So I've been playing Zoe's "games"...

[dangoball]

I don't think anyone here has a problem with cirtique of games, but a lot of us didn't like how OP basicaly called Depression Quest and anything Zoe Quin does in that vein "not a game". Just because OP didn't find it to his liking doesn't mean it's not a game. I didn't oppose his "arguments", I opposed his arguments - see the difference?

I didn't interpret the OP as claiming Quinn's games weren't games, rather he thought they weren't very good. That's a valid position to hold, and just because Quinn has been the recipient of negative press and harassment recently doesn't make her professional work beyond scrutiny.

The percieved dismissal was not as much in the post itself as in the title of the thread, which (at least to me) strongly implies that OP holds no respect for those works. You are right, thinking a game isn't very good is a valid possition, but the position can be taken in a civil manner without patronising.

Spoiler: I can't believe I'm talking about this

I personally don't care much for that whole topic of jurnalistic integrity and "quinnspiracy" (see what I mean by quotation marks?) and I'm aware that discussing a work without also mentioning the creator is nigh impossible, but whatever the topic of the month is, it's in no way connected in how we approach a certain game on a personal level. So no, DQ is not, never was, and never will be above above criticism, but the way OP went about it was simply wrong.

Also, to adress your scores in game reviews point - what makes you think those have any objective value? Those basically mean "All things considered, I think this game is about number/scale good". We can judge graphics, control scheme, gameplay, all of which Depression Quest has none or near to zero. There's some audio, but beat me over the head with a stick if you think it's a good idea to compare soundtrack of what is basically a text adventure with how well synched are the sounds of footsteps with your toons. The point of scores is to find someone who has similar criteria to yours and then see how that person likes said game. And review score bloating is another can of worms.

We could still judge a text adventure on the quality of writing, immersiveness, originality of ideas, scope of possible player decisions, and so on. We could look at several different text adventures and place them on a hierarchy of "bad" to "good". As long as a piece of media contains an element of craftsmanship we have something objective to talk about, and personal preference is a lens that we can then look through to decide whether it's our cup of tea or not. For example, I hate racing games and I'd be reluctant to play even an excellent example of the genre - but I still acknowledge that Forza is objectively better than Big Rigs.

I think we have a philosophycal difference in understanding objectivity/subjectivity more than a disagreement on how to judge games. I would still consider your hierarchy or some objective topic about element of craftmanship subjective, because no judgement can be separated from the one judging it. It seems to me that what you call "somewhat objective" is what I call "generaly agreed upon", for example a lot of people consider The Last of Us and Songs of Ice and Fire marvels of contemporary storytelling, but there are people who perieve it as trash. I think Twilight has the literary style a talented twelve years old would be capable off and still it's a bestseller, so obviously it has some merit. Yes, I'm aware how easy a target Twilight is, but a lot of people think it's good and that's exactly my point - no scale of good-to-bad will ever be unanimously agreed upon and as such cannot be taken as a guideline for objective judgement.

Anyway, I hate these threads where the OP makes a hit-and-run post and I'm left fighting his corner, so I'll wait for the OP to reappear before I make any further comments.

That is wise.

 

[Czann]

It seems her "games" are very popular with the SJW crowd. It says everything I need to know about their "quality".

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Unfortunately, you throw in a line at the end that tips the whole boat over. It comes off as being an attempt to silence NoeL's criticisms by calling into question his motives, which doesn't serve any critical purpose and comes off like a personal attack. He's well within the bounds of proper criticism to call into question the artistic merits of the game and the talent of its creator without being round-about-ly accused of trying to discredit her. You might be right that some people would look at NoeL's criticisms and assume he's trying to discredit her (I don't presume you are attempting that yourself), but that person would be out of line for doing so. It's unjustified.

Sure he is allowed to have an opinion. I am just pointing out that his entire OP reads much like "So I don't like Zoe Quinn because of the controversy around her and since I didn't know about her but have a negative opinion of her I played her games and didn't find them super-amazing awesome, so they must suck". This is especially prominent since he doesn't seem to understand just what makes Depression Quest stand out, arguing against little more than its' text-based interface and prose. Coming around with that sort of criticism with the sort of pre-face that the OP had is quite likely to be dismissed as just another round in the "Zoe Quinn is a bad/overrated person"-campaign. Personally, I just chalk it up to ignorance.

