chikusho said:
Savagezion said:
You're evasive tactics has pushed them to the bottom by arguing over semantics.
My "evasive tactic" has been to reply to the message in the order that the arguments came. Why the hell would that be a tactic?
You created that order. Quote snipping generally tends to devolve into arguing over semantics and not the point of another poster. Look at how far you whittled down the 'discussion' in you last post to me. You have tried to deconstruct any points by making it 1 liner vs. 1 liner. not discussing a topic. Avoiding the issues I proposed were wrong with your initial statement, this argument has gotten very long as you threw out red herrings and attacked strawmen trying to get me to move off of my point. You have been using evasive debate tactics and have recently resorted to outright lying about what you have said.
I have actually given you time waiting for you to break out some of the survey to use in this discussion
Why would I? My main argument was never about the study, but rather the people who'll read it.
Considering that what they are reading is why you are judging them you feel that
what they are reading is in no way relevant? Even though in your own words it is "significant" and they "can't see it". Which is the whole reason you are looking down on them.
But if this study TRULY showed ANOTHER KIND of diversity, you would think this number would be at least above 20%.
Fixed.
Actually you broke it and made it make no sense. Another kind of diversity? Diversity LITERALLY means more than 1 kind of something. Don't "fix" my stuff, I use the terms I use for a reason. Notice the word truly in all capital letters.
chikusho said:
This thread was made as a counter argument to the claim that females are outnumbered in core gaming.
My post was not an argument to the claim that females are outnumbered in core gaming.
A statement which does not differ from my original argument. I don't know what supposed "lie" you get from this, though. :/
Probably the one I pointed out in that very post that you just snipped out. This one:
Who exactly am I supporting when I start being supportive?
The previously
underrepresented demographic that has found a way to join and grow the medium.
You are looking down on others for not supporting the inclusion of women in the medium, when many people are using the study to show that they haven't really joined the core (not hardcore) demographic to gaming.
trying to get any significance out of those numbers is like saying my tabby is a tiger because they are in the same animal family.
So, you lack imagination?
Is... is that supposed to be a dig? So you see lying and/or misrepresentation as a positive thing? If I say my tabby is a tiger, I am lying. It's a domestic tabby compared to a freakin' tiger.
If anything mobile gaming being so different than gaming media before it is what "shits on the statistics" considering at least you have admitted that the "significance" and "support" is in the vein of female gamers.
That's faulty logic. All gaming media is different than gaming media before it.
Maybe if I were comparing PS2 to PS4 but when I am comparing phone apps to AAA budget console games, not so much. Check out the part I bolded for you. There is a LARGE difference between phone apps and console games.
Owning a smartphone =/= owning a console as you are claiming "because it plays games".
I've never claimed any such thing. Owning a smartphone used for games = owning a gaming device.
Sorry, but you absolutely said they were the same thing or failed to see any difference between the two. Here let me refresh you memory:
When you use your phone to play a game it's a game machine, pure and simple. It's not less of a game because what you play it on can do other stuff also. In that case, I guess XBOX One owners don't count either?
The average U.S. Household owns at least one dedicated game console, PC, or smartphone.
Of that, only 51% of U.S. households own a dedicated game console, and those that do own an average of 2
"51% of U.S. households own a dedicated game console, and those that do own an average of 2"
Those look like parallel statistics to me. That's a statement in and of itself.
Parallel? "Average" doesn't mean half. In this context average means most. WHich means some households don't have any of these. Then you have to look at the words "Of that" meaning if we ignore PC and smartphones, the previous number drops to half. Which means 49% of the homes that own a gaming device in this study don't own a console. Half of the study is on people who don't play console games.
You have a study of two markets here at the same time.
No, the industry, which includes way more than two markets.
LOL, you are so desperate. I explained to YOU that very point on page 4 or 5 and you had no idea what I was talking about. Don't act like I am oblivious to that information.
In the discussion regarding female protagonists in console gaming
This again?
Yes, this again because I have no doubt at this point it is part of your agenda. Your just frustrated that I am calling it out as weak evidence. Even as someone in favor of it. I would rather try and find a practical solution rather than delude myself into a false reality. I reserve my "imagination" for things not business related. So when talking about 'the industry' I like to be pragmatic.
yes it has to be "inconvenient" for it to count. Who will go out of their way for it? As I said this is a sub-debate of a much larger debate. If this thread gets a lot of "HURRAH!"s someone will make a thread using this study to go "Look at this study EA, Activision, Ubisoft and learn" and then I would be in there saying this stuff. I am heading it off at the pass if I can. And yet, that thread still may happen despite it.
As if that would be the only reason for fair and/or equal representation in the medium... But that's outside the scope of this.
Make sure you get that agenda pushing statement in there before you digress. It's a very transparent tactic but serves it's purpose, no?
LOL, yeah right. That was a counter point to a point you brought up. You said that a phone is the same as a console because it plays games. You were trying to once again say they are the same. You have been back and forth the whole time going:
You: "They are the same"
Me: "no they are different because X Y and Z"
You: "Well duh, I said they are different, that's how the industry works."
I said that it doesn't matter if they are on a console or a phone. They are both games. And that the enjoyment someone gets out of playing them can be equal to, or greater, than a console games. And that phones are both capable of handling games that fit within a huge number those markets you're so fond of. Which makes phones, tablets and especially PCs fit very well within the scope of the study.
You still seem to be taking my words as looking down on non-console gaming. I game on PC mostly, consoles second and phones. I don't look down on any of it. I have phone emulators I have bought, I play the little apps as well. PC and console game too. I am in all 3 markets and as such I can tell they are all widely different markets. I interact with all 3 types of gamers as a primary source of communication believe it or not. Many people will talk about the games they play with me for various reasons. (PC is the rarest breed) and they are all unique in their gaming habits. Widely so. I would never say that someone who plays on their exclusively phone games almost is the same as someone who plays on console or PC religiously. PC and console gamers DO have more similarities because of ports that go both ways of the latest titles. Your failure to recognize that reveals that either you don't talk to a large variety of gamers or you are pretending to be ignorant. I have defended facebook games and casual games on this site before back when it was hip to hate on them as console/PC gamers. I was in those threads telling people they are still gamers but I could at least acknowledge it wasn't the same thing. What is so hard about acknowledging that? Oh right, the movement for representation on consoles no longer has statistics that mean anything. You aren't interested in truth, just getting what you want.
If you are going to show the industry it is best to leave trends out.
Not if they make up the majority of the market.
Especially if they make up the majority of the market. That's how the 1983 crash happened a trend quit being a trend when people got tired of it and everything went to shit. Unfortunately it will be 2025 before this data is useful as I don't think mobile will die out due to the nature of the device. However, by then, actual consumer habits will be emerging in that market and you could compare it to these numbers. I would suggest mobile markets stay seperate though so that more information could be useful in studies like this. I love strategy games in the core market but wont play them on my phone because they are like baby's first strategy game. While consoles get the dumbed down argument a lot, phone games are the next step down from that. Because of that, I tend to play games people around me play so that I have something to talk about with them because I just don't give a fuck about Expendables 3.
