted:2 days ago
That's the thing Paul. This "claptrap" thinking has identified many things that elude simple thinking. You just seem to want to ignore it because you can't be bothered to take the time to investigate it and it doesn't really affect you personally.
You do know that most effective methods in advertising, branding, customer service and leadership are the result of all this "claptrap introspection." When a AAA game is released, that huge marketing budget, those record breaking sales and revenue figures - yeah, all a result of "claptrap" introspection, which you'd know if you knew the historical events where business, advertising and leadership met with psychology.
Just because you don't understand sociology and psychology, doesn't mean it's all bollocks and isn't needed. This is willful ignorance as the facts show otherwise, if only you'd open your eyes and look. This is no better than people who put gaming down as just a waste of time and a childish activity because they couldn't understand it. Are you not showing the same pattern of consideration and thought to psychology and sociology.
You do know that most effective methods in advertising, branding, customer service and leadership are the result of all this "claptrap introspection." When a AAA game is released, that huge marketing budget, those record breaking sales and revenue figures - yeah, all a result of "claptrap" introspection, which you'd know if you knew the historical events where business, advertising and leadership met with psychology.
Just because you don't understand sociology and psychology, doesn't mean it's all bollocks and isn't needed. This is willful ignorance as the facts show otherwise, if only you'd open your eyes and look. This is no better than people who put gaming down as just a waste of time and a childish activity because they couldn't understand it. Are you not showing the same pattern of consideration and thought to psychology and sociology.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 15th October 2015 1:09pm
Posted:2 days ago
I'm sure it has a reason to exist, but it's not needed HERE. This is ostensibly a convesation about why women are under-represented in game development (and other STEM techie jobs for that matter). I've told you why that is in my previous post, it's a fact not an opinion.
All the psychology and social aspects of examining why women were once thought only good for cooking and having babies, where society has gone since then, things of that ilk? I'm sure it's all fascinating but it's just filling in the details. And I agree those details aren't pleasant by todays more enlightened standards. But I don't need to know all this to make a decision on which person to hire next week.
All the psychology and social aspects of examining why women were once thought only good for cooking and having babies, where society has gone since then, things of that ilk? I'm sure it's all fascinating but it's just filling in the details. And I agree those details aren't pleasant by todays more enlightened standards. But I don't need to know all this to make a decision on which person to hire next week.
Posted:2 days ago
I do think that the subject of innovation is probably much more interesting to discuss than the strength of Wu's comments on gender.
Risk has been discussed, as well as the many innovations in GTA. Personally I always found GTA to be a game that is most open to innovation. It's been able to cover so many types of play, from Crazy Taxi and Need for Speed to stealth shooting and underground cage fights.
Google are consistently innovative because it is a major part of their core corporate values - devoting 20% of their workforce to free experimentation. Nintendo are consistently innovative (albeit with safe bets on using old brands), because it is a major part of their core corporate values.
There are also innovations in reiterations.
Plot twist: could the push towards cultural gender neutrality reduce the potential for innovation gained from diverse perspectives between genders?
Risk has been discussed, as well as the many innovations in GTA. Personally I always found GTA to be a game that is most open to innovation. It's been able to cover so many types of play, from Crazy Taxi and Need for Speed to stealth shooting and underground cage fights.
Google are consistently innovative because it is a major part of their core corporate values - devoting 20% of their workforce to free experimentation. Nintendo are consistently innovative (albeit with safe bets on using old brands), because it is a major part of their core corporate values.
There are also innovations in reiterations.
Plot twist: could the push towards cultural gender neutrality reduce the potential for innovation gained from diverse perspectives between genders?
Posted:2 days ago
Well if you want to go there...
I personally don't want innovation. I've been exposed to a lot of different ideas for good games over the years, and I've gotten to know what I like best in general terms. I want more of that instead please, small iterative improvements that make what I like even better over time.
Surely this industry is mature enough now that it just doesn't need to go in a radical new direction every week.
I personally don't want innovation. I've been exposed to a lot of different ideas for good games over the years, and I've gotten to know what I like best in general terms. I want more of that instead please, small iterative improvements that make what I like even better over time.
Surely this industry is mature enough now that it just doesn't need to go in a radical new direction every week.
Posted:2 days ago
I'm sure it has a reason to exist, but it's not needed HERE. This is ostensibly a conversation about why women are under-represented in game development (and other STEM techie jobs for that matter).It's all gradients, is the thing... People's knowledge, opinions and bias all vary, especially when you consider the international view of gaming. Are you telling me that game dev in the far east (where Confucianism's influence in the past tended to favouring men over women) is the exact same thing as game dev in, say... Iceland? What about dev in Muslim countries? Even in a heavily Westernised Middle East country like Kuwait, I imagine the role of women in game dev (and the role of playable female characters) differs dramatically to the UK.
...
I'm sure it's all fascinating but it's just filling in the details. And I agree those details aren't pleasant by todays more enlightened standards. But I don't need to know all this to make a decision on which person to hire next week.
This is why sociological and psychological aspects are a good thing to examine. Is it a tired conversation? Sure it is... But Good Lord, when Jennifer Lawrence is writing essays about continued pay inequality in Hollywood, you can't honestly say that game dev doesn't need to examine itself at all.
Posted:2 days ago
The only way this question will be answered is when individual companies start releasing their financial statistics on wages. My personal belief is once you start paying people it's unprofitable to base it on anything other than merit but it will be interesting to see if that gut reaction is right.
