GRcade

Who's the real mug:

The person who receives free money for making YouTube video?
Or the person who gives money to someone to make a YouTube video?

Dual wrote:Who's the real mug:

The person who receives free money for making YouTube video?
Or the person who gives money to someone to make a YouTube video?

A: The ones who actually give a strawberry float.

Remember when this thread was about Total Biscuit?

I 'member.

The north remembers.

After watching that short video of Anita Sarkeesian stating she isn't a fan of video games and had to learn a lot about them prior to starting her new project, any credibility in her claiming she had always been a gamer and so felt was the right person to tackle the subject of sexism in video games went out the window as far as I'm concerned.

Sarkeesian reminded me a bit of this guy.

Yet here we all are, having never died of terminal liver cancer, commenting on someone else's terminal liver cancer.

Disgraceful.

Someone who liked games as a kid but felt excluded from the community because of her gender strikes me as a fairly good candidate to investigate sexism in gaming but each to their own.

Not that it would even matter. Someone who hypothetically disliked games should be able to talk about them without getting hate mail and threats.

Karl wrote:Not that it would even matter. Someone who hypothetically disliked games should be able to talk about them without getting hate mail and threats.

Exactly. Werner Herzog wasn't an expert on volcanoes or the internet (or strawberry floating bears) before making documentaries on them. Morgan Sperlock was categorically the opposite of an expert on McDonalds.

I do believe Sarkeesian has a history with games, but it matters not a strawberry floating jot. The only reason it matters is that it gives man-baby nerd boys a hypothetical reason to place behind their harassment campaign.

Someone who hates games is intitled to talk about them of course but it's the claiming you love them and always have to get the money but that's shifty....... It's like me claiming to have always loved purvian pan pipes to get money to make a pan pipe album when I don't think I have ever even seen them.

As a social scientist I also find she does the work backwards she comes up with the answer she wants and then looks for evidence that supports her truth. I was one of 5 lads on a social sciences degree with like 140 people so that's 135 Women on the course and every single one of them would have done a much better job of this because they all knew how good research is done.

She miss sold the goods as being real research when it's do clearly just a vanity project with no more scientific merit than an average YouTubers entertainment out put. Heck I think the likes of Jim Sterling actually do better research for there videos etc

Tafdolphin wrote:
I do believe Sarkeesian has a history with games, but it matters not a strawberry floating jot. The only reason it matters is that it gives man-baby nerd boys a hypothetical reason to place behind their harassment campaign.

Not everyone who isn't a fan of Anita is or was out to harass the woman, Taf. At least I certainly hope that's not what you're implying. Not everyone who critiques her work is immediately out to 'get her'.

Gemini73 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:
I do believe Sarkeesian has a history with games, but it matters not a strawberry floating jot. The only reason it matters is that it gives man-baby nerd boys a hypothetical reason to place behind their harassment campaign.

Not everyone who isn't a fan of Anita is or was out to harass the woman, Taf. At least I certainly hope that's not what you're implying. Not everyone who critiques her work is immediately out to 'get her'.

Definitely not. I mentioned earlier that I don't necessarily like her stuff either, she's too arrogant and sure of her findings. Still, there are those her use her so called non-gamer status as a sick to beat her with, which is bollocks.

If she had sold her project as research by a none gamer I'd agree but selling it as research about games by a gamer in order to gain more funding that's annoying. It's like me saying I am an avid ardvark lover and would like the money from other fans of advarks when really I don't give a monkeys about them and just think saying it will get me more money than straight up admitting I have very little love or knowledge for the subject matter but I am willing to research it for cash.

So I hear someone is dying.

It's OK to say that you think the videos are poorly-researched. I personally find almost all popular YouTube documentary videos, including hers, a struggle to watch because I think they come across as very smug. No-one wants to force you to like or dislike a particular piece of content.

kerr9000: It's factually incorrect to say that she "hates games but claimed she loves them to get money" so anyone interested in facts (perhaps a scientist) should drop the claim. She has liked games since childhood (unless you think her SNES was part of an elaborate long con?) and her Kickstarter wasn't predicated on her being a gaming obsessive (she describes herself quite honestly as a "pop culture critic" and gives a fair overview of her credentials).

"She isn't a real gamer! She hates games! Her Kickstarter was a con!" These are Gamergate talking points designed to smear her, not critiques of her content. Everyone here should know better than to repeat them without thinking critically about them.

Ultimately this was the kind of misinformation TotalBiscuit was happy to propagate and encourage, which he did because of his personal Gamergate/"anti-SJW" sympathies.

I still hope he pulls through despite the odds. He deserves to be critiqued but he obviously doesn't deserve a death sentence.

Tafdolphin wrote: Still, there are those her use her so called non-gamer status as a sick to beat her with, which is bollocks.

Im sure there is and no one should have to put up with hate mail and threats.

For me, I watched a few of her videos and after deciding they were mostly bollocks, highlighted further by that "I don't even like video games" video, I chose to ignore her work thereafter.

Didn't really follow the whole Gamergate thing either. It was a thing, it was everywhere, but I chose to stay out of it hence why I wasn't aware of TB's involvement.

Rog wrote:So I hear someone is dying.

We're all dying eventually.




I'm not a huge fan of Sarkeesians work (what sort of monster says "Legos") but ultimately I think she has contributed positively to gaming as a whole through her work on Feminist Frequency. Also, I think it was fan-fucking-tastic that so many people raised their middle finger to what gamergate had become and contributed to her Kickstarter.
Lastly the incident between her and Boogie2988 at Vidcon that Slayerx mentioned was nothing worth giving a damn about. He put out a video explaining that is was not a big deal while others were claiming the opposite to try and make her look like a banana split. She snapped at him after a panel they did together and then had a civil discussion afterwards. Total mountain out of a molehill stuff.

kerr9000 wrote:....... It's like me claiming to have always loved purvian pan pipes ......

I had to look this one up on Urban Dictionary, I wish I hadn't.....

I completely missed Gamergate when it was big. I feel it's because I'm only in this gaming community.

I just like playing games, beyond this community, I feel most gaming communities are wank. I don't have the same level of time to maintain that kind of elitism some gamers have.

Squinty wrote:I completely missed Gamergate when it was big.

I missed it too, and i consider that to be a good thing.