I know this might start war in the comments so please chill people, I don’t want to get 20 reports from this single post.

  • loutr@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    If you read the article you’ll see that the author takes issue not with the inclusion itself, but the hamfisted way in which it is included. Pandering can be fine, but when it’s just checking boxes in a cringy, lazy way it’s not, and worse it becomes fodder for the gamergate type to rage about.

    • Vespair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      I understand that, but my point is that there is no shortage of shoehorned comic relief characters, or awkwardly placed fanservice, etc. Critique the actual fault at play, bad writing, rather than letting the gamergate right-wing nutsos have the benefit of having the conversation on their terms. Make the headline “DA:tV falls short in the writing department, here are some examples” and include the flimsy way the character is written as the valid critique. Games are going to pander to us, that is what I was saying; when we place special emphasis on this particular type of pandering all we’re doing is letting the right define the conversations we’re having.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 days ago

        Critique the actual fault at play, bad writing,

        That seems to be what is being done here. Everything that I have seen on this has done what you asked, said what they where critiquing then giving a clip from the game as an example. If people can not be critical of media for any reason, we have an issue.