• 0 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • There certainly was some actual “ethics in video game journalism” discussion early on that I felt was legitimate, but that got drowned out pretty quickly by the misogynists (which, from what I gather, was the entire point - it seems the misogynists started the whole thing and used the “ethics in game journalism” thing as a front to try to legitimise their agenda).

    I think the discussion about the personal relationships game journalists have with developers in general was a reasonable one to have. It unfortunately ended up just laser focusing on Zoe Quinn supposedly trading sex for good reviews, which was untrue, sexist and resulted in nasty personal attacks. But I think it was worth at least examining the fact that game journalists and game developers often have close relationships and move in the same circles, and that game journalism can often be a stepping stone to game development. Those are absolutely things that could influence someone’s reviews or articles, consciously or subconsciously.

    And another conversation worth having was the fact that gaming outlets like IGN were/are funded by adverts from gaming companies. It makes sense, of course - the Venn diagram of IGN’s (or other gaming outlets’) readers and gaming companies’ target audience is almost a perfect circle, which makes the ad space valuable to the gaming companies. And because it’s valuable to gaming companies, it’s better for the outlets to sell the ad space to them for more money than to sell it to generic advertising platforms. But it does mean it seems valid to ask whether the outlets giving bad reviews or writing critical articles might cause their advertisers to pull out, and therefore they might avoid being too critical.

    Now I don’t think the games industry is corrupt or running on cronyism, personally. And I certainly don’t believe it’s all run by a shadowy cabal of woke libruls who are trying to force black people, women (and worse, gasp black women shudder) into games. But I do feel it was worth asking about the relationships between journalists, developers, publishers and review outlets - and honestly, those are the kinds of things that both game journalists and people who read game journalism should constantly be re-evaluating. It’s always good to be aware of potential biases and influences.

    The fact that the whole thing almost immediately got twisted into misogyny, death threats and a general hate campaign was both disappointing and horrifying. And the fact that it led to the alt-right, and that you can trace a line from it to Brexit and to Donald Trump becoming US president, is even worse.



  • I’m not sure I see how they’re comparable. Progressivism requires the ability to progress; if we somehow create a completely perfect utopia then there will be no room for progressivism, but otherwise there will always be some way to improve things and progress. In practice, there will always be some way to improve society which means infinite progressivism surely isn’t unreasonable?

    Infinite growth isn’t possible because infinite money doesn’t exist, it’s as simple as that. And if infinite money did exist, infinite growth wouldn’t be possible because everything would already be infinitely large and therefore unable to grow any further…

    … but beyond that, it also requires more and more people who can afford whatever the product/service in question is. Which requires either infinite people, infinite money or both. And as the product/service grows and prices likely increase, people will priced out of the market which is the opposite of infinite growth.

    It’s also worth considering that progressivism is a mindset that is aiming for zero - zero problems, zero inequality, zero bigotry, etc. It’s not about pushing for infinite anything, it’s about trying to reduce existing issues. And while it’ll likely never reach its goal, it’s not theoretically or mathematically unreachable. It’s much more realistic to attempt to reduce something to zero than it is to increase it to infinity.


  • Not that your suggestion is necessarily bad in general, but I don’t really think it’s necessary when it comes to Factorio. I think it should be clear from playing the demo whether 100+ more hours of that seems worth the asking price for someone. It’s probably the most representative demo I’ve ever played; the full game is just the demo but more. There are no surprises down the line. There are no random pivots to other genres, or the game trying to stick its fingers in too many pies. There’s no narrative to screw up. There’s no “oh, they clearly just spent all their time polishing the first hour of the game and the rest of it is a technical mess”. It’s the same gameplay loop from the demo for another 50 hours until you “win”.

    … and then another 50 hours after that when you decide to optimise things. And then another 100 hours when you decide to make a train-themed base. And then another 700 hours when you discover some of the mods that exist…



  • “Landed gentry” was a social class of people who owned estates and, well, land. They didn’t have to work; they made their income by profiting off the work of the farm hands, merchants, etc, who worked on their land. The estates these landed gentry owned, along with their wealth, would be passed down to their children when they died. It meant the gentry did very little to earn their station in life, but still had a fair amount of power and wealth.

    How spez thinks it applies to Reddit mods, I’m not entirely sure. But he definitely meant it as an insult. His full quote was:

    And I think, on Reddit, the analogy is closer to the landed gentry: The people who get there first get to stay there and pass it down to their descendants, and that is not democratic.

