The Last Night - Mac, PC, Xbox - 2018

HSH28 wrote:I think I'll judge the game on its own merits actually.

He's explicitly described the game taking place in a future where "progressivism is out of control" and "feminism won." This is a game whose central premise is that progressivism and equality is wrong.

strawberry float this guy, and strawberry float this game. A real shame.


EDIT: He's now denying the game is about "regressive ideas" and is denying he's against equality.

twitter.com/timsoret/status/874063310794088448

Considering he explicitly stated the game was about the dangers of feminism and that he only made the denial after the MS conference, this seems like BS

Tineash wrote:Haha, game looks terrific, but no strawberry floating thank you.

Mafro wrote:

Tineash wrote:Haha, game looks terrific, but no strawberry floating thank you.

Very much this.

Doesn't matter how great the game looks (and it looks amazing) there's no way this shitstain developer is getting any of my money. Some of his tweets and reddit posts posted in the GAF thread are just strawberry floating mind-boggling.

I thought it looked good during the conference but now I'll wait for the likes of Austin Walker and other journalists I respect get their hands on the game and see how they react to whatever message the developer is now pushing.

Those tweets are grim though and if they're indicative of the games message then I sure as heck won't be buying it.

Tafdolphin wrote:EDIT: He's now denying the game is about "regressive ideas" and is denying he's against equality.

Considering he explicitly stated the game was about the dangers of feminism and that he only made the denial after the MS conference, this seems like BS

Look I don't agree with his point of view, but that really isn't the way to go about arguing against it.

Also this topic isn't the place for it.

It's exactly the right place for it. . It's his game.

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:EDIT: He's now denying the game is about "regressive ideas" and is denying he's against equality.

Considering he explicitly stated the game was about the dangers of feminism and that he only made the denial after the MS conference, this seems like BS

Look I don't agree with his point of view, but that really isn't the way to go about arguing against it.

Also this topic isn't the place for it.

It really, really is. I mean, it really is.

This is a game that is made by a guy with abhorrent views, and that apparently is based entirely on these views. The creator himself has said this. There is a risk that people who would be massively offended by these views would otherwise show interest in or buy/pre-order the game. By highlighting these views and the theme of the game here, that risk is ever so slightly negated.

And how would you rather I argue about it? "Well, the guy hates women, other races and equality, but maybe we should give him a chance?" No. The entire world has done that for the last few years.

There are plenty of games out there. People can afford not to buy this one.

Tafdolphin wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:EDIT: He's now denying the game is about "regressive ideas" and is denying he's against equality.

Considering he explicitly stated the game was about the dangers of feminism and that he only made the denial after the MS conference, this seems like BS

Look I don't agree with his point of view, but that really isn't the way to go about arguing against it.

Also this topic isn't the place for it.

It really, really is. I mean, it really is.

This is a game that is made by a guy with abhorrent views, and that apparently is based entirely on these views. The creator himself has said this. There is a risk that people who would be massively offended by these views would otherwise show interest in or buy/pre-order the game. By highlighting these views and the theme of the game here, that risk is ever so slightly negated.

And how would you rather I argue about it? "Well, the guy hates women, other races and equality, but maybe we should give him a chance?" No. The entire world has done that for the last few years.

There are plenty of games out there. People can afford not to buy this one.

I don't think it is the place because its an argument that's bigger than a single game, if you want a proper debate on the subject it needs its own topic (or maybe many topics because I think there are actually a lot of layers here).

You've read a handful of tweets from a few years ago by this guy and maybe a few topics. But you've not met the guy or heard what he has to say now have you and yet you seem to be 100% sure that the guy is an evil person trying to put forward abhorrent views.

He really could have changed his mind since he posted those tweets, looking around a bit more you might find the guy is more misguided than actually abhorrent in his viewpoint.

As for how I would rather you argue about it, that's in more depth. Look at what he actually said and pull it apart piece by piece, rather than a generalisation that can if you look not very hard at all just be shrugged off.

