Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 570 posts

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#501

Post by hnick »

puchatek wrote: post #385
sillysaurusx wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wanted to say, as a male, I had this exact experience. I was playing Pavlov VR using my wife's account. Steam profile avatars float next to people in that game, so people assumed I was female. I didn't have a mic, so I couldn't correct them. A group of people started repeatedly asking whether I was female, not for any purpose other than "hurr durr female," and then ultimately hunted me down. I forget exactly wha…

This should be a "challenge" (if those are still a thing), to be performed by anybody who believes that the issue doesn't exist. Create a female account for some online game and see how much fun you will be allowed to have with it.

There are meme "speedrun any%" videos on YouTube for this sort of thing, so there are probably some real ones out there.

FWIW I made a female character on FFXIV (partly to see if this sort of thing would happen) and never encountered this. Maybe I put out a male vibe with how I move and play (I heard we jump around a lot more). But in my experience that game's populace skews far more heavily female than normal, and a lot of the guys I met also play as female characters so maybe that's why.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#502

Post by dougmwne »

nineplay wrote: post #485
dougmwne wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a much more valid reason if people were being absolutely honest. Powerful and privileged people have spent generations spilling blood and other less violent measures to get on top and stay on top. Being on top only happens through threat of force and excercise of power. The people at the bottom will replace the people at the top if presented with the opportunity. Even if most people are content to li…

You make very good points - sometimes the best discussions are well down in the comments. Currently, while men hold the majority of the economic and political power in the US. From a purely Machiavellian viewpoint, why should they hire anyone besides other white men? They only stand to lose if business and politics become more egalitarian. What's changed in the past century or so is that it can no longer appear blata…

And to restate your point, the business may gain greatly from diversity in leadership, but the in-group mainly stands to lose. If they don't stand to lose then it's not really power sharing, is it? In my experience, these efforts hit the wall the moment they seek any real piece of the power pie. That's the difference between talks-the-talk and walks-the-walk.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#503

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #383
bennysomething wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like lots of people I disagree with, why is not liking someone the key some problem? In fact I'm not sure anyone has defined the problem of with hiring people you like other than some unsubstantiated claim that we only like people of the same colour and background which in my experience is nonsense.

This. I love my disagreeable friends because having robust dialogue is fun for most of my ilk (although it is interesting that women have told us they (mistakenly) think that we are bitterly arguing, which makes them feel uncomfortable).

I agree, but my point was, you know, you don't have to like them to work with them.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#504

Post by dougmwne »

the_doctah wrote: post #496
dougmwne wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't do better than "shitty personality," I guarantee I wouldn't hire you. On the other hand, "Unwilling to respect colleagues they wouldn't personally be friends with" is a valid reason to make a no-hire decision.

>On the other hand, "Unwilling to respect colleagues they wouldn't personally be friends with" is a valid reason to make a no-hire decision. And how would you come to that conclusion during an interview?

"Can you tell me about a time you didn't get along with a colleague and how you worked through that situation?" One of my go-to questions and often illuminating. A good answer I have heard somewhat often ends with, "Stupid Jerk was never my friend, but we figured out how to work together and produce value anyway."

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#505

Post by shadilay »

dralley wrote: post #223
username90 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is about battlefield 5, the last of us was last year. More specifically people didn't like the depiction of world war 2 in this trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7ZpQadiyqs

I love how the "realism" crowd has no issues with jumping out of planes mid-air to snipe a pilot (and then steal their plane). Or jumping from the third floor of a building onto a cobblestone street and then running away as if you had barely tripped. Or having a WWI game where half the server is carrying automatic weapons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_J._Baggett

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#506

Post by the_doctah »

imbnwa wrote: post #476
edoceo wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wild! Heres a summary https://collider.com/last-of-us-2-controversy-explained/

Though I was misattributed the subject of the controversy, I'd like to use this comment to say that TLOU2 is the greatest game I've ever played.

It really does earn that Metacritic score, doesn't it? Almost a perfect game in every way. No plot holes, no silly characterization, totally fun game from start to finish.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#507

Post by shadilay »

madamelic wrote: post #102
omgitsabird wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> considering women playing video games only became socially acceptable a few years ago What?

