Gonna briefly return to answer some questions, as I've just finished a research paper and want to take a break! (whoever gifted me gold member or whatever... why?)
I think this is one of the major problems you have (and a lot of people do), you only see discourse as battles where you have to fight and submit the other person to your line of thinking.
I disagree with this take. In Eric Barker's
Barking of the Wrong Tree he discusses this wonderful idea from philosopher Daniel Dennett called the "war metaphor," where basically every conversation isn't a sharing of knowledge but a battle with a winner and loser, which is what you describe, but I don't believe applies to me, and here's why.
I am firm believer, outside of the internet, that if something is not adding value to my life - Get rid of it. And if I don't think I'm going to add value to something, it's not worth my time. So its not so much that I see discourse as battles (anymore, I totally used to be that type of person), but more so I look try and spend my time more wisely. Obviously until my ban on Era, I was not practicing that philosophy there (or in other places on the internet).
Additionally, that post you're quoting could have been worded and contextualized a lot better, so I can understand reading through a lot of the responses why it might come off wack.
So where's the enjoyment? All I ever see when people view video games through a critical lens is them being fucking miserable and whining about everything.
Critical discourse about video games that goes beyond the common practice of isolating the conversation to the game only is actually pretty niche if you're looking at the broad picture. It's not normalized, and when it happens, the reactions are pretty much always asking the same question: Why does it matter? Someone brings up how an Ad in cyberpunk is transphobic? Why does it matter? Characters in the game are LGBTQ? Why does it matter. Journalists highlight working conditions at companies that are abhorrent? Why does it matter?
I wasn't trying to be condescending when I said that the majority of people really do view video games through child-like beer goggles. And that's okay! I don't critically analyze every piece of media I consume either.
With that said, the enjoyment of viewing video games through a critical lens is
- Seeing how real life issues / themes are tied into a game's narrative.
- Understanding where certain inspirations come from.
There's way more factors, but ultimately I find it really does boil down to an enjoyment in gaining knowledge about everything that went into a piece of art.
If you do make a return, we want your opinion on the double standards of
[IMG alt="Kyuuji"]https://www.neogaf.com/data/avatars/s/808/808351.jpg?1607572669[/IMG] Kyuuji and Cyberpunk. The biggest instigator of hatred for Cyberpunk playing Cyberpunk through the day of locked OT and through the trans era battle with the mods.
I love and respect Kyuuji. Full stop. She's incredibly smart and instrumental in my greater understanding of Trans issues and her thread about CDPR being transphobic was incredibly well done and invaluable. Being banned off of Era does not change my fondness for TransEra at all.
Kyuuji playing Cyberpunk isn't hypocritical, and here's why I think this - It's important and ethical to consume media that you perceive as problematic assuming that you're going into the consumption understanding why said media is problematic. I don't think its a black and white issue, and especially for critics, its important to understand the subject you're criticizing in-depth if you're wanting to make a convincing argument about why said thing is problematic and wrong, and needs to be fixed.
I know a ton of you will read that and think "jesus fucking christ this clown" but at the end of the day my grievances will always be towards how Era staff manage issues brought up by marginalized groups in the community, usually never with individuals on a personal level.
How do you feel about ResetEra labeling people nazis, transphobes and bigots?
Hi Black Chamber! There's a post a few pages where you list me as the second prominent member that needs to be banned, so I think you got your wish!
I think ultimately in many cases if someone does something that can be perceived as one of those labels, just in general internet users will be broad about their labeling. There's almost zero chance people are going to assume good faith, and without context in situations that really require it, you're gonna have situations that really do just boil down to people throwing those labels out.
