It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Navagon: Galaxy was always going to act as a huge human resource hog during its early development. Things should ease off a bit in the months to come.
The problem is that Galaxy should have celebrated its 1st birthday already. Remember that Original Sin got delayed because they thought about releasing it with Galaxy support. The release of this game was June 30. Last year! So... The buggy Witcher 3 launcher we have now (that's what Galaxy is - a Witcher 3 launcher), is a heavily developed version of what GOG planned to release more than one year ago. I don't even remember when they mentioned Galaxy for the first time, but the... "thing" we have now doesn't look like something that got far more than one year of development. So I don't see how things should "ease off a bit" in the next couple of months :/
avatar
Berggeist: look dude i don't wanna take the wind out of your sails or anything but

1) The first thing you linked is an opinion blog. The crux of its argument is that the report does not literally say "losers" or explicitly say men made "frequent, nasty" comments and that this study reveals "only a glimpse", which is kind of how science works. On top of that, the study actually does provide numbers on death threats and other such "nasty" comments, and also explicitly breaks these down, including an analysis on comments that would qualify as hostile sexism versus simply negative, neutral or positive. The study itself gives that it's not perfect and only had so much data to utilize, which is every study ever.

2) The second thing you link, from "nichegamer", hoo boy. Read their about me.

"We’re a website run by true gamers who love games. We have no room for jaded biases, politics or social agendas. We’re independently owned and answer to absolutely no one when it comes to what games we cover, and the way in which we cover them.

We’re proud to be based out of Philadelphia – the birthplace of American freedom, although we cover games from all over the world. We are committed to bringing you original content, insightful opinions and the full and accurate news without any fluff or agendas."

But the actual article is a desperate clutching at straws. It cries foul over the study being conducted in 2012, and that the game was old in 2012 (never mind that studies take time to process and I'm not sure why they even mention the game is old). It then argues that they didn't say "we obtained from the original data" rather than "we played", except the study actually fully divulges where the data came from and how they observed it.

Then the article comments that men were not examined for sexist comments. The study, however, gives that the only vocal players were all male. I can only assume nichegamer is now confusing homophobic with sexist, or just didn't actually read the study hard.

Nichegamer then complains that the article is not controlling for age, nationality, location or ethnicity, although how you're supposed to control for that in xbox live halo matches is beyond me. They complain that the authors of the study didn't examine players who didn't talk. Considering the study is specifically about talkers, and not people who have [I]no meaningful way to communicate[/I], why is this a shock?

Nichegamer then wanders into a personal anecdote about their college professor, and then complains that this study only found a small number of players making sexist comments. That's not what the study was about though. The study was about negative comments in general, with sexist comments specifically a subsection - and the point was still that it tended to correlate with players who were worse, and more often when the researcher "speaker" messages were said in a female voice.

Then it cries foul over the study mentioning ranking and using kill/death ratio in a cooperative game, except that if you actually take the time to read the study, it discriminates between people who aren't killing much and people who are actually dying often. This is something they should know if they actually took a stats course.

It complains it draws conclusions about "low-status males" in society, when the study is discussing status [I]as it applies within the game[/I]. The article ends on a defiant declaration that the data was manipulated to make people appear sexist, then narrowly focusing on specifically sexist comments rather than the apparent fact that those who spoke with a female voice tended to draw more negative comments in general, but the study is entirely forth-coming about the results, the limitations, and so on.

I would ask you to consider that nichegamer, whether they realize it or not, are in fact pushing an agenda of their own without actually realizing that they are. In fact, looking at their editorials, I would say that their bias is readily apparent.
Unfortunately they couldn't conduct the study as well as you critique an article about it.
The study used only one game
The study does not mention the skills of the female players. Ah yes, that itself is a bit fishy. Or should I say fishing? They more or less went in trying to find something and probably cooked this ''science'' as a result. Did you ever consider that people may be yelling at her because she's bad or because she's better than them?
Also, how is this relevant to other games. How is this relevant to Natural Selection? You get orders in NS and who will you blame if you don't follow them? How does this apply to RTS teamgames? Does this study prove that if 2 zergs swarm a female protoss player on SC2 that the female player's team mate would blame her?

