Impulse725 said:
runic knight said:
Impulse725 said:
RexMundane said:
*regretful peek into the megathread* ...#Comicgate now? Did I miss some news about how comic book authors sometimes have one another's emails or how indie comic artists have to sleep with powerful bloggers or... the Spiderwoman cover? Seriously? This is the... you're fighting for the right to force Marvel to use crappy art just because you prefer it's ludicrous over-sexualization, if only because it pisses off the EssJay-Dubbs?
captcha: "Live Life." Good call, Captcha.
There's been periodic calls for a comic gate thing on comics forums by the odd loose GG cannon who's also into comics. I seldom see even a couple of posts in support. I believe comics culture has less of a knee jerk reaction to feminist and other critiques as they consider comics legitimate art, and criticism is the price of admission for leaving the kids table.
Comic demographics also trend 20 years older than gamer, so there's that too. There's less people whipped into a panic because they're confronting their first realization that other people see the world differently.
You know I read that, and then use google for 2 seconds to check things and I see stuff like this
http://www.theesa.com/facts/
saying that the average age of gamers is 31. Average age of most frequent game purchaser (read:core demographic) is 35.
You are saying the average comic book reader is in their 50's?
But please, do continue to dismiss gamergate as opposing feminist and not just, you know, what they actually have been claiming from the start in being opposition to a lack of ethical and professional behavior in gaming journalism itself by use of ideological bias and dishonest McCarthyism-like tactics to dismiss, discredit, deflect, defame and outright demonize in order to avoid addressing the very real concerns of their audience. Though I suppose fairness would dictate you could add "by use of feminist ideology in particular".
I'm obviously talking about the more hardcore fan communities that cares about these things, you cited the amount of people who play games, total. I'm glad you know how to goggle, but your ability to find relevant statistics instead of grabbing the first thing that looks like it makes your point is lacking. I do appreciate the effort, though. The gamer community, the hardcore enthusiasts, average much younger than 31. Much as not everyone that goes out to see Transformers is not a cinema buff, not everyone that games is a gamer. The overall category would be "player".
I dismiss gamergate because I think they're incompetent as an overall movement, for the record. I don't feel the need to talk about it because a movement that can't do better than 40% support in their own demographic isn't going anywhere. You're totally unable to win over people who should be your allies because, as this thread suggests, you have an image problem, and are comically opposed to acknowledging it. Beyond maybe crushing some indie developers who are powerless in the grand scheme of things, gamergate will accomplish nothing due to their inability to make their case. The knee jerk reaction to feminism is less a cause to dismiss gamergate per say, and more a sign that the movement tends to get off on irrelevant tangents that gain them little.
I have no interest in opposing gamergate, I'm sure you'll collapse just fine on your own. I'm not even really talking about gamergate, I'm spitballing about probable reasons there's a larger number of gamers who have a trouble with girly stuff compared to other nerd culture communities. You are the one projecting gamergate into this. Granted, the thread is tangentially about discussing gamergate, but it's not like that's happening much anyway.
I cited 2 points of data in order to cover two possible ways a business might define their demographics: Total size and profitability. If you look back, you will see I also cited the amount of people who buy games regularly, just to be sure I covered what you might have meant. If I still missed it though, please, define for me how the core demographics would be viewed from a business sense if not either by size itself (number of customers defined by people in the demographic who buy games, i.e. that first number I gave) or profitability (number of repeat customers, i.e. the second number I gave).
Because right now, you don't actually have any backing for your claim, just sort of trying to get it to agree with your preconceived notion in order for that to support your overall claim. And that just isn't going to fly. Right now all you have done is go "oh, not that, I meant something else that I will not provide a factual backing to." So please, define "hardcore gamers" for me and then provide some evidence of that being a relevant classification. Because the argument you started to make was that the comic industry's core demographic was "about 20 years older" then gaming's. And I'll be honest, that is just full of shit.
So if you meant "hardcore demographic", how do you define that and since we need to compare apples to apples, how do you define that for both gaming and comics.
If you just meant core demographics, how else would you define them if not by the two examples I mentioned before, both of which would put "core comic fans" into their 50's by your statement?
Your rejection of gamergate for those reasons provided though suggests you either don't actually have a clue what it is (as suggested by your 40% statistic thing since as a consumer revolt, we
wouldn't all agree about what we feel is the exact goal, but rather it would be a nebulous concept such as "Journalism and parasitic SJw and ethics" which would require you add the total number of a few options of the rather poorly worded poll because you try to pull a number), can't look beyond the media portrayal (as the image remark itself suggests since the largest reason the image is bad is because of the constant slander and misrepresentation of it by the media individuals implicated and under scrutiny), or simply do not want to give up whatever per-conceived view you started with. Hell, go and reread the first post and see who first suggested this thread in the first place before trying to tell me that I am "comically unaware" of the image problem.
Your final paragraph does suggest the "simply refuses to abandon per-conceived bias" though, as you are the one projecting your views of the community onto gamergate itself (which isn't "tangentially" related to the topic, it is the reason. Hell, it is in the thread name).
Still, this seems more like you just wanted to post something like "lol gamers are losers" and try to cite a very poorly backed excuse to justify it while taking pot-shots at gamergate as a whole. I'm sorry, but no.