I'm glad Godaddy has done this and I look forward to other companies following.
http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/14/godaddy-reveals-salary-gender-gap-in-new-twist-on-diversity-reports/
Here's another from Glassdoor but that's probably not as accurate given the low amount of reports per company
http://blog-content.glassdoor.com/app/uploads/sites/13/GD_TechCompany_GenderSalaryComparison_Final-1.jpg
I'm glad Godaddy has done this and I look forward to other companies following.
http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/14/godaddy-reveals-salary-gender-gap-in-new-twist-on-diversity-reports/
Here's another from Glassdoor but that's probably not as accurate given the low amount of reports per company
http://blog-content.glassdoor.com/app/uploads/sites/13/GD_TechCompany_GenderSalaryComparison_Final-1.jpg
Posted:2 days ago
Adam I agree with you completely.
But, in my honest opinion as a relative neutral in all these debates (which I think my post history would back up), people on one 'side' often want to live in a hermetically sealed bubble with fellow ideological travellers, and it isn't the one Paul is on. Paul might react defensively, sometimes brusquely, but always honestly and I think he carefully observes the line between robustly representing his views, and being rude.
I actually think the internet is making people more narrow minded, not less. We seem to always seek out the opinions that validate our own, and constantly seem to try to 'cleanse' whatever communities we are involved in of dissenting views.
I really don't feel that way at all. I enjoy all of the well-argued posts, and actually see a lot of merit in what a lot of you, even on opposing sides, say. I don't actually see it as much of a dichotomy to find a lot of worth in both, say, Paul's or John's contributions, as well as someone like Jessica, or Morville.
What I do find exceptionally tedious is the snark and the personal stuff that always creeps in. I guess this is a bit of a plea for tolerance and acceptance that other people can have different views and it doesn't necessarily make them wrong, bigoted, naive or all of the above. Am I really such a rarity? Can't we just discuss stuff without blocking and ignoring and denigrating each other?
But, in my honest opinion as a relative neutral in all these debates (which I think my post history would back up), people on one 'side' often want to live in a hermetically sealed bubble with fellow ideological travellers, and it isn't the one Paul is on. Paul might react defensively, sometimes brusquely, but always honestly and I think he carefully observes the line between robustly representing his views, and being rude.
I actually think the internet is making people more narrow minded, not less. We seem to always seek out the opinions that validate our own, and constantly seem to try to 'cleanse' whatever communities we are involved in of dissenting views.
I really don't feel that way at all. I enjoy all of the well-argued posts, and actually see a lot of merit in what a lot of you, even on opposing sides, say. I don't actually see it as much of a dichotomy to find a lot of worth in both, say, Paul's or John's contributions, as well as someone like Jessica, or Morville.
What I do find exceptionally tedious is the snark and the personal stuff that always creeps in. I guess this is a bit of a plea for tolerance and acceptance that other people can have different views and it doesn't necessarily make them wrong, bigoted, naive or all of the above. Am I really such a rarity? Can't we just discuss stuff without blocking and ignoring and denigrating each other?
Posted:2 days ago
Can't we just discuss stuff without blocking and ignoring and denigrating each other?I always hope so at times just feels impossible to get to that point, or even if we do, we can't seem to stay there. Nick, I've seen some really shocking statements either way over the past few months which I can't erase and I know these aren't unique positions. Every week feels like more and more of an eye opener for me in this industry and not in a good way.
As I said above, we're all different and we all contribute. My personal argument (outside this topic) usually surrounds trying to get others to listen and consider what those valuable people within the industry have to say even if we aren't experiencing it. Unfortunately, that means falling into a trap of losing the opportunity to express what progress looks like or actual solutions.
For myself, there are replicated problems and practices which have profoundly affected me and there are too many people that have experienced the same things. However, when it comes down to it, only a minority address it partly because of differences in actual experience and partly because of varying levels to which we as individuals or groups feel empowered to make change.
Sometimes statements like Brianna's above are highly questionable and I completely agree, but one view with a subtext doesn't reflect all others or form part of a conspiracy. Both so-called sides have dragged in completely unrelated topics. Innovation with a subtext of gender has nothing to do with a previous specific topic.
There are some really interesting points here as the discussion has developed.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Adam Campbell on 15th October 2015 3:33pm
Posted:2 days ago
I'm glad Godaddy has done this and I look forward to other companies following.Sure thing.
For the quality of people I hire, they all get a piss poor flat rate of 35K a year plus 6 weeks flexible vacation time, an additional week at christmas, and bonuses that actually appear when we're doing well.
That can be seen as the male rate if you like as we're all male. If there's ever a female coder here that's good enough to pass my ridiculously high bar, she will get the same. If she'd settle for less than the others, I wouldn't hire her.
Posted:2 days ago
I was thinking more the EAs and Activisions but thanks for the input Paul. :-)
Posted:2 days ago
Why? They're more likely to have ironclad policy on this stuff. I pretty much make it up as I go along and am too small to be on anyone's radar. If there are going to be problems, they'll be right here at tiny companies.
Posted:2 days ago
Apparently the belief is that they don't.
I don't think they really care about the little indies. Everyone knows that indies are mostly made up of friends, people who know each other and people who have similar interest. To try and get indies to artificially hire someone they wouldn't normally is just pointless.
Actually when I put it like that I'm quite proud of my hiring record.
I don't think they really care about the little indies. Everyone knows that indies are mostly made up of friends, people who know each other and people who have similar interest. To try and get indies to artificially hire someone they wouldn't normally is just pointless.
Actually when I put it like that I'm quite proud of my hiring record.
Posted:2 days ago
@Paul: nobody is attacking you or accusing you of discriminating against women. Relax!