For ''scientific'' study, this seems more like an exercise in armchair social media ''online social experiment''.
avatar
real.geizterfahr: The problem is that Galaxy should have celebrated its 1st birthday already. Remember that Original Sin got delayed because they thought about releasing it with Galaxy support. The release of this game was June 30. Last year!
Oh, I remember that absurd first decision!
Luckly, GOG realized in time that it was crazy.
It's incredible, however, that 1 entire year has passed..
avatar
Doc0075: I don't know what an SJW is, someone help me out please?
avatar
fr33kSh0w2012: Social (IN)Justice Warriors!

They are Like Failed Feminists the female Version of White Knights.

A White knight is a Person who sucks up and panders to women to try and get in their panties, and that is all they are!

basically a Guy that Mocks chivalry to get his dick wet!

Basically he's a crawler these guys make everyone sick, even if I was a female and had a guy do this even I wouldn't fuck him

I AM THE BLACK KNIGHT!

I'm the exact opposite of these stupid white knight's.

Also next time doc YOU HAVE THE INTERNET THERE IS A THING CALLED GOOGLE USE IT, MORAN!
It is spelt moron but thanks anyway.
avatar
Berggeist: snip
My point was to read that study and the two criticism of it together then draw your own conclusion. Both criticism said a lot about sample size and there were very valid points about distorted statistics which made the issue appear to be worse than it was.

Off the top of my head, they pointed out only about one tenth of the players spoke, yet the study, by only counting speakers is claiming about 10% of the players made abusive comments. The truth was closer to 1% of the players made abusive comments because 90% of players didn't say a thing.
avatar
itchy01ca01: If me posting something about accepting female gamers gets a ton of downvotes.
Just saying ;)
The whole gamergate incident should teach us that most male gamers hate female gamers. This little social experiment I did just proves my theory as well.
Yup, that sounds scientifically accurate... -_-

avatar
JKHSawyer: Fuck women!

...and populate the Earth!
Way ahead of you, bro. :D
Post edited August 10, 2015 by jefequeso
avatar
fr33kSh0w2012: Also next time doc YOU HAVE THE INTERNET THERE IS A THING CALLED GOOGLE USE IT, MORAN!
avatar
Doc0075: It is spelt moron but thanks anyway.
No, no, I think he had you confused with colonel Sebastian Moran, Professor Moriarty's right hand man.
avatar
Brasas: I've been thinking of posting something saying: Wake up, we in the forum are a minority! Or something of the sort.

I think there are ways to keep the forum good, but they'd involve us taking over development pro bono, coordinating it with GOG or something. We'd have to accept we're far from a significant part of the revenue, and take matters in our own hands basically.

At least I think there are technological ways to increase transparency and empwer the self moderation that used to be more common.
GOG would have to be very selective about who they hand that to. Just take a look at Steam's forums if you want an example of what happens when you hand that small shed of power to even smaller people.

avatar
real.geizterfahr: The problem is that Galaxy should have celebrated its 1st birthday already. Remember that Original Sin got delayed because they thought about releasing it with Galaxy support. The release of this game was June 30. Last year! So... The buggy Witcher 3 launcher we have now (that's what Galaxy is - a Witcher 3 launcher), is a heavily developed version of what GOG planned to release more than one year ago. I don't even remember when they mentioned Galaxy for the first time, but the... "thing" we have now doesn't look like something that got far more than one year of development. So I don't see how things should "ease off a bit" in the next couple of months :/
On the face of it, I'm inclined to agree. But then I don't know how much of Galaxy is GOG's own work and how much is third party. Sure, they could have cobbled something together out of third party code in under six months. But more likely than not it would have been left with some intrinsic and almost unresolvable problems in the process. If they wanted something a bit more tailor made then I can see how that would take a small team a lot longer.

GOG aren't known for rushing things after all.
Post edited August 10, 2015 by Navagon
low rated
avatar
fr33kSh0w2012: Social (IN)Justice Warriors!

They are Like Failed Feminists the female Version of White Knights.

A White knight is a Person who sucks up and panders to women to try and get in their panties, and that is all they are!

basically a Guy that Mocks chivalry to get his dick wet!