    So I guess he was upset that mod teams get to select who else is a good fit to join the mod team? Of course, the issue is that he is the landed gentry - users didn’t vote for him, nor can they remove him; and he’s profiting off the work of the people who post content and the people who spend their time moderating.




  • I think it’s good that they asked here. The way the fediverse is structured means there can be plenty of people who use an instance - posting to it, browsing posts from it, etc - without being registered with that instance. If Beehaw says they’re contemplating leaving, only to be met with a “NO, DON’T GO” response from the rest of the fediverse, then that might give them reason to rethink their position. And if everyone just says “eh, whatever” or “yeah, go away” then it may reinforce their position.

    Obviously the opinions of the people who’ve registered there should hold more weight, but I think putting the question to everyone is a good move.






  • My usual go-to is to ask what their latest/current obsession is. It works really well for a few reasons:

    • it’s nice and simple to ask - it doesn’t require a monologue/wall of text to set up, and it doesn’t require you to know anything about them to ask it;
    • it’s both as personal and as low-stakes as they want it to be. They can give very intimate, in-depth answers if they feel like it, or they can just mention something like the latest film they enjoyed. There’s no risk of making them uncomfortable by asking it;
    • it lets you filter out boring people who don’t really take interest in anything;
    • assuming they do have interests, it often gives you plenty of opportunities to dive into deeper conversation;
    • it’s often engaging for them because they get to talk about something they’re passionate about;
    • it’s often interesting for you because people talking about things they’re passionate about is awesome (and often attractive).
    • it’s pretty much always relevant and fresh because their latest obsession will change over time. This makes it particularly great for things like dating sites/apps because people’s bios will often be out of date and/or they’ll have talked about the things mentioned in their bio so much that they’re kind of sick of them.

    I’ve actually had multiple people on dating sites tell me how great a question they think it is, and that they’re going to use it themselves in the future. So obviously it’s not just me who thinks it’s a great question!




  • This is where it gets tricky and a lot of nuance is lost, I think. There reaches a certain point where it stops being zero-sum because two or more parties can each have an entirely independent and valid claim.

    In your example, if you pass the money to your children, they reach 40 years old, spending the money they believe is theirs, and then suddenly they’re told they owe $2M they don’t have for something they didn’t do, that’s not fair on them. Have they benefitted from the $2M? Absolutely. Is it fair that they benefitted while the person/people you stole it from suffered? Absolutely not. But your children didn’t do anything to deserve punishment.

    Now I’m generally fairly anti-Israel, and have been for years, so don’t take this as me being an apologist for colonisers. But for someone who has lived all their life in Israel - whose great-grandparents were colonisers - Israel is home and they feel they have just as much right to it as the people it was stolen from 80 years ago. The longer these conflicts go on, the more difficult it is to come up with a fair solution on a human level.

    Israel is definitely in the wrong, though. It’s very clearly not fair from a Palestinian perspective. But no matter how you try to divide up the land now, there will be innocent people who suffer for it. There’s no easy solution to it, unfortunately. It’s more complex than just “give it back”.



  • Klangkarussell - All Eyes On You - this is probably my favourite music video ever. I’m a sucker for one-takes, and the fact that this one is nine minutes long makes it so impressive on a technical level. But also, the video really feels like an experience. I feel like there are a lot of different ways the characters and situation, and what they represent, can be interpreted; it feels like everyone reads into the video in their own way (and I’m totally down to discuss anyone else’s interpretations once they’ve watched it). Plus the atmosphere of the video really enhances that of the song - I like the song well enough, but combined with the video I find it so hypnotizing and engrossing. (Plus, it doesn’t feel cheap by any means but you can see it was made on a shoestring budget, so it gets extra points for that as far as I’m concerned.)

    All India Radio - Rippled - long-exposure light stop-motion is so damn cool. It’s such a pretty video, and I love how authentic it feels - it obviously took a lot of time, energy and talent to make (over 6 months according to the description) but it has so much personality to it, and you can obviously see the people in the background moving the lights around which makes it feel far less “clinical”.

    Delta Heavy - Get By - musically, it’s a slightly above-average 2012 dubstep track, but the video is so fun (and terrifying, I suppose…). Again, I love the stop motion, but it’s also just really fun on a conceptual level.


    Anyway, all of these are a decade old, so I guess maybe you’re right about modern music videos. I can’t say I watch many music videos, though, so there are probably some good ones I miss!