If sociology and psychology doesn't interest you then that is okay. No need to tell people the subjects are unnecessary if you're not even going to take the time to investigate the subject for yourself. The evidence shows a clear need for study and work in the area. Biases have been confirmed Paul, hence why bias is being addressed not because of "claptrap," but because of actual evidence. Nobody is saying, "you are biasing against women, that's why you have a full male team." Relax, there really is no need to get defensive.
Maybe women are bad at maths, or maybe our maths is bad at suiting women's learning preferences. I tutored a girl from a D (or an E) to a B in 6 sessions just by suiting her learning style.
Perhaps Wu's comments set a bad tone, but does that mean we cannot rise above that and still discuss the topic intelligently (or if disinterested in the subject just not get involved at all). Willful ignorance does no good in a discussion and only seeks to increase the likelihood of ad-hominem and a lower quality of "debate."
The reason why I suggested it best to focus on the subject of innovation is because it is clear that it is the only subject that could be discussed here and yield constructive results.
If sociology and psychology doesn't interest you then that is okay. No need to tell people the subjects are unnecessary if you're not even going to take the time to investigate the subject for yourself. The evidence shows a clear need for study and work in the area. Biases have been confirmed Paul, hence why bias is being addressed not because of "claptrap," but because of actual evidence. Nobody is saying, "you are biasing against women, that's why you have a full male team." Relax, there really is no need to get defensive.
Maybe women are bad at maths, or maybe our maths is bad at suiting women's learning preferences. I tutored a girl from a D (or an E) to a B in 6 sessions just by suiting her learning style.
Perhaps Wu's comments set a bad tone, but does that mean we cannot rise above that and still discuss the topic intelligently (or if disinterested in the subject just not get involved at all). Willful ignorance does no good in a discussion and only seeks to increase the likelihood of ad-hominem and a lower quality of "debate."
The reason why I suggested it best to focus on the subject of innovation is because it is clear that it is the only subject that could be discussed here and yield constructive results.
She suggested empathy was the building block currently missing from game development, and VR could offer a way to incorporate that with your motion, your eyes and the tone of your voice.Thoughts?
Edited 3 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 15th October 2015 4:33pm
Posted:2 days ago
Imagine I'm not actually huffing and puffing at this point and read my posts again. I'm certainly not defending myself as I don't feel I need to. I actually don't even feel as if I was being attacked tbh. I do ten to adopt a brusque writing style around people doing the opposite, for the same reason I will shoot anyone on sight that spouts bizspeak at me.
Also, I am acknowledging there's a current problem. But it's already been fixed and the changes are already coming. However changes to culture happen very slowly and in fact the new focus on STEM teaching in schools is only really getting started right now. It was even worse several years ago when the computer courses were literally about how to use MS Word (for all sexes)
I mentioned my own high bar for recruitment for example. It's basically 20+ years of varied experience I'm after, which makes any potential employee 35+ by default. 20+ years ago, school age for those, not only were girls not encouraged into these sorts of areas, any that showed interested got warned off.
That's freakin apalling. But it happened, and the world as we see it now is based around what happened then. I can't hire female coders that fit my requirements simply because their aren't any*. That's not me being defensive, that's me explaining to you why there are less women in game development.
(*Yes I'm generalising for brevity, gimme a break)
Also, I am acknowledging there's a current problem. But it's already been fixed and the changes are already coming. However changes to culture happen very slowly and in fact the new focus on STEM teaching in schools is only really getting started right now. It was even worse several years ago when the computer courses were literally about how to use MS Word (for all sexes)
I mentioned my own high bar for recruitment for example. It's basically 20+ years of varied experience I'm after, which makes any potential employee 35+ by default. 20+ years ago, school age for those, not only were girls not encouraged into these sorts of areas, any that showed interested got warned off.
That's freakin apalling. But it happened, and the world as we see it now is based around what happened then. I can't hire female coders that fit my requirements simply because their aren't any*. That's not me being defensive, that's me explaining to you why there are less women in game development.
(*Yes I'm generalising for brevity, gimme a break)
Posted:2 days ago
Unless you've started subcontracting for NASA or something, 20+ years' experience is an absurd requirement. It's understandable that you prefer to hire people with similar backgrounds and experiences, but call it for what it is.
Posted:2 days ago
Unless you've started subcontracting for NASA or something, 20+ years' experience is an absurd requirement. It's understandable that you prefer to hire people with similar backgrounds and experiences, but call it for what it is.There's a ton of people about with this much experience, but I doubt you will have met any as a crossword publisher. If you had, you'd instantly appreciate how valuable, versatile and useful they are, especially to smaller companies trying to punch above their weight.
There are four people in my office and we're all over 45. Sorry if the fact itself or the fact I prefer it that way offends you. What is this really, ageism?
And whilst I'm on a roll, why would at least four people upvote someone for making an obviously uninformed shot in the dark about something he cannot possibly know anything about. Oh wait a minute....
There, that's me defending myself. Time to stop editing and leave...
Edited 6 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th October 2015 9:14pm
Posted:1 days ago
@John Owens
How is Morville (and people like him) making the issue of politics and business worse? Do you two have history?
How is Morville (and people like him) making the issue of politics and business worse? Do you two have history?
Posted:1 days ago
@Jonathan Cooper
I am having problems understanding your comment. Are you suggesting that these opinion pieces are still needed because of an obvious problem that still exists or are you suggesting that perhaps we have heard enough of the gender and video games narrative?
I said this in a previous comment, but it kind of bothers me this conversation is so 1-sided. Are we ever asking why there aren't more women mechanics? Why their aren't more women landscapers?
