Jimquisition: I'm Going To Murder Your Children

[Gilhelmi]

In the United States, the 2nd Amendment (of the constitution) gives us the right to own weapons. In the state I live in, we have the (state) constitutional right to always carry (assuming, of course, that you can pass your background checks and other legal requirements). Even in California, many people have conceal carry weapons permits. You might be surprised what is actually legal, if you look at the laws on the books.

One of the many problems America currently suffers from.

But still, this right doesn't transfer to private venues, does it? If the law requires private venues or residences to allow firearms, even if the owner doesn't want them there, then that's supremely fucked-up. Don't property owners also have rights over their property?

IF, the private venue puts up a "No-Gun" sign then it is illegal (for non-law enforcement) to carry there. BUT, few places bother with this, usually because they get complaints from customers. Even people who do not carry, still complain about the "Gun-free" signs, especially in my area (I mentioned earlier the state constitutional right, it passed with 90% of the vote in my state).

Sure, a business owner can ban weapons, but they usually do not. Why ban weapons, when only law-abiding citizens are going to follow the law? Why ban weapons when so many people complain about the ban?

America also has a very rebellious streak in the common citizen, you might not see it in the media much, but many people do not trust the government. I do not mean the normal NSA wire tap rage that the media is covering right now. What I am talking about goes back a lot farther, back before our founding even. How do I say this without too sounding crazy? America was formed by overthrowing a tyrannical government. We are taught of our Abolitionist ancestors who fought against slavery and the former Black slaves who joined the Union Army to fight the Confederate rebels. American history is filled with fighting against a corrupt Government and evil people who oppressed us. So the 2nd Amendment is our guarantee that if the Government does need 'replacing' we would have the means to do so. I guess there is no way to say that without sounding crazy. I do not want to overthrow the Government, most people do not want to either, we just want to keep the ability to out of fear that if we lose the right to bear arms then the Government will start to abuse its power.

I forget who said it but "The Second Amendment protects the First Amendment." That is very much the culture in a very large part of the United States.

I do not know where you are from, but the United States is HUGH. 300 million people in 50 states. The 50 states have very different cultures from one another, even if the population in is very diverse. There is no such thing as one America culture. This is the hardest part to explain, California is very different from Utah, and Utah is very different from Florida, who is different from Kansas. Every place you go is like another country, every state has its unique flavor to it. The people are even different in temperament. You do not see that in the national media much, they are mostly LA or New York in culture.

Imagine if you went from London to Paris, or any other city in the world. That is what it is like to travel through the United States.

I said all that so you know, I am only talking about parts of America when it comes to firearms. In some areas (like New York state or Colorado) they do not allow people to carry weapons (generally, there are rare exceptions), let alone shoot anyone even in self-defense (or they have extremely high standard to prove self-defense). BUT, in Oklahoma, for example, they allow to to shoot an intruder in your home. If that person was not there legally, they forfeit their life essentially. 50 states, 51 laws (including federal, who are not suppose to interfere with state rights, but that is another lengthy discussion).

I knew a guy who was shot at by a group of people who did not like the fact that he was white and his wife was black. He took out the engine block of the racists car with one shot. The Sheriff investigated, ruled it justified, and congratulated my friend on the restraint he showed (the Sheriff said he would have shot the racists and did the world a favor). I love .50-cal pistols. Now, how would that story had played out in your country? How would it have played out in New York? How would it have played out in any number of states? 50 states, 50 ways it could have gone.

Sorry for the wall of text but, with the USA being a Democratic Republic, this type of thing gets complicated really FAST. I hope this helps you understand a bit more.

 

[Gilhelmi]

Afford video games? Have you paid attention to any of Jims episodes? Never mind that games/consoles/computers are ridiculously priced, barely playable and require all sorts of nonsense hoops to jump through even to be able to play them. Lets also have our favorite games ass raped by focus group mentality.

No, they really aren't.

Computers and consoles have never been more affordable. When I was growing up, a decent computer (adjusted for inflation) would cost around $10,000 today, and it was slow and cumbersome. Today you can get really fast computers for under $1,000, and a cheap (but still capable) computer for a few hundred.

And don't get me started on the games. The games of today are so much more sophisticated, way more playable and engaging. People get nostalgic about "retro" games, but the reality was that most of them weren't very good. And they still cost tons of money back then, too.