You said he 'hates equality' and yet looking at at least some of those tweets, one of his opinions appears to have been that his issue with feminism is that he saw it as not espousing equality. Clearly not a viewpoint I share, but its not something you can argue against if you just ignore it.

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:EDIT: He's now denying the game is about "regressive ideas" and is denying he's against equality.

Considering he explicitly stated the game was about the dangers of feminism and that he only made the denial after the MS conference, this seems like BS

Look I don't agree with his point of view, but that really isn't the way to go about arguing against it.

Also this topic isn't the place for it.

It really, really is. I mean, it really is.

This is a game that is made by a guy with abhorrent views, and that apparently is based entirely on these views. The creator himself has said this. There is a risk that people who would be massively offended by these views would otherwise show interest in or buy/pre-order the game. By highlighting these views and the theme of the game here, that risk is ever so slightly negated.

And how would you rather I argue about it? "Well, the guy hates women, other races and equality, but maybe we should give him a chance?" No. The entire world has done that for the last few years.

There are plenty of games out there. People can afford not to buy this one.

I don't think it is the place because its an argument that's bigger than a single game, if you want a proper debate on the subject it needs its own topic (or maybe many topics because I think there are actually a lot of layers here).

You've read a handful of tweets from a few years ago by this guy and maybe a few topics. But you've not met the guy or heard what he has to say now have you and yet you seem to be 100% sure that the guy is an evil person trying to put forward abhorrent views.

He really could have changed his mind since he posted those tweets, looking around a bit more you might find the guy is more misguided than actually abhorrent in his viewpoint.

As for how I would rather you argue about it, that's in more depth. Look at what he actually said and pull it apart piece by piece, rather than a generalisation that can if you look not very hard at all just be shrugged off.

You said he 'hates equality' and yet looking at at least some of those tweets, one of his opinions appears to have been that his issue with feminism is that he saw it as not espousing equality.

Not to get too off-topic, but this is exactly the type of laissez faire bullshit I'm talking about. If this guy was Muslim who, 2 years ago, went on twitter and praised terrorist attacks would you give him the same leeway? Of course not, yet this guy publicly supported a campaign that ruined people's lives through doxxing and online bullying and you're all "But you haven't even met him!" Bullshit. strawberry float this guy.

He hasn't even apologised. He's simply denied everything. No, "I'm so sorry my views affected people" or even a "I'm sorry if you were offended." Just a hazy denial.

As for the "wrong place" thing nothing you've said is at all relevant: this is not a debate about feminism or politics in games in general, it is about the fact that this is a game that was created on the principles of sexism and far-right rhetoric. As long as this topic is around, and I'm not banned from it, I'll be arguing against this game.

Tafdolphin wrote:Not to get too off-topic, but this is exactly the type of laissez faire bullshit I'm talking about. If this guy was Muslim who, 2 years ago, went on twitter and praised terrorist attacks would you give him the same leeway? Of course not, yet this guy publicly supported a campaign that ruined people's lives through doxxing and online bullying and you're all "But you haven't even met him!" Bullshit. strawberry float this guy.

There is a difference between supporting terrorists who actually kill people and supporting a horrible sexist campaign that ruined people's lives. Yes there is.

I'm not even sure he was really supporting them in the way you are suggesting. Just because someone posted something on social media, I don't think they should be forever tied to that particular opinion.

Tafdolphin wrote:...it is about the fact that this is a game that was created on the principles of sexism and far-right rhetoric. As long as this topic is around, and I'm not banned from it, I'll be arguing against this game.

Argue against the game then. Don't argue against the man creating it. Point me to the place where it says this game is going to be based on the principles of sexism and far-right rhetoric. If that's what the game ends up being I somehow doubt you'll have to shout about it in here.

On the other hand, maybe that isn't what the game is going to be. Will you be able to admit you were wrong if it isn't the game you think its going to be? If its proved this guy isn't the guy you think he is, will you apologise to him?

