(the point was that this game is partially based on answering questions with questions)

So you want someone to gift me a game that will annoy me? Why?

I found what I saw repulsive. Not just the view of women, the view of people of different skin colour to.
Why did'nt someone in the development team say "hey, is'nt this a little offensive", I am mostly talking about the black woman that apparently is called monkey.

Quick reply (since I'm about to fall asleep, I hope my thoughts are coherent enough despite being tired):

Well, in case of the latter, I can at least explain why I won't tell that person that I love them. Likewise, in case of the former, the interviewee could have explained why he did not want to engage on that level.

It happens often that a journalist is asking a question that would be detrimental for the interviewee to answer. One of our local football managers once answered one of those notorious "Are the rumors true that your are interested in signing player X?" questions like this: "I will never comment on such questions. If we are in negotiations and I confirm them, then it would make such negotiations harder. If we aren't, and I tell you so, then you will take the lack of a denial as a proof of such rumors in all following cases where I don't deny anything explicitly. I will not confirm or deny any such rumors - if we have something to announce, we will notify you." That's fair, I think - he did not _evade_ the question, he took it serious, and he explained (and gave logical reasons) why he would not comment.

If Browder did not want to engage the issues that that the interviewer put forward, then he could have declined comment, and explained the reasons for doing so. Of course, it might have been difficult to find reasons that would be deemed acceptable - but then again, that might be an indication that not engaging the issue simply isn't a very good strategy in this case.

Exactly. ;)

I can understand that he doesn't _want_ to answer questions that could lead into a moral minefield, but with him being the game's "director", I believe he should have a better way of dealing with such a question even though it might be unwanted. Either address it, or explain why you won't, and if you can't find a good way of doing the latter, then re-evaluate your stance on the former.

I think I know what you're referring to. I've found myself many times in situations where I agreed with the goals of a movement, but not with the means of some of its proponents. I will typically speak my mind in such situations, but I've also come to accept that every beneficial or necessary movement will have people who are overdoing it. On one hand, that may be detrimental to the movement - extremists make for great straw puppets when the opposing side is looking for targets, and why should one even fight people if they can be won over? On the other hand, even though I don't like it, I found that extremists often seem to be necessary to put things in motion on a bigger scale.

Good assessment of the situation, I think. :)

So you mean that I as a white male know exactly how it is to be a black woman and how it feels to be violated in different ways by the society? Are you serious?

You don't know much about what it means to a feminist do you? You better look that up.

If people could think logically and see themselves in other peoples shoes the world would not be as it is.

IT IS FUN. it is a great game, you reproach someone to answer questions with questions, and it's a very theme of that game, and it makes that game amusing, and anyone having played it would have gone "haha" at this post, and i have no idea wheher someone would have taken it seriously enough to actually gift it, and if they did it is still a game that would probably amuse you, including the question-for-question thingy in it. Sheesh !

I think the topic of 'enabling mysoginy/sexism through videogames' is a thing that should be discussed thoroughly, it's nowhere solved. People complaining that it seems everybody is onto it nowadays should know that's what happens when things are bottled up way too long.
I don't particularly like RPS but they do ask questions and lay (?) valid problematics.

Your post just shows how different two people can be. The game sounds like torture for me...
A lot of people consider answering a question with a question, rude behavior or at least adversarial where I come from.

Next time on "PR F#@&-ups" XD

Yeah, I've got no issue with Nathan or RPS. If Browder hadn't put his foot in his mouth, there would have been a simple, dry, non-committal answer, and everyone would roll their eyes and move along.

But Browder did put his foot in his mouth, and we all got some unpleasant Blizzard frankness out of it. It's one thing to offload the entire hyper-sexualisation issue on your fan-base, quite another to admit you're mostly fine with it. Yeah, sure, the money flows and you're fine, but PR exists so that you don't have to say it like that, ideally until you don't have to say it at all! Because you should be working to eliminate it, not live with it!

That's all nothing new, for me and for most other people, but I'm all for bad press in Blizzard's direction. They've been riding on goodwill for over a decade, and it shows in their games. Ironically, the hyper-sexualisation issue didn't really exist with them in the 90s. Never had any issues with StarCraft, or Warcraft, or even Diablo - the amazon might have looked sexy, but she never pranced around on high heels! Now, Kerrigan actually evolved the things! o.O

The really disturbing part, though, is that the increased sexualisation in Blizzard coincided with the increased immaturity, both in artistic style and in storytelling. It started with Warcraft 3, but one couldn't call it a trend back then. When I recently watched a WoW cutscene - the end of Pandaria, I think - my first thought was "Why is everyone speaking like they're drunk?" The inanity of the dialogue aside, there seemed to be a pause every three words, as if the director feared the audience wouldn't be able to follow otherwise. Mayhaps he was right?

And is that the Blizzard audience now? Lewd pre-teen boys? I doubt it, given the hefty load of subscription fees it generates. How could Metzen and Didier get it so wrong! Can't even blame Activision, since Blizzard has had absolute creative freedom throughout. In fact, at this point, a hefty dose of corporate oversight might do them good. Sadly, there still seems to be some gameplay-design talent in there, judging by the success of Hearthstone, and that will probably be stomped out, too. On the other hand, it seems to be suppressed already, if we're to judge by SC2 and D3; and with Titan down the drain, it's unlikely that it would have seen manifestation anyway. So yes, changes would probably be best. Big ones.

Apparently, it's seen as a common practice amongst rabbis, and that game does tenderly poke fun at it, presenting it as a irritating trait, but still having you (in your dialogue options) possibly live up to this stereotype. It plays on that trait in very amusing -and sometimes unexpected- ways. So, if it is such "a thing" to you, I think that you'd find that aspect of the game quite fun (even if in an "aargh" way). But whatever.

So you mean that she as a black woman knows exactly how it is to be a white male and how it feels to be violated in different ways by the society? Are you serious?



I mean, what's the big deal about being black a woman, or both in today's society? A black man is president of the USA and a woman is the chancellor of germany. There' black celebrities, actors and surgeons, and the same goes for women. If there's a time in history were being born as a white male doesn't at all mean automatically win the gentic lottery (which it never did in the first place) it's now.

Being a woman or black means to be completely equal to everyone in today's society. Yet somehow people (and it's mostly not even the supposed victims) make it out as being the most terrible thing to happen, gee I wonder if we aren't a bit racist or misogynistic in supposing such a thing.

What? Just what? How old are you really.

Are black women oppressing white males in any way? Give me an example. I don't even know why I aswered this childish comment.

Where in any first world country are black people being oppressed?

I mean, what's the big deal about being black a woman, or both in today's society? A black man is president of the USA and a woman is the chancellor of germany. There' black celebrities, actors and surgeons, and the same goes for women. If there's a time in history were being born as a white male doesn't at all mean automatically win the gentic lottery (which it never did in the first place) it's now.

Being a woman or black means to be completely equal to everyone in today's society. Yet somehow people (and it's mostly not even the supposed victims) make it out as being the most terrible thing to happen, gee I wonder if we aren't a bit racist or misogynistic in supposing such a thing.

Ha, are you serious? You mean there is no racism and no women at all in the whole world that are being violated at all?
You must live in a bubble, It's racist and misogynistic to ignore what the world looks like.
Italy, just one example.