I am having problems understanding your comment. Are you suggesting that these opinion pieces are still needed because of an obvious problem that still exists or are you suggesting that perhaps we have heard enough of the gender and video games narrative?
I said this in a previous comment, but it kind of bothers me this conversation is so 1-sided. Are we ever asking why there aren't more women mechanics? Why their aren't more women landscapers?
Posted:1 days ago
@Morville
The part where they actually have a control and experimental group is telling. I really don't think it says that much about the industry and says MUCH MORE about WOMEN.
"In another experiment, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues arranged for female undergraduates to talk to an actor pretending to be a computer science major. If the actor wore a T-shirt that said “I CODE THEREFORE I AM” and claimed to enjoy video games, the students expressed less interest in studying computer science than if the actor wore a solid shirt and claimed to enjoy hanging out with friends — even if the T-shirt-clad actor was another woman."
IMHO this seems to say women are judgmental by nature. I suppose in a way this makes sense, being that women are the gender that bears children in humans they may be more adept in social situations as a result of evolution. So perhaps their judgmental nature causes them to avoid career paths they would otherwise be qualified for. Tech is too "geeky and nerdy" for them.
The question is should tech change to "welcome" women or should women get into tech and be the change they want to see?
The part where they actually have a control and experimental group is telling. I really don't think it says that much about the industry and says MUCH MORE about WOMEN.
"In another experiment, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues arranged for female undergraduates to talk to an actor pretending to be a computer science major. If the actor wore a T-shirt that said “I CODE THEREFORE I AM” and claimed to enjoy video games, the students expressed less interest in studying computer science than if the actor wore a solid shirt and claimed to enjoy hanging out with friends — even if the T-shirt-clad actor was another woman."
IMHO this seems to say women are judgmental by nature. I suppose in a way this makes sense, being that women are the gender that bears children in humans they may be more adept in social situations as a result of evolution. So perhaps their judgmental nature causes them to avoid career paths they would otherwise be qualified for. Tech is too "geeky and nerdy" for them.
The question is should tech change to "welcome" women or should women get into tech and be the change they want to see?
Posted:1 days ago
@Col: I'm not blaming the companies or saying anything of that nature. In fact one of my earlier comments said that this is outside of our locust of control but gi-biz is raising awareness about the subject for your perusal and also so that you may lend your support to it if you wish.
I'm not jumping on any bandwagon, I just happen to take an interest in these subjects, and find it far too easy to overlook. The same things I see being said about female's interest (and in some cases ability) in maths is exactly what was incorrectly said about their academic interst and ability just 150 years ago until we realized it was down to a teaching style that favoured boys.
As you said, we are not psychologists and sociologists, which was my point also. But the opposition we often see to sociological subjects is based purely on willful ignorance and unwillingness to even consider what is raised, perhaps due to the misconception that they are being blamed or being asked to solve the problem.
The way I see it is that matters of our society are being attended to by those that way inclined and it in some way relates to the video games industry. Some of these stories and articles might relate to groups with an agenda and some may not, but this is what is going on and hopefully it is carried out in a balanced way and is purposeful. Thus far, having taken the time to investigate myself I would just say there is substance behind this subject. There are bandwagons, but there is also a legitimate investigation and understanding.
I'm not jumping on any bandwagon, I just happen to take an interest in these subjects, and find it far too easy to overlook. The same things I see being said about female's interest (and in some cases ability) in maths is exactly what was incorrectly said about their academic interst and ability just 150 years ago until we realized it was down to a teaching style that favoured boys.
As you said, we are not psychologists and sociologists, which was my point also. But the opposition we often see to sociological subjects is based purely on willful ignorance and unwillingness to even consider what is raised, perhaps due to the misconception that they are being blamed or being asked to solve the problem.
The way I see it is that matters of our society are being attended to by those that way inclined and it in some way relates to the video games industry. Some of these stories and articles might relate to groups with an agenda and some may not, but this is what is going on and hopefully it is carried out in a balanced way and is purposeful. Thus far, having taken the time to investigate myself I would just say there is substance behind this subject. There are bandwagons, but there is also a legitimate investigation and understanding.
Posted:1 days ago
I said this in a previous comment, but it kind of bothers me this conversation is so 1-sided. Are we ever asking why there aren't more women mechanics? Why their aren't more women landscapers?Maybe its because we tend to focus on the industry we work in? Women in the automotive industry is actually a widely discussed topic, as is gender balance in the National Health Service, which is dominated by women.
Its hard to escape the subject seeing as there are many discussions to be had about it. At is most basic, the argument is economic, as like I personally suggested, we're talking about two halves of a nation's productive workforce.
Other debates may include the dynamics of people within an industry and the natural side effects of gender imbalance, many of which are subtle, some perhaps not so. We do actually have trade bodies like UKIE considering these factors as they attempt to work across the industry to make it flourish.
Posted:1 days ago
as is gender balance in the National Health Service, which is dominated by womenCan I just underline my thing here. The NHS is dominated by women because far more nurses are needed than doctors. In school, "Nurse" has always been a grade A pick for pushing on girls whilst it's been a taboo subject for boys. "Surgeon" otoh was a grade A pick for pushing on boys and taboo for girls.
So ingrained into society was this particular idea, that "Nurse" as a job title came with gender flavours. It still might, I'm not sure tbh. There was "Nurse" and there was "Male Nurse". Male nurse being the obvious exception to the norm.
