I liked the video. It was pretty interesting and down to earth. I like how its edited, those short commercials/images/gameplay bits are set up to speak for themselves instead of her going over them and explaining them, which keeps a clear message.

It was a wise decision not to allow comments nor ratings on the video, the message would be drowned in the mass of the not-so respectful internet dwellers.

How many videos she is expected to release?

Yeah I thought it was pretty good too.

And we return to my original point.
Why am I the least-bothered by this video?

You're the least bothered because you're the only one that is looking at this from the perspective of "feminist issues are a real thing that need to be talked about." Duh. Obviously. That's not an opinion, that's an objective fact that only the most bigoted would disagree with (which, yeah, a lot of them are on the internet). Honestly its shameful that in a modern, first world society we still can't completely grasp the fact "Oh hey, we're all the same species and need each other to survive... we should treat everyone by the same standard."

The thing a lot of people are upset about isn't that she's talking about feminist issues. The thing people are upset that this was the first taste of what she planned to do with $16k after 6 months. Btw, I literally looked up "roles of women in video games" or something similar on YouTube and found a much more interesting (albeit a bit more amateur) video where someone was talking about this very subject. I don't care that she's a woman, or that she has an idea I generally agree with: I'm angry that someone was basically able to make it rain with a shallow business pitch (I remember seeing it once before it was over) and this is all they have to show for it.

If she wants to make a documentary, fine, make a documentary. But if all the backers got was like... a newsroom shot while she spouted sparse facts overlayed by fancy graphics, then yeah she could have probably done that as a hobby on the side. As someone else mentioned: of course it's great to make money off something you love, but the standards go up when you start asking for money.

Also to the person who said it was a good idea to disable comments and ratings because it would "get in the way of the message"... do you realize how hypocritical that statement is? This is a video series intended to INCREASE DISCUSSION ABOUT WOMEN IN VIDEO GAMES, so it's a good idea to discourage any kind of response or free thought on the very video itself? Can I get an English major in here to determine whether or not that's irony... because I think it is.

Your claim in the context of this thread was that the genders need to be different, not individuals; that in order for society not to fall apart, people with different genitalia need to have different personalities, specifically as a consequence of what genitalia they have. THAT is the claim I was disputing; THAT is the claim that has yet to be justified.

No, my claim is not actually related to genders at all, at least not directly. That’s just guilt by association.
I basically want to say that differences are good (and indeed allow species to evolve, so they are necessary), and the larger differences make me personally more interested in a person (this part is just me, not the main point).

As it turns out, the best way to make people different is to pump different chemicals—“hormones” if you will—through their bodies.

In other words, it is just related to certain chemicals rather than gender, but gender is what causes those chemicals (in most people).


With men being from Mars and women from Venus, these chemicals certainly are effective.
Men cannot understand what women are thinking nor vice-versa. This kind of mystery is something I cherish, and indeed we all do on some level.
This is the foundation of “it’s necessary for us to be different”.
Gender plays a passive role, but it causes those chemicals and physical differences as well that create the largest gap between people, and frankly life would be bland without it.


L. Spiro

Your claim in the context of this thread was that the genders need to be different, not individuals; that in order for society not to fall apart, people with different genitalia need to have different personalities, specifically as a consequence of what genitalia they have. THAT is the claim I was disputing; THAT is the claim that has yet to be justified.

No, my claim is not actually related to genders at all, at least not directly. That’s just guilt by association.
I basically want to say that differences are good (and indeed allow species to evolve, so they are necessary), and the larger differences make me personally more interested in a person (this part is just me, not the main point).

As it turns out, the best way to make people different is to pump different chemicals—“hormones” if you will—through their bodies.

In other words, it is just related to certain chemicals rather than gender, but gender is what causes those chemicals (in most people).


With men being from Mars and women from Venus, these chemicals certainly are effective.
Men cannot understand what women are thinking nor vice-versa. This kind of mystery is something I cherish, and indeed we all do on some level.
This is the foundation of “it’s necessary for us to be different”.
Gender plays a passive role, but it causes those chemicals and physical differences as well that create the largest gap between people, and frankly life would be bland without it.


L. Spiro

You may be a brilliant programmer but, your information on biology is sorely out of date. And similarly for psychology.

You may be a brilliant programmer but, your information on biology is sorely out of date. And similarly for psychology.

I am always open to education if you are willing to point out where I have gone astray.

But this might be a good time to mention that the only thing that has gone into my stomach in the last 3 days is 50%-vol (not proof) Vodka, and I should probably just remove myself from the conversation. Even drunk I can see I am saying a few idiotic things.

I don’t think I will be replying again until I deem myself fit for social contact (which may never happen, because if I am to be 100% honest my objective right now is to die), but do feel free to “update” me.


L. Spiro

You may be a brilliant programmer but, your information on biology is sorely out of date. And similarly for psychology.

I am always open to education if you are willing to point out where I have gone astray.

But this might be a good time to mention that the only thing that has gone into my stomach in the last 3 days is 50%-vol (not proof) Vodka, and I should probably just remove myself from the conversation. Even drunk I can see I am saying a few idiotic things.

I don’t think I will be replying again until I deem myself fit for social contact (which may never happen, because if I am to be 100% honest my objective right now is to die), but do feel free to “update” me.


L. Spiro

LOL. A real damsel in distress![spoiler]Unfortunately, this is the internetz. And I don't know you. So while I think you are be sarcastic and wily, you may be actually trying to kill yourself. Let's strive for the former shall we![/spoiler]

And rent on a serviceable apartment is like 250$.

Where do you live? In American cities big enough to have some software companies to work for, I haven't seen apartments that cheap, basically, ever.

I worked in a smaller city in the 1990's and at that time and place about the cheapest you could go was $400 a month -- and even that is certainly not possible now, even there.

previously in the thread:

I live in Missouri, and you can get 250$-350$ housing in KC, STL where I live, and Columbia where I went to Mizzou for a bit. Possibly even less depending on the details.

note that cost of living is much lower in the midwest, but at least in my case (also living in the midwest, but in Oklahoma), there are no real software jobs short of going somewhere like Texas or similar... (don't currently have a job, more just doing stuff on my own...).

but, like anything, there are good points and there are drawbacks.

Women, want to get revenge on the men?
Disappear from the Earth. That would drive the men absolutely batshit crazy. A sign of females’ value to men despite any perceived objectification.

Also, do you really need to repeat this tired old cliche? Actually, back in this thread (http://www.gamedev.net/topic/639144-sony-and-the-ps4-im-impressed-your-thoughts/page-3) you were rightly criticizing the stereotyping of men as "sex-hungry dolts". So why the change?

Why turn this at the extreme case ? For what I know most fathers and mothers say that the best thing that happens in their live is the coming of their little babies. So yes the live is more fun when there are men and women.

I just want to bring some other thing (I didnt saw the vid or read all the posts)

Today game market isnt all about AAA anymore, casual games (facebook and mobile) share an enormous amount in the market (if not more then 50%, I didnt find any numbers with a quick search, but lets face AAA games are competing with indies already). Casual games arent male focused games in any way, Id say my mom is playing way more games than me due facebook and browser games (tetris, farming, that bejeweled puzzle, etc).

Casual games arent male focused games in any way

Yeah, this is a good point. From my understanding casual game companies specifically target women. I learned this first hand actually from the rejection feedback I got upon submitting a puzzle game to a casual game company in Seattle (not PopCap). Basically they said something like 90% of their users were women and that they didn't think my game which was an abstract puzzle game would appeal to them.