You might complain about DRM or online passes, but we had to deal with shit like crazy cardboard wheels used to decode numbers, or "enter the third word of the fourth paragraph on page five of the user manual."

Oh Dear Lord, I remember those days. My 2 year old, free (with contract), cell phone is more powerful then the first computer we bought, the Apple II (oh, how I miss her so, but that is just nostalgia for text based games).

I remember the hoops I had to jump through just to get an NES game to play. First the blowing, then the jiggling, then the Iso alcohol, then more jiggling, then the Prayer to God that this would just work.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Never been more affordable? Computers for the last decade are updating at such a rate that parts on a computer diminish at ridiculous rates, or for the nose bleed section, it might cost you a grand, but it'll be worthless in 3 years.

That's completely inaccurate. The progress of computer hardware has slowed over the last ten years. It's never been more stagnant. It's very different to the 80s and 90s, when there would be huge leaps in technology within a year or two.

Do you really think a 3-year-old computer or console is worthless? That's not borne out by the facts of the market.

As for consoles, surely you don't mean to lump them in with computers seeing as they've gone from 200 dollars at launch (psx) to 600 dollars at launch (xbone). Yeah, real cheap.

Have you not heard of inflation or relative purchasing power? When I was a teenager, we'd be lucky to get a few dollars per week in pocket-money. These days teenagers tend to get more like tens of dollar per day.

We get treated like shit constantly and it's apologists like you who give these corporate leeches permission to do so, not only that, you defend them with the weaksauce "oh it was worse" or "they're a business"

I'm not being an apologist, or defending anything. Just addressing the facts.

I had to go into thousands of dollars of debt to buy powerful computer as a student - these days they are given to kids as birthday presents, and an iPad (which are commonly given to kids under 10 years old) has more computing power than a $4,000 computer did then.

Moores law, look it up.

Uh, no. Why don't YOU look it up? Moore's Law simply states that you can make better hardware for the same price every two years/year and a half or so, NO WHERE does it state that old hardware is instantly obsolete just because newer hardware is available.

Here's the thing about PC games: most of the big, tripple-A games you play on the PC are also being released on consoles, meaning games currently coming out are designed to run on EIGHT YEAR OLD HARDWARE. I might have to run Bioshock Infinite on low settings to get it to work on an old 8800, but it WILL run on an 8800. The 8800 came out in November of 2006, and I know a few people still using it.

The only reason you would need to upgrade your PC every other year is if you absolutely must always be able to run every game on the highest settings. While the average PC gamer tends to like being able to run things on high settings, most of us also don't mind running things on lower settings if it means not spending several hundred dollars every year, and we're not about to shell out thousands just for a slight graphical upgrade.

In other words, your "worthless in three years" comment is completely ludicrous and just plain false. I ran basically the same rig for four and a half years, and I could have pulled another two out of it easily if my graphics card hadn't died (a death which was partially my fault, not entirely the card's). As it is, I expect my current rig to last AT LEAST four years, and with $100-$200 or so in upgrades in that time, I can probably push that out to at least six before my games start getting noticeably uglier (or eight years if I don't mind playing on low settings).

 

[Deadcyde]

Never been more affordable? Computers for the last decade are updating at such a rate that parts on a computer diminish at ridiculous rates, or for the nose bleed section, it might cost you a grand, but it'll be worthless in 3 years.

That's completely inaccurate. The progress of computer hardware has slowed over the last ten years. It's never been more stagnant. It's very different to the 80s and 90s, when there would be huge leaps in technology within a year or two.

Do you really think a 3-year-old computer or console is worthless? That's not borne out by the facts of the market.

As for consoles, surely you don't mean to lump them in with computers seeing as they've gone from 200 dollars at launch (psx) to 600 dollars at launch (xbone). Yeah, real cheap.

Have you not heard of inflation or relative purchasing power? When I was a teenager, we'd be lucky to get a few dollars per week in pocket-money. These days teenagers tend to get more like tens of dollar per day.

We get treated like shit constantly and it's apologists like you who give these corporate leeches permission to do so, not only that, you defend them with the weaksauce "oh it was worse" or "they're a business"

I'm not being an apologist, or defending anything. Just addressing the facts.

I had to go into thousands of dollars of debt to buy powerful computer as a student - these days they are given to kids as birthday presents, and an iPad (which are commonly given to kids under 10 years old) has more computing power than a $4,000 computer did then.

Moores law, look it up.

Uh, no. Why don't YOU look it up? Moore's Law simply states that you can make better hardware for the same price every two years/year and a half or so, NO WHERE does it state that old hardware is instantly obsolete just because newer hardware is available.

Here's the thing about PC games: most of the big, tripple-A games you play on the PC are also being released on consoles, meaning games currently coming out are designed to run on EIGHT YEAR OLD HARDWARE. I might have to run Bioshock Infinite on low settings to get it to work on an old 8800, but it WILL run on an 8800. The 8800 came out in November of 2006, and I know a few people still using it.

The only reason you would need to upgrade your PC every other year is if you absolutely must always be able to run every game on the highest settings. While the average PC gamer tends to like being able to run things on high settings, most of us also don't mind running things on lower settings if it means not spending several hundred dollars every year, and we're not about to shell out thousands just for a slight graphical upgrade.

In other words, your "worthless in three years" comment is completely ludicrous and just plain false. I ran basically the same rig for four and a half years, and I could have pulled another two out of it easily if my graphics card hadn't died (a death which was partially my fault, not entirely the card's). As it is, I expect my current rig to last AT LEAST four years, and with $100-$200 or so in upgrades in that time, I can probably push that out to at least six before my games start getting noticeably uglier (or eight years if I don't mind playing on low settings).

Actually Moores law is that transistors on a microchip double every 2 years.. essentially stating every two years your cpu is going to be twice as powerful. Two years.

Let me summarize that for you with pc games. Low settings. Low. Settings. You want a consistent decent experience you have to pay more. Simple as that.

Say, how often would the firmware/driver upgrades be after those four years? Not including user made about 80 percent of hardware gets no driver love after that amount of time. So obsolete in three years isn't far from the mark. Nonetheless, you said it yourself a few hundred bucks in upgrades, on top of your cost of games, plus online DRM meaning an internet connection is required... $$$$$

Fact is, you're paying money you shouldn't have to. Granted the rules are slightly different for your PC master race self, but the end result is the same.

Afford video games? Have you paid attention to any of Jims episodes? Never mind that games/consoles/computers are ridiculously priced, barely playable and require all sorts of nonsense hoops to jump through even to be able to play them. Lets also have our favorite games ass raped by focus group mentality.

No, they really aren't.

Computers and consoles have never been more affordable. When I was growing up, a decent computer (adjusted for inflation) would cost around $10,000 today, and it was slow and cumbersome. Today you can get really fast computers for under $1,000, and a cheap (but still capable) computer for a few hundred.

And don't get me started on the games. The games of today are so much more sophisticated, way more playable and engaging. People get nostalgic about "retro" games, but the reality was that most of them weren't very good. And they still cost tons of money back then, too.

You might complain about DRM or online passes, but we had to deal with shit like crazy cardboard wheels used to decode numbers, or "enter the third word of the fourth paragraph on page five of the user manual."

Oh Dear Lord, I remember those days. My 2 year old, free (with contract), cell phone is more powerful then the first computer we bought, the Apple II (oh, how I miss her so, but that is just nostalgia for text based games).

I remember the hoops I had to jump through just to get an NES game to play. First the blowing, then the jiggling, then the Iso alcohol, then more jiggling, then the Prayer to God that this would just work.

oh please, a blow on the cartridge and a slap did the job 90 percent of the time and I never once had to use iso alcohol. On any cartridge.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

IF, the private venue puts up a "No-Gun" sign then it is illegal (for non-law enforcement) to carry there. BUT, few places bother with this, usually because they get complaints from customers. Even people who do not carry, still complain about the "Gun-free" signs, especially in my area (I mentioned earlier the state constitutional right, it passed with 90% of the vote in my state).

That would have the opposite effect here - any place that allowed patrons to carry firearms would see customer patronage drop off to almost nothing, and probably go out of business.

There's also a big difference when you're talking about a gaming convention, where there are thousands of people, and many of them are carrying replica/prop weapons. I would not want to go anywhere near such a convention if I knew anybody other than uniformed police officers were carrying actual firearms.

Sure, a business owner can ban weapons, but they usually do not. Why ban weapons, when only law-abiding citizens are going to follow the law?

Not really a problem when you live in a country where there are very few firearms in circulation, and people don't feel the need to carry them.

American history is filled with fighting against a corrupt Government and evil people who oppressed us. So the 2nd Amendment is our guarantee that if the Government does need 'replacing' we would have the means to do so. I guess there is no way to say that without sounding crazy. I do not want to overthrow the Government, most people do not want to either, we just want to keep the ability to out of fear that if we lose the right to bear arms then the Government will start to abuse its power.

Oh, I understand the history and the reasoning, but the practicality is miles removed from that. There's no way that individuals armed with rifles and pistols are going to be able to overthrow a government armed with tanks, fighter aircraft, drones, bombers, and nuclear missiles.

Sure, the military might stage a coup, but look how well that's working out for Egypt. The real flaw with this argument, is that anybody who wants to overthrow the US government is generally not going to agree with the other people who want to overthrow the US government. The society is just way too fragmented to have any common cause.

I do not know where you are from, but the United States is HUGH. 300 million people in 50 states. The 50 states have very different cultures from one another, even if the population in is very diverse. There is no such thing as one America culture. This is the hardest part to explain, California is very different from Utah, and Utah is very different from Florida, who is different from Kansas.

I'm Australian, but I have lived in, and travelled across the USA. I'm well aware of this.

BUT, in Oklahoma, for example, they allow to to shoot an intruder in your home. If that person was not there legally, they forfeit their life essentially. 50 states, 51 laws (including federal, who are not suppose to interfere with state rights, but that is another lengthy discussion).

And we can see how well that's worked out, with George Zimmerman being acquitted, despite his outright murder of a teenager, while Marissa Alexander was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a harmless warning shot against someone she had a restraining order against.

I knew a guy who was shot at by a group of people who did not like the fact that he was white and his wife was black. He took out the engine block of the racists car with one shot. The Sheriff investigated, ruled it justified, and congratulated my friend on the restraint he showed (the Sheriff said he would have shot the racists and did the world a favor). I love .50-cal pistols. Now, how would that story had played out in your country? How would it have played out in New York? How would it have played out in any number of states? 50 states, 50 ways it could have gone.

It would have been very unlikely to happen at all in the last 50 years or so.

Sorry for the wall of text but, with the USA being a Democratic Republic, this type of thing gets complicated really FAST. I hope this helps you understand a bit more.

I do understand, and I do like the USA. I just think things are pretty fucked-up where guns are involved. It just seems to me that guns are more important than other human rights and common decency in the USA. My country has its own share of problems, but our approach to guns seems to be a hell of a lot more successful.

 

[Quellist]

*claps* I wouldnt say Jimquisition is the only thing that keeps me coming back to the Escapist but its pretty much surpassed Zero Punctuation as the high point of the site.

Well said Jim, well said

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Actually Moores law is that transistors on a microchip double every 2 years.. essentially stating every two years your cpu is going to be twice as powerful. Two years.

Yes, but that doesn't take into account software.

We've actually been in a rather paradoxical phase for the last 5-10 years. While the hardware keeps getting more powerful, the software on general-purpose computing platforms (i.e: Windows, Mac, Linux) has been largely unable to keep pace with it. We now have ubiquitous multi-core processors, but much of the software is unable to take full advantage of it. So, the increasing hardware power doesn't actually make much of a difference in the user experience.

Conversely, the more fixed platforms (PS3, Xbox, iPad, etc) have not made huge advances in hardware capability, but the fact that they are a fixed target has meant that the software keeps getting more and more optimised. So, even on an old hardware platform, the software experience gets better as developers gain experience with the platform.

In short, transistors aren't all that matter. Even ignoring the fixed-platform stuff, things like storage speed and connectivity don't scale linearly alongside processor speed. So, the reality is that most people's computers aren't really much faster in practical terms than they were three years ago.

 

[Nicy]

I'm with you here Jim. I don't care what someone thinks a person did to them, threatening that person's kids is just completely unacceptable and I think it does paint a very dark picture of the current game culture.

How? How does this represent me and other gamers? And yeah I am gonna take it personally. You're gonna slag off a group to which I proudly belong so fuck it, might as well have a pop at someone who can take it. Go on. How does this run off on me or anyone other than the assholes personally responsible?

Did you know that crazy One Direction fans stalk the mothers of the band just in case the boys ever visit their parents and send real death threats to real people for the crime of going out with a member of a boyband that they happen to love?

Does that paint a very dark picture of current gamer culture of music culture, or does it rather just make individual crazy bitches look crazy?

It represents us and the gaming culture because we aren't making it stop. If we're content to sit back and call "not my problem" then we ARE responsible; not for their actions, but for OUR inaction. If, however, we all make it clear (as Mr. Sterling is doing) that this shit is bananas, that we will not stand for it, and that we will collectively call out and smack down anybody we catch doing it, it will stop. And we will be able to feel proud of ourselves and our culture for refusing to allow sociopaths to assault people under our roof.

 

[tardcore]

SNIP

Again nothing but a bunch of hyperbole implying that its the non-dickheads faction of the community that are to blame for the insane actions of others.

You are not just asking people to help fight the idiots of the community. You and Jim are implying that these idiots exist due to the majority of the community being selfish lazy and thoughtless bastards, with no blame being laid at the feet of the idiots themselves. There's a major difference.

Uh and no I didn't call you a nazi, I just offered a counter argument to your idea that focusing only on negativity gets anything done. I typed out the first widely recognizable examples of both positive and negative social motivators I could think of as a juxtapotory example. You made the implication any of those had any comparison to yourself all on your lonesome.

And I don't live in any kind of alternate reality. Your implication that only viewing matters in a negative manner is the only worthwhile motivation (which I see you've now kind of recanted on) is just the same as someone thinking its ok to try and motivate another by threatening them or their families with violence.

And the rest, didn't call you a bully, implied you are telling people to treat the members of the community you feel are aberrant in the same way bullies behave, I.E. gang up on them. Didn't call you a dictator, just made the point that people blindly following the direction of others with no objective thinking of their own (which is exactly what you said I should do when you said I shouldn't be questioning your motivations here, just accepting them) is what those who want complete control over others desire. Which by the way is what actually kept Stalinism alive for so long, well that and a campaign of terror. And didn't call you a nazi, see above.

And yeah I did get you pretty good there. Whenever an individual puts themselves above the rights and rules of others due to higher self perceived importance of their own views, they have stepped into the realm of hypocrisy. And no your strawman arguments that I'm just of guilty of the same behavior don't work as I've explained why your assumptions were incorrect. I'm also not calling you a hypocrite, I'm simply pointing out that the excuse "well its that important to me" doesn't justify trampling on the rights or feelings of others.

And there is not a damn thing wrong with asking for people to help to better police the community, or even just themselves. That isn't nor has it ever been my issue with you. Its the blanket shaming and insulting you've used to claim that we are the ones totally at fault for the existence these monsters in the first place (at the same time painting yourself as a long suffering martyr due to our lack of concern) is what is bothering me. I seriously hope you can understand the difference.

As a silly little analogy to attempt to explain what I'm seeing, is you and Jim complaining that those of us who know better than to shit on the floor, are the ones who are at fault because we didn't stop Jimmy from shitting on the floor. When what we all should instead be focusing on is why the hell is Jimmy shitting on the floor in the first place? What the hell is wrong with Jimmy? Now I won't lie I do understand your point that if we want to stop the floor being covered in shit something needs to be done to motivate Jimmy to behave differently. But problem is, Jimmy was shitting on the floor long before we came along and its something more than just our so called permissiveness that's at the root of the problem. And that is what we should be looking into, otherwise all we can hope for is an endless parade of floor shitting Jimmys. With the added bullshit of the rest of us non-shitters now being at each others throats blaming each other for the actions of some third party dickhead.

And sorry if you feel that way but I'm not twisting what you say, I'm just trying to show you that others might have a different viewpoint than yourself, and offering counter arguments accordingly.

Anyway I am seriously done here. I looked around earlier to find where I could delete my account but couldn't find anything. If someone would kindly point me in the right direction I'll happily get out of Dodge City by sundown and stop uglying up the place.

 

[wearesoneutralthatithurts]

To be honest, the video's kinda missing the point. Hepler wasn't harrassed because she was creative with her writing. Holy shit no. That never happened. Hepler was harrassed because she was a video game writer who didn't like video games, and people understandably flew off the handle (not that the death threats were understandable) at someone who got into the industry without deserving to.

1. she said she didnt liked the fighting part and this is a reasonable opinion. Why the cat does this opinion deserve harassment? why the heck does teh idea that there might be other people who like her didnt like the fighting parts deserve that?
I mean, i dont get it?
Yeah, there are people who don't like fighting in games(if the games are not about that fighting) and if you choose to implement the OPTION for skipping the fight scenes, where is the problem? i dont get it.I would be happy if FF13 had that option. Other people like that.. i dont get why giving people more options to make their experience better WITHOUT taking said parts from the game is criticiseable..
I remember katawa shojo where you could disable the sex-scenes. people who like them watched them, people who didnt like them didnt had to watch them. Both groups are happy because their demands were met in the same game.


I mean, you have the option to make YOUR gaming experience better without limiting the experience of other people. thats a great idea, why the hefty critique and the sick harassment?


Also.. I dont think that people having opinions which i consider as wrong or worse entitles me to harassment. Critique:yeah, sure 100%
but harassment=|=critique. Its a sign of maturity to not harass people. I mean, be angry, and vocalize that anger, that is okay. but its better to be angry at a opinion and express that anger without resorting to personal hurtful attacks. I know its damn hard, i often fall for it myself, especially if there are things I have heard to the excess and sometimes there is the need for venting the frustration. But i do think that its the best to vent that anger in a productive and well, civilized manner.
Its hard and most people will fail because we are no saints and in anonymity there will often be no consequences (which is a big part of the problem. because silence to that behaviour enables it)for behaving like ass. So as long as the most people will ignore that behaviour, its just our own principles of not being an ass which constrain us.
(better would be the possibility to take consequences. In forums like these, there are the mods which help enabling a good discussion) but if you look at online gaming, the harassers are often cheered to or ignored and only if some lines(which are individual) are crossed people speak up(and get called out as white knights. ><)
Usually, online gaming have rules for behaviour-and there are usually rules which say that harassment&such stuff is not allowed.
So why is it often tolerated? anonymity? you dont know the victims so its not relevant?(until say, someone you like is harassed.. which is kinda sad. Its sad that you need to knwo one person to be empathetic to that person)

well, I think there should be places for people who like gaming without harassment, rape jokes, hacks and unfair play.( trolling might or might not be a part of it.*) usually most places should be that kind of place because they have rules which forbid such behaviour-but the rules are not enforced. So we need places where they are enforced-which costs money and time. There has to be more demand for safe-spaces i think. but that just my opinion.



If the trolling is one victim=one time trolled by one player and the trolling is creative, i dont see a problem. but is a player gets permanently the victim of trolling so that person cant play 20 minutes online without getting attacked than this ruins the gaming experience and is bad. IMHO
( i remeber some creative and funny trollings in dark souls.^^)

 

[hazydawn]

I didn't know this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QLz0CqtMVc] still had to be passed around.

I watched it... It's shit. And why is Jim's picture shown sucking his purple dildo as the commentator mentions homophobia?

On Jim's vid: I felt this episode was unneeded. I didn't even watch it so boring is this whole issue to me.

 

[jo291]

And to think that this is coming from the guy who made a video talking about how we have to have a thick skin on the internet.

Way to do a 180 Jim.

Also reminder that Bio-ware was not open to constructive criticism of any kind as evidenced by their heavy and unfair censorship of their own forums.

 

[HNLRoscoe]

I understand the point that Jim is trying to get across here, but I have to say I'm sick of hearing about this. Of course sending death threats and threatening people's kids is wrong. All rational people know this. The people who think it's ok to do so probably don't watch Jimquisition and aren't worth the time anyone takes to mention how deplorable what they're doing is.

Any person with priorities fucked up enough to make issues related to the quality of a video game that personal isn't worth acknowledging. On the flip side of that coin, anybody with half a brain should know that, as bad as threatening the lives of children is, and as much as it triggers protective and fearful instincts, these threats are all a bunch of bullshit. No one's coming after Hepler's kids, nobody's going to hurt Anita Sarkessian, and the COD dev who tweaked the gun mechanics will live to see the next 5 installments of the series released.

Jim said in the video's description and in the video itself that it was sad that something as simple as that needed to be said, but I find it sad that I need to respond with a lesson that we've probably all been taught as children: The people who send death threats and the like are doing it because they know it gets to you. By responding with diatribes calling them names and, in the case of this video, literally just saying "fuck you", you're not only lowering yourselves to their level, but validating their actions by giving them attention. Be the bigger person and ignore them. Take a minute before you start writing your article or the script to your newest video about how stupid and subhuman these people are, and consider that someone at their level of intelligence isn't going to listen to your scolding of them. That they're far impotent to ever make good on their threats. Indeed, it's a wonder that such people manage to operate a computer in the first place.

In summation, of course threatening the lives of people who displease you and their children is wrong. Anybody that doesn't know that isn't worth reasoning with because they were obviously never reasonable to begin with. Demonstrate by your actions that you're the more mature and intelligent person, rather than simply claiming to be, alongside pithy insults and accusations of cowardice, in your videos and articles. By doing so, you deprive them of the attention and recognition they crave. The internet and gaming communities are very large, and it's inevitable that there will be some stupid, ignorant, or downright malicious people. Consider, before judging the entire community, that for every one racist, misogynist, and death threat sender, there are at least 10 (probably more) rational and respectful commenters that are being lumped into your retaliatory insults and accusations of immaturity and self-entitlement. Add to that another 10 or more who normally keep quiet and don't participate. People like me.

 

[HNLRoscoe]

Instig8iveJournalism is the face of everything wrong with the gaming community.

Could you elaborate on why you think that? I understand that Instig8iveJournalism often explores the less popular sides of arguments, but I think that he does so in a reasonable and mature way. Thus fostering discussion, rather than just writing off unpopular opinions under blanket accusations of misogyny, racism, or other kinds of trolling.

 

[HNLRoscoe]

Title says Helper left because of harassment, reading the article, she left because of family reasons. So the question is, what the fuck does an incident that was talked about and dealt with two years ago have to do with Helper leaving for family reasons. We're talking about this, because in gaining views, gaming journalism made shit up to create a firestorm that ended up being put out when Bioware and Helper mention that she left for family reasons and that the shit was made up.

Interesting. I remember a similar thing happening right before Halo 4 came out. The directors were doing an interview about the online play and mentioned Xbox Live has a policy of banning people who make sexist remarks, among several other things. Game journalism outlets ran with this and began running headlines about how Halo 4 was going to issue special bans for sexism to protect girl gamers. I actually sent feedback to The Escapist about how they were running misquoted yellow journalism and they ended up issuing a correction.

If this whole issue stems from similarly misquoted pieces about Hepler, I'd say that we should email the editors of the piece in question and ask them to correct themselves. I'm sure they won't all be as reasonable as Escapist was, but trying to fix what's wrong with the journalism in our community is better than just sitting around and watching it go to shit.

 

[antipunt]

This is one of my first episodes here, and I cannot figure out for the life of me, why anyone would want to spend 7 minutes being chastised for doing absolutely nothing.

>_>

I could just go to the DMV

 

[Deadagent]

To be honest, the video's kinda missing the point. Hepler wasn't harrassed because she was creative with her writing. Holy shit no. That never happened. Hepler was harrassed because she was a video game writer who didn't like video games, and people understandably flew off the handle (not that the death threats were understandable) at someone who got into the industry without deserving to. There are a lot of good writers out there who also like video games and Hepler leaving is not going to cause anything of value to be lost.

It's also a bit disconcerting that Hepler is now such a huge attention figure that the things she says can cause a massive shitstorm between gamers and the journalists who support them. I'm imagining the comical yet grim situation of her saying "I was almost raped by someone who said he didn't like Dragon Age 2" and gaming pundits everywhere getting enraged with series of condescending and patronizing articles towards the "gaming community" in an effort to find all of the bad weeds and tell them a thing or two!

Long story short, the fragile egos of game developers everywhere aren't my problem, my business nor my interest and I'd be happier if the things I watch weren't full of moral posturing addressed to a vocal minority that will be anything but convinced.

Finally SOMEONE understood why I linked the video I linked, It's been paintful to see so many respond to that link and miss the point entirely.

That's like saying "4Chan is a great place for an intellectual discussion".

Even when 4chan is at it's worst, they wont ban you because someone got offended. In terms of being able to express unpopular ideas, it's a much better place than this forum.

You do get more downright idiocy with that as well but that's the price of freedom.