And that's all of it. Any social debate about WHY those choices were made, how wrong-headed, blah, etc. is all in the past. Today there is just consequence and the opportunity to correct the streaming for the future, which has doubtless happened already too. There's just nothing to talk about anymore, it's been done and you missed it.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th October 2015 11:10pm
Posted:1 days ago
Perhaps very few people care but these facts and discussions really matter to me. I know a lot of people are focussed on their own teams and their own jobs, but I feel part of the responsibility to really discuss what happens next not just now and be a part of it. This is a games industry specific site, so I think its the correct forum to engage with other professionals that might care.
If we're so insular I often wonder why discuss these things at all? I can't imagine doing this on IGN or Eurogamer, even though we have much of the same news there. Along with my offline discussion and debate, I still want to use online spaces.
I'm not giving up yet, but I hope its actually possible without the discussion being closed down.
If we're so insular I often wonder why discuss these things at all? I can't imagine doing this on IGN or Eurogamer, even though we have much of the same news there. Along with my offline discussion and debate, I still want to use online spaces.
I'm not giving up yet, but I hope its actually possible without the discussion being closed down.
Posted:1 days ago
OK. So, the answer is you don't actually know the source of the problem and its all over?Seriously friend, you just made my head explode. Maybe this is why these things go round and round. Wanna try again?
Is the solution to get more women into nursing? More men? Or look increasingly abroad, despite obvious issues there? The shortage is a fact as far as demand for skills goesMore of everyone is clearly needed. The short term solution is to mop up all available trained immigrants right the hell now as people are dying and it takes years to train new staff. Language barrier, politics of immigration generally etc., are small beer when it comes to curing the sick and dying. In the longer term, we should be training new people of our own of course.
However once again you've tried to move the goalposts and inject some straw men. I was explaining why we're in this mess right now, which is relevant to the actual debate. However a talk about how to get out of inherited problems in the NHS is something different entirely. I don't have expertise or even imagination for that one so I'll leave it to the people who think they know how to cure all the worlds ills. I know it seems easy to do that but it's because you have no clue whatsoever about the actual situation on the ground. You think politicians enjoy fucking this one up on purpose? Actually, don't answer that as it insults my intelligence when people think they can fix things they have zero actual knowledge of. Like you and I in this case.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th October 2015 11:52pm
Posted:1 days ago
Paul, you basically closed down the discussion and said any talk was in the past and is no longer an issue.
The question I answered was about why these things aren't discussed elsewhere, well, they are. Its just as relevant to those who want to talk about it.
Any social debate about WHY those choices were made, how wrong-headed, blah, etc. is all in the past.
Today there is just consequence and the opportunity to correct the streaming for the future, which has doubtless happened already too. There's just nothing to talk about anymore, it's been done and you missed it.I often use these types of parallels with other sectors to make a point, which I hope Rich Allen gets in this context. Its a discussion that isn't just a games thing but we talk about the implications elsewhere. These things go round and round because some people don't want to hear and that's OK, I just don't see the point derailing and throwing it in the bin.
The question I answered was about why these things aren't discussed elsewhere, well, they are. Its just as relevant to those who want to talk about it.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Adam Campbell on 15th October 2015 11:51pm
Posted:1 days ago
Seriously friend, you just made my head explode. Maybe this is why these things go round and round. Wanna try again?I think these go round and round because of the unwillingness people show towards actually exploring and discussing the subject, which requires a tad bit of paying attention to and perusing other points of view and information that might conflict with your worldview - not just for the sake finding a victor of debate, but for the sake of intelligent discussion.
Clearly the case is closed in your mind, so everything raised to discussion is just pointless whiff-waff about nothing, and social scientists are just wasting their time with all their graphs and studies.
Maybe the world is exactly as simple as it seems in your mind, but if it were not the case then surely your current behavior would prevent you from knowing any better. If you have no curiosity about the subject, can't see how telling those that are that there is nothing to see without having seen what there is to talk about.
Adam: If we're so insular I often wonder why discuss these things at all? ... I just don't see the point derailing and thrown in the bin.My thoughts exactly.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 15th October 2015 11:53pm
Posted:1 days ago
Can't discuss the topic. Can't discuss the subtext of the topic. Can't discuss any research or parallels with the topic. Can't even talk to those who might be interested without the derailment. I might honestly join the exodus and look elsewhere. LinkedIn group anyone?
Posted:1 days ago
@ Rich
Not really. In fact Morville is one of the more reasonable people who has a left of politics view who comment on here but like most people who share that view they think they should be "involved" or even in control of how companies behave and their input can be frustrating because it comes across as very academic and not rooted in the real world decision people have to make.
I said with my last comment when it comes to larger companies and corporations I really don't think there's an issue and I think the financial statistics on wages will show that however with respect to small indies there probably is an issue but it's more narrow than gender or race and can more accurately described as "birds of a feather flock together". I do think that the wider point that a more diverse and I mean personality types rather than anything else does help the culture of a growing company and even yes innovation but people also have to understand one of the main advantages of going indie is the chance to work with like minded people in a less formal environment on something they all have passion for.
Not really. In fact Morville is one of the more reasonable people who has a left of politics view who comment on here but like most people who share that view they think they should be "involved" or even in control of how companies behave and their input can be frustrating because it comes across as very academic and not rooted in the real world decision people have to make.
I said with my last comment when it comes to larger companies and corporations I really don't think there's an issue and I think the financial statistics on wages will show that however with respect to small indies there probably is an issue but it's more narrow than gender or race and can more accurately described as "birds of a feather flock together". I do think that the wider point that a more diverse and I mean personality types rather than anything else does help the culture of a growing company and even yes innovation but people also have to understand one of the main advantages of going indie is the chance to work with like minded people in a less formal environment on something they all have passion for.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by John Owens on 16th October 2015 7:42am
Posted:23 hours ago
@Adam: I'd go for linked in. For anyone interested I am part of a group that hold events in parliament where we invite notable speakers and MP's on various subjects centred around human rights and equality.