Basically he's a crawler these guys make everyone sick, even if I was a female and had a guy do this even I wouldn't fuck him

I AM THE BLACK KNIGHT!

I'm the exact opposite of these stupid white knight's.

Also next time doc YOU HAVE THE INTERNET THERE IS A THING CALLED GOOGLE USE IT, MORAN!
avatar
Doc0075: It is spelt moron but thanks anyway.
Oh I know how it's spelt I was being sarcastic, Doc!
low rated
avatar
Elmofongo: So women already in politics is not enough? Women already in agencies is not enough?
avatar
itchy01ca01: If a women works harder than a man at their job, they deserve just as much pay, time off, what have you for what they do as any male. That's the problem corporate America/Canada is still having.
I am also a bit drunk; so I really love your style! ;-)

If a movement is based on hostility of a jilted lover - I do not think it is about "she" or "he" - it is about source criticality.

What say you? Bit agit-prop and source-unctitical, eh? ;-)

And I see no reason to take you very kindly on your unkind attitude on men or boys whom game - I know some, including my bro. It always has been good; and I dare think most real life boys / men would love to game away with their sis / gf / 3rd Party gamer.

Make do - but the real life men and boys and women and girls are ... just bluaady great!

Pity on yer, if this be not yer experience. But joint fouk me, I people really go all against a fellow gamer - this person is just a fellow gamer. Not just! Is it not...



---

Edit: On a bit drunken longitudinal, and at that too immediate a judgement; I shall be still okei in the mor'n, I think!

The OP implies gamers like to huddle up, excuse for themselves and think ill of each other, somehow.

I accept none of this ... easily.

Will the OP tell me why I should think he/she knows any impassioned gamers; as opposed to spinning the thing to pit gamer against each other???

I might dismiss you as I dismiss a homo-hater (one that hates plausibly anything in LGBT; but zeros in on one aspects) - but I feel I must ask: where did you get the idea that a gamer hates another?
Post edited October 20, 2015 by TStael
Don't turn this place into polygon damn it...
avatar
itchy01ca01: If me posting something about accepting female gamers gets a ton of downvotes.
Just saying ;)
The whole gamergate incident should teach us that most male gamers hate female gamers. This little social experiment I did just proves my theory as well.
You say that as if it's surprising.
low rated
avatar
Berggeist: Nichegamer then complains that the article is not controlling for age, nationality, location or ethnicity, although how you're supposed to control for that in xbox live halo matches is beyond me. They complain that the authors of the study didn't examine players who didn't talk. Considering the study is specifically about talkers, and not people who have [I]no meaningful way to communicate[/I], why is this a shock?
Something to note: many female gamers deliberately choose not to talk when playing a game online because of harassment issues in the past. This could skew the results, and make it look as though female gamers are rarer than they actually are.
low rated
avatar
Elmofongo: snip
avatar
itchy01ca01: If a women works harder than a man at their job, they deserve just as much pay, time off, what have you for what they do as any male. That's the problem corporate America/Canada is still having.
Have you ever come across a woman that works harder than men at their job ?
Have you ever come across a woman that works 70+ hours a week or gets dangerous jobs such as construction, mining, frontline military, etc ?

Women won't get paid equal to men because they work less hours, take more time off and work in safe jobs.
Post edited October 20, 2015 by tort1234
low rated
avatar
itchy01ca01: If a women works harder than a man at their job, they deserve just as much pay, time off, what have you for what they do as any male. That's the problem corporate America/Canada is still having.
avatar
tort1234: Have you ever come across a woman that works harder than men at their job ?
Have you ever come across a woman that works 70+ hours a week or gets dangerous jobs such as construction, mining, frontline military, etc ?

Women won't get paid equal to men because they work less hours, take more time off and work in safe jobs.
Well, there are the recent women who graduated from the US Army's Ranger school.

There is famous scientist Marie Curie, who worked with dangerous radiation (although it wasn't known to be dangerous at the time) and died of radiation poisoning.

There is Amelia Earhart, who attempted to fly around the world.

There are the "Night Witches", russian women who bombed the German military during World War 2.

So yes, some women do, in fact, perform dangerous jobs.

Also, note that the National Organization for Women passed a resolution that says the male-only selective service registration requirement in the US is discriminatory.