Point taken. Ethnicity does not mean race. As to finding out whether it makes any difference and hence its inclusion, I ask you whether this study is about gauging reaction of different cultures to games or trying to do a study on any broader subject at all. If it was indeed to conducted to fin out the culture-based reactions, then OK, but unfortunately, ITS NOT.
Sure, Pokemon is an adventure game lol. Have you ever seen Pokemon; ie not the TV show,the game at all? The whole game is based around turn based strategic battles. All activities are concerned with the battle to be had. Its like saying Splinter Cell is a shooter.
And LoL is NOT an RTS. I don't know what you were on when you said this, or if you were not on something you normally are, but RTS in videogame terms means a base+economy+military buildup game with multiple units to control, all with varying levels of micro and macro needed. You should play one sometime.
Then we have the ''adventure games''. That term is normally used to describe games like Grim Fandango and other point and click story only non-mechanical game. If RDR is an adventure, so is GTA, which both are clearly not when compared to the point and click stuff.

Please point out where I said GoW and Bioshock weren't shooters. Please, with your high blown academic critique, do so. I don't give a flying fuck about why some green haired hipster decides to call Shadows of Mordor and RPG or Assassin's Creed a stealth game, but just saying those radically different games are popular for being shooters; and saying people like the ''genre'' called FPS because of that is lacking in any sanity and logic. No one buys Bioshock for the unrefined shooting, and no one plays Half Life for being an FPS.
They are categorizing mechanically and immersively different games into one generalization of a genre theycall ''shooter''. Its seems you can't distinguish BioShock from Counter Strike, but most normal people can, and they play for different reasons than being an FPS. Its you who can't see any depth to their methods. You don't even know what an RTS is. So watch some Ahoy documentaries or something, so can offer an educated opinion.

Kinda related : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQHwdp43oRY
NSFW, datass warning.

But again, all you do is complain....

You never address the real issues, such as the spurious unproven and silly claim that all personality types should be equally represented in the industry. Or essentially, "equality" gone stupid.

Heck, not every personality type likes games and puzzles equally. Hence the whole purpose of differentiating these types. That's Psychology 101. Yet, somehow, these "professors" think all personality types need equal representation in the industry? Are they forgetting their learning or rather more likely pushing their particular agenda? This is a perfect example of "agenda based" science where researchers are seeking results to endorse their agendas. There is good science where the results are what they are, and there is this silly science where results are exaggerated, and conclusions go off on a safari.

Not that there is much sense in your mostly useless and meandering rant...but let's address the couple possibly debatable points.

So you support rejecting applicants from college or university based on a psychological questionnaire? To promote diversity? Because that is what is being suggested. The rest of your "exact coding" rant isn't debate worthy...

So, as to people making their own games and starting their own companies...
As to the movie analogy, yes, I tell them to go see some other movie they like. If you don't like a particular movie, so what, others do. Who the heck are you to "demand" that movie be changed, the same for games...
The rest of your ranting is worthless enough not to address...

Honestly I haven't understood anything you're trying to say in that post.

Editor in Chief of Gameranx, Ian Miles Cheong, has apologised for his behaviour towards gamers during #GamerGate

http://stillgray.com/post/119992928665/what-games-mean-to-me

He hasn't joined gamergate but he has left anti-gg and the SJW movement.

Honestly I'm not sure how I feel about that, but at the very least we should respect him for coming out and saying something, and just leave him alone.

That was very unexpected...
Very well put, I mean, it really seems heartfelt.
The strange thing is, it almost appears playing Witcher 3 and not seeing the misogyny and sexism and racism claimed by his fellow comrades may have been the turning point.
He even threw a dig at Leigh Alexander. I mean wow!

He might have been like "If we call this is misogyny and racism, what else have we been making fools of ourselves with?"

It's also interesting to see that he admits to doing exactly what people have accused the SJW movement off: arguing for the sake of arguing just "to make a point" even if it means your point gets buried under a huge pile of intolerance which completely shuts down any dialog with the very people you're meant to make the point to.

That's why SJWs are useless and need to die as a movement: they don't give a damn what the people they shout out think nor about converting them. The exact opposite of what they SHOULD do to get people on-board. It's all an image game - to boost their own ego, get popular with their fellow SJWs, get pats on the back and get to act all superior and arrogant towards everyone who is not yet "enlightened" about your progressive views.

This could be a serious blow to their narrative.

While i do not yet fully trust him, I'll give him the benefit of doubt for the time being.
(This has as far as I've seen, the general sentiment of gg on this: accepting the apology while remaining somewhat skeptical)

I've seen quite a lot of criticism considering his salvation from "he knows he's on the losing side" to "he's just doing it for attention" but I think the truth is simpler - in this game, you can "peak" i.e. you get more and more "radical" until you suddenly stand at the pinnacle, looking down and suddenly realizing the path you're on, deciding that it's not right.

A friend of mine was in a biker gang for over a decade and gradually became this "bad ass" guy, going on dangerous rides, getting deeper and deeper into the biker mentality. In a sense, it was like a cult - the way he dressed, the music he listened to, the way he acted, etc. - he was made to hate rival gang members to the point where he got arrested for pointing a toy gun at them. That's when he realized what a fool he had been - he had been looking for acceptance, which is what most of these SJWs want, too. He completely ditched the whole biker gang thing and in the space of a week turned back to the friendly old guy he was before. So yeah, it's not surprising for people to do a 180° turn when they realize what the organisation they felt part of, really is like and stands for.

I think the turn of events with Ian Miles Cheong is a good thing. I find it especially interesting that one of the reasons he changed his mind was due to playing The Witcher 3 and comparing it to some of the reviews he has read. Over these past months, I have found myself bummed out about video games and the industry, but The Witcher 3 also reminded me of why I love this medium so much.

I do hope people leave him alone though, whether he is sincere or not. I think it is best to let him be as Slxe suggested.

As a quick side question, are we allowed to shill our own blog/writing? After spending time with the game and seeing many of the events mentioned in the Polygon review, I wrote a short article about why these type of reviews need to stop. The gist of it being, that critics are too busy pushing a personal agenda and missing an opportunity to elevate video game journalism to new heights. Many of the quests in The Witcher 3 have a moral story behind them, but Polygon could only focus on what a woman was wearing or that she was being hurt.

Shill away! Why not?

:D

I just always like to make sure it is okay first. I know GOG is pretty relaxed, but I know some forums in general can get fussy for any type of self-promotion. I just figure it is better to write this stuff out in detail and link here, than create a huge wall of text post.

The thoughts on the Polygon article can be found here. Please note though, there are some early game spoilers for those that haven't played. I do mark where they begin, but figured I warn people here too. I just find it a little disheartening that the game is sending a very clear message about certain subjects but some critics can't see beyond the little details to realize that.

For a blatant racist who threw around rape accusations like they were confetti, I remain verrrrrrry skeptical.