We could have a panel discussion on the subject as a whole with panelists representing different industries and points of view. I would imagine it to be a much more productive method. Just this week we were discussing getting political education in parliament.
How does that sound?
We could have a panel discussion on the subject as a whole with panelists representing different industries and points of view. I would imagine it to be a much more productive method. Just this week we were discussing getting political education in parliament.
How does that sound?
Edited 4 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 2:48pm
Posted:23 hours ago
John: it's more narrow than gender or race and can more accurately described as "birds of a feather flock together".Yes. This was a possibility I raised in an earlier thread based on the dominant role that networking plays in recruitment.
I really don't think there's an issue and I think the financial statistics on wages will show that1. http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-11-14/women-make-less-than-men-even-when-they-are-equally-qualified-mbas
2. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/
Here you have females perceived as having lower skill, which would explain #1, distorting the meritocracy a tad bit.
3. http://m.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full
A scientific study in relation to #2
The subject is tricky as I feel many of the studies ask the wrong questions, for example I've yet to see a study that attempts to analyse the impact of non verbal communication during the interview stage, for which we do have the technology for. I feel there aren't half as many studies on the pay of people with equal levels of skill when discussing wage gaps. Because of the lack of those studies, people in discussions will still rightfully have queries as there are significant gaps in data.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 8:16am
Posted:23 hours ago
@ Keldon
Paul, thanks for the entertainment.
Chill. Your emotions are getting the better off you. Nobody is trying to "pull you into these things." These roles you assign to people are ridiculous. Nobody is trolling here, that is insulting.That's exactly what you and your like do and you are borderline abusive when doing it.
Paul, thanks for the entertainment.
Posted:23 hours ago
That's exactly what you and your like do and you are borderline abusive when doing it.Me and my like? What like is that exactly John? What roles have I projected specifically? In fact quote me giving someone a role and accusing them of exhibiting intentionally negative behaviour relating to an antagonistic role, please, for clarity. Or back up your ad-hominem accusation (on a public professional site I might add).
I remember saying, "nobody here trolls, hence why I don't put anyone on ignore." Just for reference.
Please, quote me or retract your statement.
Perhaps you're lumping me together with other people, which is understandable as I don't use a picture.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 8:25am
Posted:22 hours ago
@Keldon
People who share your left leaning political/academic views and I've no desire to retract what I said and frankly I wasn't near harsh enough.
People who share your left leaning political/academic views and I've no desire to retract what I said and frankly I wasn't near harsh enough.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by John Owens on 16th October 2015 8:32am
Posted:22 hours ago
@John: quote me explicitly assigning a role. Harshness is irrelevant, you made a false claim about me in public. Back it up, please.
What left leaning view exactly? John. Don't just generalise. All I've done is share what studies have shown, that implies no political orientation.
I've used language that does not contradict right leaning principles, in fact I've quite openly acknowledged and addressed the subject in relation to meritocracy. I've shared articles from Bloomberg and Forbes, which echo everything I'm saying.
So please, be specific. The left leaning straw man needs to be put to rest. Politics, I might add is much bigger than just left and right orientation.
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/solutions-shape-factual-belief/
I prefer to think and discern rather than subscribe to a viewpoint.
What left leaning view exactly? John. Don't just generalise. All I've done is share what studies have shown, that implies no political orientation.
I've used language that does not contradict right leaning principles, in fact I've quite openly acknowledged and addressed the subject in relation to meritocracy. I've shared articles from Bloomberg and Forbes, which echo everything I'm saying.
So please, be specific. The left leaning straw man needs to be put to rest. Politics, I might add is much bigger than just left and right orientation.
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/solutions-shape-factual-belief/
I prefer to think and discern rather than subscribe to a viewpoint.
Edited 2 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 8:40am
Posted:22 hours ago
@ Keldon
Maybe it's just something I perceived then because of my internal bias against people who hold your opinion and like to bring all the academic arguments into the discussion.
But we're now supposed to accept people's perception as fact aren't we?
Maybe it's just something I perceived then because of my internal bias against people who hold your opinion and like to bring all the academic arguments into the discussion.
But we're now supposed to accept people's perception as fact aren't we?
Posted:22 hours ago
What opinion John? We went over this before. I never said the solution is forced inequality. Is that the opinion? I've always spoken against forced inequality, but one comment I made about forced inequality has been taken out of its context and each correction gets forgotten and only the misinterpretation recalled.
And yes, it would be perceived.
And yes, it would be perceived.
Posted:22 hours ago
...you made a false claim about me in public. Back it up, please.
one comment I made ... has been taken out of its contextYou don't seem to like that? My head just exploded again.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 16th October 2015 9:01am
Posted:22 hours ago
But we're now supposed to accept people's perception as fact aren't we?I've never suggested that or made any comment that would give that impression, ever. I think it was actually Morville who said that.
I'm well aware of the subjectivity of human experience. No, I simply look at studies that show bias does exist without any doubt, not because it fits my worldview, but because I can discern the quality of the science (in some studies).
Posted:22 hours ago
I've never suggested that or made any comment that would give that impression, ever. I think it was actually Morville who said that.Aye... Perhaps clouded the issue somewhat, so I'll amend my comment there. :)
Posted:22 hours ago
Worth considering :
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/why-politicized-science-is-dangerous/
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/why-politicized-science-is-dangerous/
But as Alston Chase put it, “when the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power.”
