Results 1 to 30 of 155

Thread: Clarkson gone!

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Horse Archer Senior Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Novi Sad, Serbia
    Posts
    4,315

    Default Re: Clarkson gone!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironside View Post
    One is how deep did the harassment go in the GG movement.
    One is why Sarkeesian is the most publically known face and why she is defended on that position.
    One is how to deal with spinning and disinformation.
    One is whatever Sarkeesian lied about Hitman. Minor, but popular topic, based on the responses.
    One is why sexism is supposed to have an influence even on adult people, while violence do not.
    Without going into any of that point by point, I just want say that gamers inherently react badly to criticism of their favourite pass time.

    That is partly a remnant of a time when gaming was still in its infancy. After the very first batch of games which were family oriented mostly (from Pong to Tetris), the next batch allowed gamers to get personally involved. There was often a storyline (however rudimentary), a hero, an enemy or enemies to defeat. It was much more immersive, and, most importantly, it involved gamers committing virtual violence.

    Since games are different from other mediums by the fact that you, as a player, have influence on what happens, some started saying that is much more dangerous than other types of entertainment. In movies, irrespective how involved you are with a certain character, you're still a passive observer to that character committing imaginary violence. In games, you're actually committing that imaginary violence. You need to press the button to pull the trigger or swing a sword.

    Even before it was expertly scrutinized, conservative voices started a campaign to either limit games availability or even totally ban them.
    As gaming was still in its infancy, there was a fear that they may be successful, and gamers fought aggressively, and for a long time, to prove otherwise. That's a big part (imho, the primary reason) why gamers tend to dismiss any criticism out of hand. It helps that gamers are now one of the most well connected social groups globally, and it is fairly easy to "unite" them in defence of gaming, and, likewise, it is extremely difficult to penetrate that group.

    I believe that is the reason why other people feel they need to be more sensationalist to get heard, like that Sarkeesian lady. I've seen her giving an interview to Jon Stewart at Daily Show. She was actually likeable and well spoken. She doesn't attack games, in fact, she admitted during that interview that she is a passionate gamer, but she wants games to be less sexist. That's the impression I got.

    We are far beyond the point where games could have been taken away from us. The gaming industry has surpassed movie and music industry in size. Games are here to stay and will probably become even a more important part of human life in the future. That means we need at least to allow the discussion about some aspect of games and gaming to be had.
    Last edited by Sarmatian; 04-25-2015 at 18:45.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO