MrTomFTW Comments

Page 1 of 66

  • Metallica to play BlizzCon 2014

  • MrTomFTW 21/10/2014

    I AM THE TABLE Reply +8
  • Legend of Grimrock 2 review

  • MrTomFTW 21/10/2014

    Be excellent to each other. Reply +3
  • Surgeon Simulator dev reveals first slice of I Am Bread gameplay

  • MrTomFTW 20/10/2014

    This is barm-y! Reply 0
  • Spelunky's creator is writing a book about its development

  • MrTomFTW 20/10/2014

    @seasidebaz I don't think Spelunky HD was made in GameMaker, just the HTML5 original. Reply +4
  • UK gov changing law to get tough on internet trolling

  • MrTomFTW 20/10/2014

    People who troll may spend several years in a small, dark room with limited access to the outside world.

    Also they may be sent to prison.
    Reply +71
  • We cannot let this become gaming culture

  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores You know you're coming across a bit... strong here. I suggest calming down a little bit. Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @Crea Oh and while we're on the subject, ban people from calling others "social justice warriors".

    Because when your painting your opposition as people fighting for social justice it's generally a bad PR move :)
    Reply -3
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores Well maybe if a hate group had threatened him not just with death, but with rape, doxxed him and his family, threatened school shootings, forced him out of his home he might have got an article sympathetic to him out of it.

    And maybe if Anita had campaigned for censorship and had sued gaming companies and retailers we might be less sympathetic towards her.

    Maybe in an alternate universe the sun would rise in the west, set in the east and you'll not be going on and on and on and on and on with your terrible strawman argument.
    Reply -2
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores You used to love this site? You only registered today and have 7 posts - all in this thread.

    That's one hell of a quick love/hate relationship you've got going there.
    Reply +3
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @Crea I agree again. That would be an excellent first step on bringing this whole thing to an end.

    And of course we literally mean stop mentioning them right? Rather than calling them Literally Who* so they can still talk about them, but pretend they're not.

    *There's 9 LWs now last I checked :/
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores
    I want to know where EG and the other SJW sites were when Jack Thompson was getting threats. Thanks.
    Well I'll give you EG links. These are the first three I could find, if they're not enough you can angrily storm off and find them or examples for other sites yourself. I suggest Google as a good starting point.

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/news241005thompson
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/news191005thompsonagain
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/news121205thompson

    Here's a sympathetic article about him as well:
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/news130106thompson

    And the press checked up on him after his disbarring, he's found God:
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-01-18-jack-thompson-trades-game-hating-for-god
    Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores Problem with your comparison with Jack Thompson is that the situations are not comparable.

    Jack sought censorship of games. He wanted games banned, he wanted people arrested, he sued Rockstar, Take Two and Walmart. He was actively trying to take people down.

    Anita Sarkeesian offered feminist critique without asking for any kind of change, let alone censorship.

    Of course that didn't make the threats and harassment towards him right, but sites both within the gaming press, and in the wider world reported on it accordingly. It wasn't a complete whitewash... It's just hard to be sympathetic to someone like that (which is something GamerGate should probably consider).
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @Crea Quite right. Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian would have still been virtual unknowns if they hadn't had their lives threatened.

    You can thank the group of people that started GamerGate for that one. They wanted to silence them, instead they now have the likes of the New York Times writing about them.
    Reply +3
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @michaelmoores
    Where was your article about Jack Thompson, EG?
    Pick one, there's loads:
    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.eurogamer.net+jack+thompson&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&gws_rd=ssl
    Reply +4
  • MrTomFTW 19/10/2014

    @richardwilson I don't believe it! Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve To say the author of the work a game is based on doesn't influence it's design is a little naive TBH.

    For a cheap cash-in maybe... But for the likes of The Witcher where they're actually putting some effort in, the source material tends to be very influential indeed.
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @NeoTechni
    I don't get why people think she isn't trying to censor games. You don't point out things you're arguing are bad for society with no expectation or desire for it to change. And she argues video game violence against women normalizes it, she's claiming it leads to real violence against women. And you don't think she's trying to change that? Censor that?
    Well... I think you grossly misunderstand the point and purpose of critique I'll tell you that much.

    It is highlighting problematic issues that are tropes because of the frequency that they appear. The issue isn't that Hitman has that one section where strippers are used as killable background decoration, it's that games in general fall back on the strip club trope so often and Hitman is an example of that.

    But then she's not saying we must never ever have another game with a strip club or strippers, or prostitutes or whatever. But some consideration should be taken as to whether or not you're just using it as quick and lazy shorthand to show how edgy and gritty your game world is.

    Apparently this point of view is enough to garner a lot of hate.
    Reply +5
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @Liquid--Leeroy OK, I had been trying to ignore you since you were so determined to drag the coversation into another strawman attack against me. But you're persistent so let's address Thunderf00t really quick.

    The video you're looking for is "Quinnspiracy and does 'maybe' mean no?" in which he takes the standpoint of blaming the victim for not staying safe, rather than blaming the rapist for being... well a rapist. Then the last part of the video focuses on "The Five Guys Saga" and all the slut shaming that goes with that. Plus links to the InternetAristcrat videos on the matter (he's another one I won't allow here).

    And that's without the context of videos such as "'Feminist logic' Stay Safe = YOU DESERVE RAPE!", "TEACH THEM NOT TO RAPE" (in which he argues we shouldn't teach men not to rape as people still murder each other) and "Do hot girls have all the advantages?"

    So yeah, no Thunderf00t on EG please!
    Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve - well I couldn't possibly be an SJW by that definition. Yet here I am... Getting called just that. Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @TekMerc Also to add to your point. The likes of Anita Sarkeesian and other feminists are not trying to censor games at all. As Anita herself writes on every one of her videos:
    Remember that it is both possible (and even necessary) to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of it's more problematic or pernicious aspects.
    Reply +4
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @Liquid--Leeroy
    Nothing about censorship requires that it the speech be universally unavailable, only that the censor suppresses it from their own sphere of influence. By your logic, the church never censored heretical books in the dark ages, because they were available outside territory they controlled... Bollocks.
    Poor example. I can't stop you typing www.youtube.com into your browser and viewing his videos. You can do it right this very second with minimal effort. The church's control over books at the time would have been total control of the populace's access to those books. Unless smuggled in which would have been high-effort and very risky.

    So, still not censorship.
    Reply -5
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @emanuelpereira1

    the SJW (like tom)
    It's funny you throw around "SJW" like an insult.

    LOOK AT HIM! HE BELIEVES IN SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUALITY!

    Does the idea of social justice repulse you? Does it make you uncomfortable? :)
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @PEnchan707MkII In response to those four demands I think you should actually read Polygon's letter from the editor about GamerGate:

    http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6996601/on-gamergate-a-letter-from-the-editor

    I know Polygon's name is mud when it comes to GamerGate supporters but he does make some very interesting points in regards to ethics, the SPJ ethics code, the code of ethics they have had in place since day one and something I previously wasn't aware of - the Pen and Pencil club:

    Are critics of the list aware that journalists have "conspired" in this way for, literally, over a century? I live in Philadelphia, home of the Pen & Pencil Club, a similarly private social club for journalists that's been in existence since 1892. This is where journalists from the Philadelphia Inquirer, a newspaper that won 17 Pulitzers in 15 years, would get drinks with journalists from competing papers and discuss, what else? Work.
    Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve Well look at this for example:



    Those loud voices within GamerGate don't like Polygon's political views, so boldened by the "victory" with Intel (again, because they didn't like Gamasutra's political leanings) they seek to silence or change them by going after Nintendo. How is that not censorship? How is that not unethical?
    Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @_tangent - there's more than ample evidence that GamerGate was designed to spin the negative attention away from the people harassing Zoe Quinn and then Anita Sarkeesian and back to the press. It's like one big middle-finger at all the well meaning, left leaning gamers who have been suckered in by the astroturfing that took place as part of "Operation Shillgate".

    I'm sorry, but if there's anyone with their head in the sand it's you for your constant denial of this.

    edit: Link!
    Reply -2
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve I would definitely not.

    I would not give the site my traffic, but to attempt to force change on them in such a manner as GamerGate has is extremely unethical. It's no better than thuggish strong-arming.

    "Nice ad campaign... Shame if something were to "happen" to it..."
    Reply -2
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @_tangent Poll or no, people on the left tend not to support groups built on the harassment of women. Quite the opposite.

    So going on the assumption the majority of respondents to that poll were telling the truth and not astroturfing they should probably re-examine exactly what they're doing since at it's origins and at it's very core GamerGate is very much right wing.
    Reply -4
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    The crazy thing is, no-one on the GamerGate side seems to have hit upon the correct answer - start your own gaming site with a right wing stance and do things "right". There's probably not a better time than now if you believe the ground swell against the established sites is so large.

    But no, they'd rather attack these sites in a way that's more likely to encourage them to ignore their vague demands further.
    Reply -3
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @PEnchan707MkII Nice spin, but I'm sorry that's total rubbish. It's well worded but it's still an attempt to change via denial of revenue. Still totally unethical and still censorship. Reply -1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @_tangent Gawker (and Gamasutra) losing advertisers is censorship though. It's an attempt to silence them, or at least to change their editorial stance, by denying them funds. The idea is "change, or go out of business", and it's entirely unethical. It literally threatens people's careers.

    Whereas me saying "do not post Thunderf00t videos" will have no impact on his bottom line or his ability to say whatever he wants.