Like I said, personally, for me. I will wait to see what this game is. I'd rather not pre-judge it based on anything.

HSH28 wrote:
Argue against the game then. Don't argue against the man creating it.

Why not?

HSH28 wrote: Point me to the place where it says this game is going to be based on the principles of sexism and far-right rhetoric.

Literally one post above your first in the topic:

Saint of Killers wrote:

Just the fact that he talks about feminism having "won" is bad, like someone's going to lose if feminism becomes accepted. Spoiler: no one loses when there's equality. Well, except the men who lose their unearned male privilege, but that's the whole strawberry floating point.

On the other hand, maybe that isn't what the game is going to be. Will you be able to admit you were wrong if it isn't the game you think its going to be? If its proved this guy isn't the guy you think he is, will you apologise to him?

Again, why do you feel the need to give this guy leeway? He's literally stated online that he thinks feminism is wrong, and progressivism bad. Why on earth would you give someone like this the benefit of the doubt?

As to "what I think he is" what other evidence do I have to go off of? He's stated some abhorrent views, then denied them without apology or any sign of contrition, having only done so immediately after his game got some marketing. Why would I assume he's changed?

Like I said, personally, for me. I will wait to see what this game is. I'd rather not pre-judge it based on anything.

And that's your choice. It's my choice to oppose this game based on the factual evidence before me.

Saint of Killers wrote:

Venom wrote:

HSH28 wrote:I think I'll judge the game on its own merits actually.

Exactly. I purposefully avoided the whole GamerGate thing -two indignant sides both shouting at each other, both shouting into the wind.

Venom: One side for equality, the other taking issue with it. Yes, they really were as bad as one another.
Ignorance truly is bliss, eh.

HSH28: I initially took the same view until I read up more on the game.

Hey man, it's not that I'm against equality! It's just that there were two sides arguing, not in manner that was productive - the whole thing was toxic and I doubt one side improved their behaviours because of the arguments of the others. And there's not point going down the route of 'If you're not with us you're against us' because that isn't true. In the real world most people have their own fires to fight, going to work and experiencing different prejudices . If I see social injustice in the real world I think I would make my voice heard, but scrapping with strangers on forums won't help anyone. People go online for different reasons. GRcade and other games media is an outlet for me, an escape into talking about games, celebrating games - i'm glad of it.

Tafdolphin wrote:Again, why do you feel the need to give this guy leeway? He's literally stated online that he thinks feminism is wrong, and progressivism bad. Why on earth would you give someone like this the benefit of the doubt?

I'm not giving those views leeway, I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt though.

If he says (and I think he has) that, that isn't what he thinks any more and that this game isn't about that any more. Then unless you can prove that it is and that he's lying...yeah I'm willing to give the game at least a chance.

If it does turn out to be the game you think it is, I'll have to see how I feel about that. But as of right now, I'm going to wait and see.

Looking at twitter it looks like Notch got involved in this (like a moth to a flame) and has managed to call Zoe Quinn a banana split without realising it was her.

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:Again, why do you feel the need to give this guy leeway? He's literally stated online that he thinks feminism is wrong, and progressivism bad. Why on earth would you give someone like this the benefit of the doubt?

I'm not giving those views leeway, I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt though.

But wwwwwhhhhhhyyyyyyy? Seriously, why? Why why why? Give me a reason Hugo. Why would your initial reaction to these views being expressed vividly and repeatedly be to give the guy the benefit of the doubt? Why?

Mafro wrote:Looking at twitter it looks like Notch got involved in this (like a moth to a flame) and has managed to call Zoe Quinn a banana split without realising it was her.

twitter.com/notch/status/874093957432594432

Oh strawberry float me

To me it depends on how the themes are depicted and handled. A sci-fi game about a progressive movement getting hijacked and used to become a new powerful establishment could be really interesting. Unfortunately the tweets of the dev don't inspire confidence that this will be done in a careful and mature way. Because he sounds like a dick.

Tafdolphin wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:Again, why do you feel the need to give this guy leeway? He's literally stated online that he thinks feminism is wrong, and progressivism bad. Why on earth would you give someone like this the benefit of the doubt?

I'm not giving those views leeway, I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt though.

But wwwwwhhhhhhyyyyyyy? Seriously, why? Why why why? Give me a reason Hugo. Why would your initial reaction to these views being expressed vividly and repeatedly be to give the guy the benefit of the doubt? Why?

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spupkj

EDIT - Why is it such a problem if absence of anything recent I believe that the guy might have changed his views. You don't want to give anyone any benefit of the doubt at all? You are willing to completely write this guy off. That I have a problem with. You are leaving little or no space for any kind of change in people. Those views could just have been a little (or a lot) naïve. You don't think its possible this guy is actually not a horrible person? Not even possible and all from a handful of tweets that yes say some nasty sounding things.

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

Tafdolphin wrote:Again, why do you feel the need to give this guy leeway? He's literally stated online that he thinks feminism is wrong, and progressivism bad. Why on earth would you give someone like this the benefit of the doubt?

I'm not giving those views leeway, I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt though.

But wwwwwhhhhhhyyyyyyy? Seriously, why? Why why why? Give me a reason Hugo. Why would your initial reaction to these views being expressed vividly and repeatedly be to give the guy the benefit of the doubt? Why?

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spupkj

That's not an apology! If you read what he says here it actually sounds more like a defence of his previous comments.

I also don't buy the patriarchy stuff. Maybe it applies in the USA, but I live in Paris, and here in France, virility is not encouraged at all, sensitive men and intelligence are a lot more appreciated than "being a tough guy" and muscles. Most masculine behaviors are totally prohibited and are considered very macho here.

This is strawberry floating hilarious: my girlfriend is French and has reliably informed me the culture over there is exactly as bad, if not worse, than anywhere else. She grew up being wolf-whistled and descriminated against at work because of her gender. She now runs workshops and gives conference talks on just how bad sexism is in the French workplace. "We have 6 women on our team." Bully for you.

As many gamers, I absolutely adored playing Ellie in The Last of Us, or Clementine in Walking Dead, or Ripley in Alien Isolation, and The Boss is my favorite character in all the Metal Gear Solid saga

"I have black friends too!"

I am, of course, against any form of harassment. I've been harassed quite a lot lately myself.

"Men's rights are important too!

If you like our game (which is very progressive), you shouldn't change your mind because I have different opinions than yours.

This is not an apology! This is almost an admission that his previous tweets are still his viewpoint!


EDIT: Just sent that patriarchy in France quote to my GF. She had a good old laugh.

Straight white males do sometimes have issues with the whole 'equality' thing, probably because they've never had to deal with any kind of bias and just see other minority groups getting more of a fair crack. The guy just seems like he feels threatened to me, rather than genuinely hateful.

There's certainly a great story to be told about the balance tipping too far in the other direction, and those people being discriminated against instead, though I sincerely doubt this game will be intelligent enough to pull that off.

Tafdolphin wrote:

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spupkj

That's not an apology! If you read what he says here it actually sounds more like a defence of his previous comments. The "there is no sexism in France" thing is strawberry floating hilarious too: my girlfriend is French and has reliably informed me the culture over there is exactly as bad, if not worse, than anywhere else. She grew up being wolf-whistled and descriminated against at work because of her gender. She now runs workshops and gives conference talks on just how bad sexism is in the French workplace. "We have 6 women on our team." Bully for you.

What are you even talking about. I post a reason for giving the guy the benefit of the doubt and you exclaim that its not an apology.

I'm not talking about Idlethumbs posts the guy made 3 years ago either. To me those just show that he was in over his head at the time and didn't really know what he was talking about. I was referencing the Raw Fury statement seemingly from people that work with him.