Look up what sparked Gamergate. It was largely based in men getting mad about women calling games out for being misogynistic. I am sure some was valid criticism. I am not really a fan of "every game must be progressive", etc. but the fact men got mad that women dared criticize video games should say a lot about the state of the video game industry. Not only that, but also, for a long time, video games just weren't ma…

Gamergate started with the 'Quinnspiracy Theory' video series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy#Notes

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#508

Post by void_mint »

pmarreck wrote: post #495
void_mint wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Harassment intentionally includes observers. If you do something to someone, and a third party observes it and is made uncomfortable, that is harassment in the workplace. To say "Guys are just ribbing eachother" ignores people that observe that behavior and find it uncomfortable/hostile/toxic. This is also an extremely generous description of what happened. Women were harassed, both sexually and not. Their pay was lo…

> "Women have to have thick skin" is just nonsense to not have to type "The women are harassed relentlessly". Which is also a false translation (and thus a strawman) of what I said. The vast majority were treated quite damn well. > It's also worth noting that the military is a toxic cesspit for sexual abuse. I did some Googling here and found that in 2013, 0.9% of all military members reported sexual assault. I don't…

> Which is also a false translation (and thus a strawman) of what I said. The vast majority were treated quite damn well.

I copied and pasted exactly what you wrote.

> I did some Googling here and found that in 2013, 0.9% of all military members reported sexual assault. I don't know how that compares to civilian life, and I'll just toss this out there, I bet this varies A TON by military branch, and I will leave it at that

If you care to educate yourself, in another post I made in this thread I referenced the actual data on sexual abuse in the military. The dramatic majority goes unreported, and the cases that do get reported face retaliation from superiors. It’s a toxic cesspit.

edit I'll just add them

> Sexual assault in the United States armed forces is an ongoing issue which has received extensive media coverage in the past. A 2012 Pentagon survey found that approximately 26,000 women and men were sexually assaulted that year; of those, only 3,374 cases were reported.[1] In 2013, a new Pentagon report found that 5,061 troops reported cases of assault. Some are optimistic that this increase in reports is indicative of victims "growing more comfortable in the system".[2] Of the reported cases, only 484 cases went to trial; 376 resulted in convictions.[3] Another investigation found that one in five women in the United States Air Force who were sexually assaulted by service members reported it, for one in 15 men.[4]

20% of women reported.

> A survey for the Department of Defense conducted in 2015 found that in the past year 52% of active service members who reported sexual assault had experienced retaliation in the form of professional, social, and administrative actions or punishments.[5] In addition to retaliation against soldiers remaining in active service, many former service members who reported sexual assaults were forced to leave after being discharged. Reasons for discharge included having a "personality disorder" or engaging in misconduct related to the sexual assault such as fraternization or (prior to the end of don't ask, don't tell) homosexuality, even if the homosexual conduct was non-consensual.[6]

52% of active service members who reported experienced retaliation. 52%. Getting discharged for homosexuality as a result of _non consensual_ homosexual contact. Tell me again about all that integrity and respect in the military.

> You sound like a person who would never make it in the military.

I don’t care, truly at all, if you think I’d make it in the military. I criticized an obviously disgusting group (that you’re a part of), and you’re making a judgement of my character out of adversarialism.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#509

Post by the_doctah »

crooked-v wrote: post #236
blacktriangle wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gamer gate was Zoe Quinn cheating on her boyfriend with game "journalists" in order to get marketing for her Depression Quest game. That is the core of it and NOBODY contests those facts. The rest of the misandrist narrative is just Quinn and said journalists grabbing on to the social justice zietgiest in an attempt to do damage control.

> and NOBODY contests those facts Quinn's ex-boyfriend, who made the original claims, later explicitly said: > To be clear, if there was any conflict of interest between Zoe and Nathan regarding coverage of Depression Quest prior to April, I have no evidence to imply that it was sexual in nature. For further context, the only coverage the journalist in question made of Quinn's work was before they had met, and well b…

>For further context, the only coverage the journalist in question made of Quinn's work was before they had met, and well before the April in question.

The article was published March 31st, and they started dating in early April. What's your definition of "Well before"?

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#510

Post by 0xcde4c3db »

a_t48 wrote: post #210
endtime wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My point is that there is any controversy when there is a game where the female main character is not explicitly sexualized Samus Aran?

https://images.nintendolife.com/7ec23ee6efba1/zero-suit-samu... Yeah totally unsexualized Edit: yes, this is an image from Smash, but she gets a bikini picture in Fusion as a "reward"

There's also an infamous (at the time, anyway) shot of her in Other M. Of course, if you're familiar with the story it's obvious that there's nothing like sexual objectification involved. It makes perfect sense that she's on the floor unconscious in the Zero Suit with her ass pointed directly at the camera, because she was just attacked without warning by a man who she's uncharacteristically submissive toward.

Uh, wait. That came out wrong. Can I start over?

Post reply on HN