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Tom Keresztes on 16th October 2015 9:36am
Posted:21 hours ago
@John: have you examined any of the studies I've posted. They are real world and carried out by people with no agenda. Studies aren't all theoretical and just relevant to the laboratory or made by people with political agendas, especially the one I posted.
And it's not about winning by the way. It makes the discussion difficult if vital items are just outright ignored rather than discussed.
Some studies don't reflect the real world, true, but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant because it's a study. I judge a study on the quality of the science and look at what it means.
There's a phenomena in medicine called neurophobia, which is an aversion to neurology. I think a similar thing happens to science - particularly the social sciences.
How could bias be better confirmed or denied? Because the quality of discussion will always be low if we can't establish any agreed facts if you think about it.
And it's not about winning by the way. It makes the discussion difficult if vital items are just outright ignored rather than discussed.
Some studies don't reflect the real world, true, but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant because it's a study. I judge a study on the quality of the science and look at what it means.
There's a phenomena in medicine called neurophobia, which is an aversion to neurology. I think a similar thing happens to science - particularly the social sciences.
How could bias be better confirmed or denied? Because the quality of discussion will always be low if we can't establish any agreed facts if you think about it.
Edited 3 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 9:58am
Posted:21 hours ago
So if 4 friends start a small company with the aim of making the next greatest 2D fighting game the likelihood is that they will aim to make the game they want to play which invariably means more hardcore.This is very true.
With people of different experiences and skill levels it would force them to cater for a more mass market audience. e.g. 4 expert Street Fighter 2 fans are less likely to innovate and build in an auto-block feature.
I think Nintendo did a great job with Mario Kart on the Wii. At first I didn't agree with the mechanic but revisiting the game years later I found it kept it fun for everyone.
Posted:21 hours ago
@Tom: and how do you discern science from politicised science? Or better yet, what would be a good scientific approach to confirming our denying gender bias?
And how does the difference between a male and female name determining the wage offered and level of skill perceived not indicate the presence of bias?
And how does the difference between a male and female name determining the wage offered and level of skill perceived not indicate the presence of bias?
Posted:21 hours ago
And I'll reiterate, for me it's not about winning. We all have our own logical approaches to the progression of a discussion. Mine involves examining the truth of a matter, or finding a better way of determining it. Tends to work better in person where tone of voice and other non verbal forms of communication are present.
Posted:21 hours ago
@ Keldon
I don't know the answer with respect to the studies. I used to believe them and now I'm not sure.
The whole way academia works now just smells. It's a place were kids are supposed to be opening their brains to different opinions and having their views questioned are instead being fed one political narrative and having anyone who disagrees silenced.
btw - I answered the question of how you could confirm gender bias. Look at the money. The reports from GoDaddy and Microsoft both show it's negligible.
Real world data not some study and how many websites covered the announcement from GoDaddy?
I don't know the answer with respect to the studies. I used to believe them and now I'm not sure.
The whole way academia works now just smells. It's a place were kids are supposed to be opening their brains to different opinions and having their views questioned are instead being fed one political narrative and having anyone who disagrees silenced.
btw - I answered the question of how you could confirm gender bias. Look at the money. The reports from GoDaddy and Microsoft both show it's negligible.
Real world data not some study and how many websites covered the announcement from GoDaddy?
Edited 2 times. Last edit by John Owens on 16th October 2015 10:28am
Posted:20 hours ago
Just for clarity, what false claim do you think I made about you, exactly?I already answered this, but of course you just don't read what people with opposing views put, including that specifically, so what would be the point of doing so again.
In any case, I'm really not that bothered whether you understand me or not now tbh., I'm mostly just covering my own ass from your assassination attempts.Your own contributions to the main subject has thus far been a big fat zero and your readiness to reach for other people's thinking via acamedia papers isn't doing you any favours either.
You appear to think you're the voice of reason but all you're actually voicing is noise.
Posted:20 hours ago
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 16th October 2015 11:01am
Posted:20 hours ago
eat some cookies dipped in honey.I can almost hear my teeth rotting from the sugar, but damn, that does sound nice. :D
Posted:20 hours ago
@ Darren Adams
Before someone else brings it up, there actually is some evidence that 'diverse' teams have some slight performance benefits, but at a slight cost to employee happiness - the proposed mechanism is that diversity forces people out of; 'in-group' comfort zones and raises performance accordingly (through anxiety about being judged less leniently by members of the 'out-group').
I suspect the effect is minor and is effectively noise compared to any of the following - staff experience, staff skill levels, funding, tools, techniques, quality of leadership, morale etc.
Before someone else brings it up, there actually is some evidence that 'diverse' teams have some slight performance benefits, but at a slight cost to employee happiness - the proposed mechanism is that diversity forces people out of; 'in-group' comfort zones and raises performance accordingly (through anxiety about being judged less leniently by members of the 'out-group').
I suspect the effect is minor and is effectively noise compared to any of the following - staff experience, staff skill levels, funding, tools, techniques, quality of leadership, morale etc.
Posted:20 hours ago
@ Morville
And there's me saying you were the more reasonable of the posters.
Stop putting words into people's mouths. @Keldon this is what I mean when I say boderline abusive.
I stated why she couldn't be objective and it had nothing to do with her being emotional or a woman. She herself said that she went into the games industry to lead the charge and show that women could make it the implication being that it is harder for women. It's perfectly reasonable to assume if people set up a failure scenario to begin with then once they fail they will fall back to that reason especially considering she couldn't provide one statement of an event to back up her claim.