 

[Maximum Bert]

I just kept thinking bloody hell this person has a way better life than me and they are depressed which was kinda depressing and uplifting at the same time lol.

This is exactly the thing. People rarely understand that depression is not connected to how "good" someone has it, it's a clinical illness. Quite often those who strugle with depression also think "Why the fuck am I depressed? I have a familiy, a job, good friends. I have no right to be depressed. I'm such an ungrateful litle piece of shit!", which doesn't help at all.

If you want to experience more of what depression might be like, try choosing those "unhealty" options in Depression Quest - the story will quite different.

Im not sure people can truly understand depression it takes so many different forms. I have suffered from depression and still do to an extent but after a struggle of a few years managed to get myself out of the worst of it and am currently in a better place than I have been in a long time but im not going to go into my own experience with it and I have never been in deep depression as it were where I would seriously consider suicide or anything. I chose the options in the game what I would do to purposely see what the outcome would be and be the closest to what I would do in RL although of course its hardly comprehensive enough for that and so dont have any real reason to see the other paths they just made no sense to me and its not an experience I cared enough to want to see where all the choices would lead.

That said just because I have experienced depression personally did not mean I could relate to this fictional character in many ways I knew what was causing the worst of my depression and struggled out of it on my own efforts despite quite heavy criticism and potentially quite severe repercussions which I was aware of and from an outside perspective im sure what I did made no sense but after it immediately made me feel a lot better if create a fair few problems which I was prepared to and have dealt with now. I have had lapses of course and tbh I dont think I will ever get rid of it entirely because I have conflict with what is left I dont want to let go of what is causing the left over depression now because letting go of that will mean letting go of certain memories and feelings I dont want to forget.

Depression is very real its horrible just like obsession is also horrible and both are destructive but in my opinion after suffering to an extent from both (more former) imo it is a self created illness and depending on the cause others may not be able to help you I know it certainly did not help me but there is always a way out and you can always do that by yourself after all its your mind but if you can have people help you then that doesnt hurt and im sure for some people makes it much much easier.

The only parallels I could join from the book and my experience is to be proactive and not try and take an easy way out because there is none and sitting still letting yourself sink further and further down is not good even if it is a struggle, still didnt think much of the game though as I said I found it fairly forgettable hardly a travesty but nothing special either but if she wants to make games like it more power to her its an expressive medium like any worth its salt and I dont believe in games having to have X and Y to be good or everything should be open world or peaceful or have sexual equality etc everyone should be able to make the game they want and then I will decide if its for me or not.

 

[WickedLordJasper]

I haven't played Depression Quest, but text-based games can be incredibly immersive. Leather Goddesses of Phobos was hilarious. Curses has an amazing dry wit and responsiveness that can catch you by surprise. A Mind Forever Voyaging was poignant and offered real political commentary. I would be interested to know if any other fans of the Infocom era of games feel that Depression Quest stacks up to Infocom's catalog.

 

[dangoball]

Excuse the snip

I see. My personal experience with depression is quite different from yours and so is for some of my friends. While other than the choices didn't make sense to you, they did for us. Like you said: what you did might have seemed sensless to your surroundings, bud it made sense to you.

I have to disagree with depression being self-created. It has neurological background and feelings of zero self-worth are usualy results of your upbringing and social surroundings, over none of which you have much control. And while your advice is good, depression really made it difficult to get out of bed on some days because everything I could have done would have been wrong, useless and futile, so why even bother?

But I'm glad you got over it

It seems her "games" are very popular with the SJW crowd. It says everything I need to know about their "quality".

Thank you for providing you well researched and well informed opinion on the topic at hand. Your most exquisite assessment of quality and judgemental tendencies, which you are not showing in the least, of a closely and precisely defined group is an inspiration to us all.
/sarcasm

 

[Gorrath]

Unfortunately, you throw in a line at the end that tips the whole boat over. It comes off as being an attempt to silence NoeL's criticisms by calling into question his motives, which doesn't serve any critical purpose and comes off like a personal attack. He's well within the bounds of proper criticism to call into question the artistic merits of the game and the talent of its creator without being round-about-ly accused of trying to discredit her. You might be right that some people would look at NoeL's criticisms and assume he's trying to discredit her (I don't presume you are attempting that yourself), but that person would be out of line for doing so. It's unjustified.

Sure he is allowed to have an opinion. I am just pointing out that his entire OP reads much like "So I don't like Zoe Quinn because of the controversy around her and since I didn't know about her but have a negative opinion of her I played her games and didn't find them super-amazing awesome, so they must suck". This is especially prominent since he doesn't seem to understand just what makes Depression Quest stand out, arguing against little more than its' text-based interface and prose. Coming around with that sort of criticism with the sort of pre-face that the OP had is quite likely to be dismissed as just another round in the "Zoe Quinn is a bad/overrated person"-campaign. Personally, I just chalk it up to ignorance.

Well that's what I took issue with in your response to him. He explicitly states that the controversy stuff isn't a part of the reason he finds her work underwhelming and doesn't bring any of that stuff up in his critique of her work, so it seems unjustified to claim that his critique reads that way. Questioning his motivations behind his critique becomes fallacious. At what point anywhere did he state that he didn't like Zoe Quinn? If I think Michael Bay is a talentless hack, someone coming along and telling me I only think that because I don't like him as a person isn't a rebuttal, it's a fallacy.

If he doesn't understand what makes Depression Quest, in your view, a good game, it's perfectly reasonable to take him to task on that. And you did, and I think your points there are very valid. But he should be free to question the merits of the game and the ability of its creator without being subjected to accusations that he holds his opinion for reasons other than what he's stated.

Critiquing the game for its minimalist design is completely valid. If someone's dismissing his opinions because they want to insert their own belief about what his intent is, they aren't doing discourse any justice. It wouldn't be any different than me telling you that the game sucks and you don't get it because you're an SJW and Zoe Quinn defender. It'd be totally unfair of me or anyone to do that to you.

 

[Story]

Unfortunately, you throw in a line at the end that tips the whole boat over. It comes off as being an attempt to silence NoeL's criticisms by calling into question his motives, which doesn't serve any critical purpose and comes off like a personal attack. He's well within the bounds of proper criticism to call into question the artistic merits of the game and the talent of its creator without being round-about-ly accused of trying to discredit her. You might be right that some people would look at NoeL's criticisms and assume he's trying to discredit her (I don't presume you are attempting that yourself), but that person would be out of line for doing so. It's unjustified.

Sure he is allowed to have an opinion. I am just pointing out that his entire OP reads much like "So I don't like Zoe Quinn because of the controversy around her and since I didn't know about her but have a negative opinion of her I played her games and didn't find them super-amazing awesome, so they must suck". This is especially prominent since he doesn't seem to understand just what makes Depression Quest stand out, arguing against little more than its' text-based interface and prose. Coming around with that sort of criticism with the sort of pre-face that the OP had is quite likely to be dismissed as just another round in the "Zoe Quinn is a bad/overrated person"-campaign. Personally, I just chalk it up to ignorance.

Well that's what I took issue with in your response to him. He explicitly states that the controversy stuff isn't a part of the reason he finds her work underwhelming and doesn't bring any of that stuff up in his critique of her work, so it seems unjustified to claim that his critique reads that way. Questioning his motivations behind his critique becomes fallacious. At what point anywhere did he state that he didn't like Zoe Quinn? If I think Michael Bay is a talentless hack, someone coming along and telling me I only think that because I don't like him as a person isn't a rebuttal, it's a fallacy.

If he doesn't understand what makes Depression Quest, in your view, a good game, it's perfectly reasonable to take him to task on that. And you did, and I think your points there are very valid. But he should be free to question the merits of the game and the ability of its creator without being subjected to accusations that he holds his opinion for reasons other than what he's stated.

Critiquing the game for its minimalist design is completely valid. If someone's dismissing his opinions because they want to insert their own belief about what his intent is, they aren't doing discourse any justice. It wouldn't be any different than me telling you that the game sucks and you don't get it because you're an SJW and Zoe Quinn defender. It'd be totally unfair of me or anyone to do that to you.

While I'm sure Gethsemani can speak for herself, and I agree with your post to a certain point, I just want to chime in and say the OP does sound pretty condescending. He wasn't exactly being subjective when he used game in his heading in such away. Plus attaching her name to the game themselves and reminding them of the controversy, isn't helping either. I'll just say there is no consequence that even a few people above and below Gethsemani noticed this attitude as well. I mean, even though their opinions are different, compare the OP of this post with the OP of this one:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.858709-Open-Discussion-about-Depression-Quest-as-a-Game-forget-the-author-attached-to-it-please#21298291

I feel one is a lot less condescending.

OT:
I personally enjoyed playing DQ. It was certainly different, even if it wasn't for me.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Excuse the snip

I see. My personal experience with depression is quite different from yours and so is for some of my friends. While other than the choices didn't make sense to you, they did for us. Like you said: what you did might have seemed sensless to your surroundings, bud it made sense to you.

I have to disagree with depression being self-created. It has neurological background and feelings of zero self-worth are usualy results of your upbringing and social surroundings, over none of which you have much control. And while your advice is good, depression really made it difficult to get out of bed on some days because everything I could have done would have been wrong, useless and futile, so why even bother?

But I'm glad you got over it

Cheers I know depression is different for everyone I personally know people who have it and have had it much worse than me including some who have unfortunately committed suicide because of it. I dont per-tend to be an expert on it and tbh am sceptical of those who do but regardless the only depression I truly knew was ofc my own and like I said it did not draw that many parallels with the game except in broad strokes you seem to have a different experience.

As for your view on depression not being self created but created by outside stimuli and that lack of control I agree with the outside stimuli bit but I still felt it was self created because it was down to my interaction with the outside i.e my upbringing, social scene, job etc or lack of it and how I interpreted these things. I dont really have the elegance or clarity of mind to adequately explain my feelings on how I got over the worse of it but suffice to say it was more about me embracing the lack of control in my life instead of fighting it and casting away all connotations negative and positive of myself and instead focusing on things I can do instead of what I cant and then keep following through with that. I dont want to start sounding like some doddering old crazy person here recounting phrases I have heard but I really believe there is freedom in every cage. Two people can see the same thing and see something completely different perspective is key.

Again I can only go from my own experiences but I found the strength to overcome mine from within its just I havent been able to go all the way because of a last major conflict even though I know what I have to do. Of course saying it is easy doing it is much harder it took me a long time. Hopefully you find your own way out if you havent already. We may disagree about it being self created or not but in the end it does not matter just getting rid of it is good enough depending on the person I do think belief whether its their creation or not can be important. Telling them its their fault (in their head) or not their fault will have different effects in different people (or rather them believing one or the other telling someone straight up its in their head is unlikely to be very helpful) some positive some negative for me the eventual belief it was self created was instrumental in me getting out for others I know it has sunk them further in which is why I will never say its a something they have no control over or self inflicted to someone in real life (unless I know them very well) and shouldnt be saying my views here really incase it makes people worse so I will end now by just saying these are just my beliefs dont take it as me preaching because I dont believe everything is so black and white what worked for me may not work for you we have different minds after all.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

I feel like the bigger the game developer persona is, the less interesting their games are. I'm looking at you, Cliffy B. I couldn't name you one person involved in the creation of Skyrim. I know the Houser's names from the opening credits of most rockstar games, but that's about it. And right around the time Nintendo started trotting out Miyamoto at a moment's notice was also right around the time he announced his fantastic new project, Wii Music. Game development is just too damn big and hard to have time to tweet or host press conferences. I also never really liked Jonathan Blow's Braid or his complaints about it not making enough money. And I have NO interest in ever playing Fez developed Oscar the Grouch.

 

[Gorrath]

While I'm sure Gethsemani can speak for herself, and I agree with your post to a certain point, I just want to chime in and say the OP does sound pretty condescending. He wasn't exactly being subjective when he used game in his heading in such away. Plus attaching her name to the game themselves and reminding them of the controversy, isn't helping either. I'll just say there is no consequence that even a few people above and below Gethsemani noticed this attitude as well. I mean, even though their opinions are different, compare the OP of this post with the OP of this one:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.858709-Open-Discussion-about-Depression-Quest-as-a-Game-forget-the-author-attached-to-it-please#21298291

I feel one is a lot less condescending.

OT:
I personally enjoyed playing DQ. It was certainly different, even if it wasn't for me.

I don't see the issue with putting "game" in quotes. Part of what the OP was questioning is whether or not such experiences should even be considered game. That is a perfectly legitimate question worthy of discussion. He attached her name to the game because part of his post was wondering why she seemed to be such a prominent figure in the indie game scene when her games, in his opinion, didn't seem to be very well made, which is also a perfectly legitimate question. At this point I feel like I'm white knighting for the OP, but I am often compelled to speak up when I feel people are making unfair arguments. Even if one thinks the OP is being condescending (I didn't read it that way, but I could see how one would) using that as an argument would be a fallacy as well, since attacking the tone of an argument does nothing to address its points. There's plenty of good arguments to be made against the OPs position on DQ so attacking his intent and tone are needless and unjustified diversions.

I've never played DQ myself and have no opinion on the game. I do like the idea of a minimalist movement in the indie scene though so that part appeals to me. I'd love to see other artistic movements and styles incorporated into games as well. It's one of the reasons I love Hotline: Miami.

 

[Robert Marrs]

Honestly I played depression quest and it hit home. Tried it a few times and could never finish it. My stance on this whole issue is no secret and I would never actually contribute to her in the monetary sense but I would say its a fairly accurate representation of living with severe depression. Whether or not its a game I suppose you could argue. Its just a choose your own adventure story that doesn't really let you make to many decisions. Seeing as its free I don't really think it matters.

 

[Story]

While I'm sure Gethsemani can speak for herself, and I agree with your post to a certain point, I just want to chime in and say the OP does sound pretty condescending. He wasn't exactly being subjective when he used game in his heading in such away. Plus attaching her name to the game themselves and reminding them of the controversy, isn't helping either. I'll just say there is no consequence that even a few people above and below Gethsemani noticed this attitude as well. I mean, even though their opinions are different, compare the OP of this post with the OP of this one:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.858709-Open-Discussion-about-Depression-Quest-as-a-Game-forget-the-author-attached-to-it-please#21298291

I feel one is a lot less condescending.

OT:
I personally enjoyed playing DQ. It was certainly different, even if it wasn't for me.

I don't see the issue with putting "game" in quotes. Part of what the OP was questioning is whether or not such experiences should even be considered game. That is a perfectly legitimate question worthy of discussion. He attached her name to the game because part of his post was wondering why she seemed to be such a prominent figure in the indie game scene when her games, in his opinion, didn't seem to be very well made, which is also a perfectly legitimate question. At this point I feel like I'm white knighting for the OP, but I am often compelled to speak up when I feel people are making unfair arguments. Even if one thinks the OP is being condescending (I didn't read it that way, but I could see how one would) using that as an argument would be a fallacy as well, since attacking the tone of an argument does nothing to address its points. There's plenty of good arguments to be made against the OPs position on DQ so attacking his intent and tone are needless and unjustified diversions.

I've never played DQ myself and have no opinion on the game. I do like the idea of a minimalist movement in the indie scene though so that part appeals to me. I'd love to see other artistic movements and styles incorporated into games as well. It's one of the reasons I love Hotline: Miami.

But with some people, including myself, putting the game in quotes attributed to the perceived condensing attitude. As you said, just because you didn't see it doesn't mean others did not. And if someone sees an indirect bias with the OP's opinion I think it is equally fair to point it out when they respond to the his questions. It's not really fallacy since he vary well may have formulated this questions and his critique, at least partly, from his initial bias. Heck, the OP might have done this without even realizing it. An argument can have valid points while still having a negative bias toward the the subject. I honestly don't think Gethsemani was being unfair when she was pointing this out.

Plus, this might also be just my ignorance, but Zoe Quinn wasn't much of a public figure until after this controversy. Even her games (and other work) didn't get much press coverage as oppose to names Greg Kasavin or Phil Fish. So I'm not sure how she's given the title of a prominent face in Indie gaming all of a sudden.

Also, urgh forgive the poor grammar on my part.

 

[Gorrath]

But with some people, including myself, putting the game in quotes attributed to the perceived condensing attitude. As you said, just because you didn't see it doesn't mean others did not. And if someone sees an indirect bias with the OP's opinion I think it is equally fair to point it out when they respond to the his questions. It's not really fallacy since he vary well may have formulated this questions and his critique, at least partly, from his initial bias. Heck, the OP might have done this without even realizing it. An argument can have valid points while still having a negative bias toward the the subject. I honestly don't think Gethsemani was being unfair when she was pointing this out.

Plus, this might also be just my ignorance, but Zoe Quinn wasn't much of a public figure until after this controversy. Even her games (and other work) didn't get much press coverage as oppose to names Greg Kasavin or Phil Fish. So I'm not sure how she's given the title of a prominent face in Indie gaming all of a sudden.

Also, urgh forgive the poor grammar on my part.

No worries. I pride myself on grammar and often make stupid mistakes when churning out posts on forums. Sometimes I go back and slap my forehead with a groan, "Did I actually type THAT?!" So cheers!

But, onto the discussion! Whether one sees an indirect, or even direct bias is of no real consequence. That's a big part of why such arguments are fallacies. The OP could have directly stated that he thought Zoe Quinn was an awful little troll of a woman, and then went on to make a bunch of criticisms of her game that might be completely valid, despite any bias. We are, all of us, biased, but dismissing arguments as being biased does nothing at all to rebut them. A person or even argument can be filled with bias and still be valid. Such arguments become even more chaffing when they are used to dismiss people's point of view out of hand: "You only think that way because you don't like Zoe!" is a meaningless round-about that avoids confronting any point the OP might make. If we spend time attacking the tone of arguments, or the bias of people making them, or character of an individual, we aren't doing what we need to to refute anything they have to say. Most of Geth's points were right on in that respect, which is way I was cheerleading for them.

I'll do the same for you too; pointing out that Zoe Quinn's influence only seems inflated because of this controversy is a fine rebuttal to the assertion that she holds too much influence for a person who's games are, in the OP's estimation, of questionable value. It gets right at the heart of the argument without calling into question the tone or intent of the person you're arguing with. It's lovely! I push hard for this in threads because I hate to see conversations turn into mutual character assassinations where everyone ignores any valid thing anyone has to say because it's easier to engage in fallacies. And cheers to you for being an amiable person to talk with!

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Read OP's 'post'. Notice how putting things in inverted commas conveys a certain attitude?

The OP's 'post' was certainly something, it definitely had words and stuff.

Try to avoid such things when you're trying to make a 'point'.

 

[Calcium]

So I've been reading the OP's "post"...

People connect with games in different ways, for different reasons. It's a subjective thing. I'd like to think that people that are interested enough to visit websites dedicated to games would know this, but apparently we're still stuck declaring developers talentless and/or deriding those that like and play the games we disagree with (not directed at OP, more just reflections on how some people will sneer at those playing CoD).

Just a note, I hope you didn't think I was sneering at those who play CoD. I was just remarking that some people like it while others don't. I understand why some people do. I personally don't.

This particular idea of people sneering at people who like the games (or in this case people that like the developer of the game), isn't just elitist, it's what drives that separating force in the gaming industry that makes people feel like they're being excluded from their own hobby. I don't go into the comic book shop and have to go into my own separate corner for DC comics while all the people that enjoy Marvel point and laugh. Because... well... maybe that isn't the best analogy, we get into fights all the time. But it's usually pretty good natured fights about who would win, Spiderman or Aquaman (yes, I've had that fight).

Anyway, the point is (before I start rambling), is that this condescending attitude towards certain people that like certain games or developers or genre of games is what is splitting people up into factions, and what is making people feel like they can't speak up. And that's what creates controversy. We... you know... shouldn't do that.

Also, sorry if you thought I was sneering at you.

Oh, no worries, it wasn't aimed at you, I actually really liked your post. I just gave the example of CoD as it tends to have it's players derided the most commonly - that and I can't quite erase from my mind the nonsense that went around when both MW3 and BF3 were releasing.