    To say the two situations are comparable is nothing but false equivalence.
    Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @emanuelpereira1 Yeah, I've seen those before. They're believed to be part of the same lot from /pol/ that got caught out inventing "angry feminist" sock puppet accounts and astroturfing the #endfathersday. Reply -5
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @Liquid--Leeroy

    1. I have never said that most of GamerGate are misogynists. My message has always been that supporting GamerGate is to support the hateful elements within it. This does not necessarily make a person misogynistic, they may just be misguided or naive. So again, strawman on your part. Stop that.

    2. Not allowing Thunderf00t's videos on this site is still not censorship. It is not in my power to censor Thunderf00t. He is free to continue making his videos and we are free to say they are not welcome here. This does not equate to censorship by any definition of the word.

    3. As for Anita's gaming credentials, I'd rather believe her over Thunderf00t. Even then they're not actually all that important. I wouldn't expect a music critic to necessarily know how to play instruments or sing for example. I'd say her master's degree is actually more relevant in this case.
    Reply -6
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve I actually wouldn't disagree with your description of Gawker as a rotten egg to be honest. I am not a fan.

    And yes, Gawker media would be who you complain to but the complaint would be about the Gawker.com editorial staff, not the Jezebel staff no? They are separate groups of people in the end.
    Reply +2
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve Worth pointing out that Gawker and Jezebel have entirely different editorial staff. No overlap whatsoever.

    They're owned by the same company, but it's like blaming Outside Xbox for something RPS wrote.
    Reply +3
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @emanuelpereira1 How are some hurtful and ill-judged comments evidence that they have slutshamed, doxxed, mocked gaming and said they would kill their children if they became gamers?

    Stop making things up just to suit your little fantasies.
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @Kzin Weird, at her Ted talk she says she's been gaming since she's a child. Even includes a photo of her playing on a SNES. It's about the 1:00 mark.

    http://youtu.be/GZAxwsg9J9Q?t=1m
    Reply +1
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @emanuelpereira1 You really want to slander the people at Gawker and Gamasutra like that?

    Also, the donations to charity were a nice PR move. But a middle finger to their critics rather than a true altruistic move.
    Reply -3
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @blarty The deletion of comments on a website and the attempted ruination of careers through the denial of funds is by no means comparible. Reply -5
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @blarty I'll happily ignore them actually. Brietbart is a right-wing paradise and home to that awful Milo person, and KotakuInAction who seek censorship through the withdrawal of ad revenue and list the charity Child's Play on their official boycott list are not much better. Reply -2
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve I'll take your word that is was a joke. That's fine. But you've got to understand that you had been very argumentative, quite abrasive and I think Retroid calling you "evasive" was quite diplomatic. Plus with a prior ban under your belt, suddenly making a comment about "the Jews" from out of nowhere looks very bad indeed.

    Nothing exists in a bubble. You can't slag Zoe Quinn off several pages and then make a racial comment and not have it taken at face value. I hope you understand.
    Reply +2
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve Oh yeah. I do remember that now.

    No apology though, that had absolutely nothing to do with you disagreeing with Anita or Zoe. You were being racist and sexist. One page back, page 87 to see the racism (which is why Retroid banned you). Then several pages prior to that to see a dollop of sexism spread out.
    Reply +3
  • MrTomFTW 18/10/2014

    @dirtysteve I did? Where was this? Reply 0
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @SpaceMonkey77 Another problem with buying games is that they'd have to wait for them to be released to the public. I understand the most page views of a review come within a short time frame of the embargo lifting, generally speaking. Reply +2
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @emanuelpereira1 Please do not insult other users. Thanks. Reply -1
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @Liquid--Leeroy
    which is inconvenient to your narrative of "anyone who disagrees with anything she says is a misogynist/rapist".
    That is something that I've never, ever said or suggested. You've created a strawman to make my position easier to attack. Poor form.
    Reply -1
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @Crea It just so happens all the sites you named are part of the gamer network. Reply -5
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @Liquid--Leeroy If by "Hmm, I kind of disagree" it means "here's your home address, I'm going to rape and murder you", then yes that does sum up the situation. Reply +7
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @zzkj Sadly "not feeding the trolls" is what they want. They want people to quietly sit by and maintain the status quo while they slap down anyone who dares to get ideas and step out of line.

    It's important people keep on speaking up against GamerGate and it's toxicity.
    Reply -5
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    GamerGate was never about ethics. Don't forget the tweet in which it was coined, which also linked to those two terrible InternetAristocrat videos:



    It's been about the silencing those speaking out against the harassment since day one. You've been had by Operation Shillgate:

    Reply -1
  • MrTomFTW 17/10/2014

    @jabberwoky I think he may have been talking to me and got a bit mixed up :) Reply 0