And there's me saying you were the more reasonable of the posters.
Again, it was a general comment about things men can do. Specifically, though, the "objective" comment was in direct response to this comment:Which I tracked down to.
Yeah, I think we can, even in this comments section of a website. We can not have argumentative men saying a fellow professional can't be objective (code for "she's an emotional woman"). We can examine the bias of people we work with/for. We can make the industry more welcoming by uniformly arguing against crunch, considering women (generally) favour a better work/home life balance in their employment than what gaming is perceived to have now.An argumentative man? What's that supposed to mean if you think I'm calling her an "emotional woman".
Stop putting words into people's mouths. @Keldon this is what I mean when I say boderline abusive.
I stated why she couldn't be objective and it had nothing to do with her being emotional or a woman. She herself said that she went into the games industry to lead the charge and show that women could make it the implication being that it is harder for women. It's perfectly reasonable to assume if people set up a failure scenario to begin with then once they fail they will fall back to that reason especially considering she couldn't provide one statement of an event to back up her claim.
Edited 3 times. Last edit by John Owens on 16th October 2015 4:48pm
Posted:20 hours ago
There's a ton of people about with this much experience, but I doubt you will have met any as a crossword publisher.Pot, meet kettle.
...
And whilst I'm on a roll, why would at least four people upvote someone for making an obviously uninformed shot in the dark about something he cannot possibly know anything about.
Posted:20 hours ago
@John: personally I put it more down to cognitive slips. We can all read too much into someone's comment either by way of inferring their worldview and other associated beliefs, or by way of inferring the implications of the statement. Implications are tricky as even if you identify a statement that is implied by someone's prior comment, often the original statement was meant in relation to an unspecified context and results in the feeling that words have been put in one's mouth.
An interesting phenomena occurs when you repeat back someone's words verbatim. Perhaps it is a result of differences in expression, but you can often make someone say, "that's not what I mean," even if you are saying exactly what they said. This is because much of the meaning is conveyed in the tone. When communicating via text we write with a tone in mind, often feeling that the tone will be conveyed by the choice of words and use of smilees or emphasis. However it is read back differently, while at the same time the other person's responses will be read with a tone assigned by your perception of them.
I like to think of it like this, we can make mistakes about what we think someone means, accept the correction and move on.
Take us for instance. I said, "that's not what I'm saying," you said, "cool, let's move on," and guess what? We've moved on and everyone's happy. I think a level of tolerance is much needed in online discussions for at least the few reasons I illustrated above - and I'm sure someone else could have conveyed that in a much more eloquent way, but I hope the message came across well.
An interesting phenomena occurs when you repeat back someone's words verbatim. Perhaps it is a result of differences in expression, but you can often make someone say, "that's not what I mean," even if you are saying exactly what they said. This is because much of the meaning is conveyed in the tone. When communicating via text we write with a tone in mind, often feeling that the tone will be conveyed by the choice of words and use of smilees or emphasis. However it is read back differently, while at the same time the other person's responses will be read with a tone assigned by your perception of them.
I like to think of it like this, we can make mistakes about what we think someone means, accept the correction and move on.
Take us for instance. I said, "that's not what I'm saying," you said, "cool, let's move on," and guess what? We've moved on and everyone's happy. I think a level of tolerance is much needed in online discussions for at least the few reasons I illustrated above - and I'm sure someone else could have conveyed that in a much more eloquent way, but I hope the message came across well.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Keldon Alleyne on 16th October 2015 11:13am
Posted:20 hours ago
@ Keldon
Most times I do give people the benefit of the doubt which is the reason why unlike with you and Paul in this comment section it doesn't just deteriorate into "stop trolling me" although perhaps that would be easier but no matter what he implied the facts remain I never at any point mention "emotion". In fact if you Google the page no one mentions "emotion" in the whole discussion.
Most times I do give people the benefit of the doubt which is the reason why unlike with you and Paul in this comment section it doesn't just deteriorate into "stop trolling me" although perhaps that would be easier but no matter what he implied the facts remain I never at any point mention "emotion". In fact if you Google the page no one mentions "emotion" in the whole discussion.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by John Owens on 16th October 2015 11:22am
Posted:19 hours ago
@Adam: I'd go for linked in. For anyone interested I am part of a group that hold events in parliament where we invite notable speakers and MP's on various subjects centred around human rights and equality.Thanks Keldon, I think that would be really interesting.
We could have a panel discussion on the subject as a whole with panelists representing different industries and points of view. I would imagine it to be a much more productive method. Just this week we were discussing getting political education in parliament.
How does that sound?
I know UKIE for one, have sub groups covering various aspects of the industry to discuss key issues and industry-wide solutions. They hold a lot of interesting events too.
The frustrating thing is, the main trade bodies have no individual membership except for students. So membership is expensive unless its funded by a studio.
Posted:18 hours ago
Folks, we're a professional site, let's act the part. Please leave the ad hominem and tit-for-tat at the door. I'm not sure what other moderators are watching this, but I for one would rather not start swinging the moderator-bat when this spins back up tomorrow morning.
Posted:12 hours ago
Just a quick reminder of our house rules. Would hate for you to spend your valuable time writing something I later delete.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-10-20-our-house-rules
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-10-20-our-house-rules
Posted:11 hours ago
Contact our staff
- Editor in Chief James Brightman
- European Editor Dan Pearson
- Advertising Sales Chris Buckley
Who we are
Gamer Network
This site © 2002-2015 Gamer Network. All Rights Reserved. No part of this site or its content may be reproduced without the permission of the copyright holder.
GamesIndustry.biz is
hosted by dx