You can say it, it's a filthy fucking lie, but you can certainly say it. Instig8iveJournalism is the face of everything wrong with the gaming community. He's the kind of person Jim and Bob beat on because he's such an easy target. He's the fucking Fox News of the gaming community.

So the guy who dosen't get a cent for his opinion, and expresses it in a calm reasonable manner even if it's the unpopular opinion, is more like Fox news than a man (Jim) who gets ad revenue and expresses the politically correct popular opinion more often than not. Might wanna look at that a bit more objectively, dont you think?

 

[jo291]

What we should be asking is why Helper and Fish were singled out... even though it should be obvious.

Phil Fish is really bad at interacting with people, especially when they're criticising him, but I don't really get where Hepler violated the 'don't be a dick' rule. As far as I can tell, Hepler's an obvious target because she's: unfortunate looking, a woman, associated with a game that's basically emblematic of the bioware dating sim/fanfic caliber writing/illusion of choice stuff, and is featured in a DA2 trailer describing the sexuality of characters nobody likes while being all of the above.

Where does 'don't be a dick' come into it?

She admitted to not being much of a gamer herself and said she'd like an option to skip the gameplay in a particular game in order to enjoy the story. Cue the "OMG! Y U WANNA DUM DOWN DA GAEMZ CASUAL!" dipshits, and 4Chan and Reddit being their usual piles of human worthlessness.

If someone removes the game-play from a game then it is not a game, now is it?

People were justifiably upset that somebody that does not even like video games was writing a video game.

And our fears were justified when we saw how much Dragon Age 2 was dumbed down with its "Press button and cool stuff happens" approach to gameplay for thick skulled empty headed people who wanted nothing more then self gratification in game-play form that they had to put little effort in to play or beat.

 

[Sticky]

That's like saying "4Chan is a great place for an intellectual discussion".

To stop you right there and hopefully not careen the topic off course any further: It actually is a very good discussion board if the most populous/active boards are avoided. Particularly in the way of hobbies and personal interests like the tabletop games board and the retro video games board. I know blaming the internet hate machine for everything bad that happens is a new fad, but don't believe that the site or the concept of anonymous discussion itself doesn't have it's merits or the site is only populated by irate teenagers.

This is one of my first episodes here, and I cannot figure out for the life of me, why anyone would want to spend 7 minutes being chastised for doing absolutely nothing.

>_>

I could just go to the DMV

It's not all like this, but Jim does sometimes get swept up in the controversies surrounding video games quite often. He's been at the center of it and the outskirts quite frequently and he does have a good mindset of how to approach trolls or even difficult to discuss topics in general. So it's best to consider this an extremely rare circumstance and carry on. Hope to see you around more in the future.

That said, I also don't like that the recent pages are now resorting to saying this is everyone's fault because of criticism toward helper herself. Some reactions are overbearing, sure, but that doesn't mean that any person is inherently immune to criticism about their words and actions.

Phil Fish himself being an excellent example because without any prior context or information regarding his actions, he seemingly broke one day because someone at Gametrailers said some nasty things about him personally and threw his hard work out the window. Which doesn't absolve him of criticism at all and is really silly to expect people to sympathize with someone who essentially flipped the chess board over and is now crying in the proverbial bathroom. No matter how harsh the criticism may be.

But that's where the criticism ends, Fish's only mistake was the way he responded. The man responsible for the criticism was also immensely unprofessional about the whole thing and should be held accountable for his actions as well. A more skilled public face would have turned the whole thing around on said unprofessional critic and made the topic be about the critic and his childish behavior, but game developers are rarely known for being skilled public figures. Which is absolutely not Fish's fault at all.

 

[Erttheking]

Hepler got the backlash for saying that the part she hates about videogames is being forced to play them in order to watch the story sequences and Fish just gets treated like the douchebag he is.

I agree that threatening with murder is a bit over the top, but please don't pretend these people didn't have it coming. They don't get all that hate for their work (even though Hepler was responsible for the weaker parts of DA:O), but as a result of their statements and actions.

No, she DIDN'T have it coming. Helper said that she didn't like the gameplay part of current gaming, how combat focused it is? Can someone please tell me why that is worth getting angry over? It's her opinion, it's an opinion I disagree with, but it's her opinion and it wasn't an opinion that affected the games that she was making. Having an opinion that people don't like is NOT enough to make it so that someone "Had it coming", especially when that opinion doesn't actually DO anything.