Edit: Was a slightly rushed before the edit, but wanted to add a little more. Elitism is something that particularly irritates me. I've taken a break before from watching a certain Youtubers content when they exclaimed twice in the same video that a game didn't sell well because people that play on the Xbox 360 are idiots, despite the fact that they knew and even mentioned that there had been no marketting around the game in question. And that was from someone who is one of the most respected figures in the scene.

I have a feeling that it's more to do with human nature than with the medium. That people get 'tribal' about things in the same way as happens with some sports, rather than an idea that the medium is immature and might grow out of it. Of course I'd like to think that there'll be a time when people don't deride others over their platforms hardware or what games they play, or accuse reviewers of taking bribes because some game was given a higher score than they expected, but I think that reality is a little far off.

 

[Vivi22]

When I glanced at the title I thought this thread was about someone getting round to playing the Zone of the Enders (am I the only one?) which is pretty damn sweet thing to be happening...but no its another Zoe Quinn thread.

I fucking wish it was about Zone of the Enders.

At least the OP isn't just some guy complaining about her alleged sex life that's nobodies damn business and is actually trying to talk about her games on their own merits. I have to give him props for that, even if I haven't played any of them and can't really add much to the conversation. Had you not mentioned Zone of the Enders I wouldn't have even bothered posting.

 

[Asita]

While I'm sure Gethsemani can speak for herself, and I agree with your post to a certain point, I just want to chime in and say the OP does sound pretty condescending. He wasn't exactly being subjective when he used game in his heading in such away. Plus attaching her name to the game themselves and reminding them of the controversy, isn't helping either. I'll just say there is no consequence that even a few people above and below Gethsemani noticed this attitude as well. I mean, even though their opinions are different, compare the OP of this post with the OP of this one:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.858709-Open-Discussion-about-Depression-Quest-as-a-Game-forget-the-author-attached-to-it-please#21298291

I feel one is a lot less condescending.

OT:
I personally enjoyed playing DQ. It was certainly different, even if it wasn't for me.

Isn't that par for the course for interactive fiction though? I've seen more than a few amateur works that use Twine or similar engines and one of the more common comments for them (and Visual novels, really) even amongst those who enjoy the given piece is that it's more of a Choose Your Own Adventure story than it is a game, which is a fairly understandable sentiment given that the player often has less control and interaction with the game world than they did even in Zork or Colossal Cave Adventure. Point being that there's a very good chance that the quotations came from disdain for the format of Depression Quest rather than disdain for its developer.

 

[European Uppercut]

Read OP's 'post'. Notice how putting things in inverted commas conveys a certain attitude?

The OP's 'post' was certainly something, it definitely had words and stuff.

Try to avoid such things when you're trying to make a 'point'.

This. This so many times over, it kills to come into a well intentioned topic and see what looks like someone acting patronizing before the topic even gets underway.

 

[Story]

While I'm sure Gethsemani can speak for herself, and I agree with your post to a certain point, I just want to chime in and say the OP does sound pretty condescending. He wasn't exactly being subjective when he used game in his heading in such away. Plus attaching her name to the game themselves and reminding them of the controversy, isn't helping either. I'll just say there is no consequence that even a few people above and below Gethsemani noticed this attitude as well. I mean, even though their opinions are different, compare the OP of this post with the OP of this one:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.858709-Open-Discussion-about-Depression-Quest-as-a-Game-forget-the-author-attached-to-it-please#21298291

I feel one is a lot less condescending.

OT:
I personally enjoyed playing DQ. It was certainly different, even if it wasn't for me.

Isn't that par for the course for interactive fiction though? I've seen more than a few amateur works that use Twine or similar engines and one of the more common comments for them (and Visual novels, really) even amongst those who enjoy the given piece is that it's more of a Choose Your Own Adventure story than it is a game, which is a fairly understandable sentiment given that the player often has less control and interaction with the game world than they did even in Zork or Colossal Cave Adventure. Point being that there's a very good chance that the quotations came from disdain for the format of Depression Quest rather than disdain for its developer.

Yeah I agree with that completely, the person that quoted me previously said this as well. At the same time it is easy to interpret the use of quotations as sneering even if it was unintentional on the OP's part. I can really only speak for myself, but appearently I'm not the only one to read it that way at first.