The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

Fana: "I mean the same writers will sometimes tell you that they have to write fluff pieces for games they don't like more or less for payola, if we take them at their word there then we can just assume any competent writer can write appropriate accolades and praise for nearly anything within reason."

Oh, no doubt. I'm sure journalists have to write about stuff they don't give a shit about all the time. But you think Polygon got their SJW cabal to decide what their Game of the Year should be, then got some disinterested schmuck to make up a reason why? I hope you understand why that's ridiculous.

Fana: "no i'm just demonstrating that they can write positively about anything, just an example of skill that analyzing an article is a waste of time on some level. why they chose gone home for game of the year probably has more to do with an ideology that's out of touch with the general gaming base than anything."

And your "probably" probably has more to do with your confirmation bias than anything else.

Gone Home got plenty of positive reviews, and those reviews are not just numbers on a scale. They all explain, in detail, what the reviewer liked about the game and why it was so highly regarded. You're suggesting that, even though these reviews make perfect sense, don't misrepresent the game in any way, and mirror the opinions of non-politically-minded gamers, that they are lying because of an ideology you assume the reviewers have... because reasons. You can't make this stuff up.

Well, Fana, I actually did provide evidence. Remember that long, long list of quotes from Gone Home user reviews? The list that shows that the main reason it had so many user reviews written about it at all was because a bunch of anti-SJWs looking for a fight decided to politicize the good reviews it got? You, on the other hand, have nothing but your "feels" telling you that the many, many legitimate revewers were overly generous with their praise because of an ideology that makes no appearance in the reviews themselves.

Fana "you just grabbed random quotes from people who obviously don't like the game and summed them all up as rabid anti-sjw. what the fucking retard is wrong with you, your list is as inconsistent as you are."

Ha ha Jesus Christ.
You've got to be kidding me here, right?

I have shown you that these reviews are not even about the game, but a reaction to the positive reception the game received, and that they wouldn't even EXIST if it wasn't for the offense taken that such a game was received so positively. FFS, an unconventional, low-budget game with limited appeal got 675 user reviews written about it. Spec Ops: The Line, a big-budget, polished, deep and intelligent game that came out a year before got only 239 user reviews, despite being available on more platforms and even being given away for free to thousands of gamers. Why do you think this is, Fana? It's because people were actually ANGRY that an indie game with no action that featured a gay-centric plot got lots of praise. They saw this as a personal affront, as proof that SJWs were infiltrating their precious hobby and they would not stand for it, so they wrote their own negative reviews in droves to battle this "injustice". It would not surprise me one bit if most of those reviewers haven't even played the game (there are strong hints of this, such as the often-repeated tidbit that the game can be beat in under a minute, which is a completely irrelevant jab that has nothing to do with the quality of the game).

But, as has happened at least twice before, I expect you to grasp at straws until you find something you THINK counters what I said, then when I show you how you are objectively wrong about that you will simply pretend that never happened. Or are you ready to admit you were wrong about taxi drivers in GTA and Boxxy's videos?

Lurkin McDirkin: "Hey Tanoomba,
does it ever wear on you that 100% of people who encounter you on this forum think you are completely wrong and insane? I wonder why you continue to fight what you obviously consider to be the good fight while everyone around you thinks you are (at least) partially insane? "

Doesn't wear on me in the least, obviously.



Fana: "not with the ones I picked out that you quoted, you just lumped a bunch of quotes together and called them all sexist, I mean you can see that you did that right? "

I guess you didn't notice that ALL of the snippets you quoted referenced the positive reviews the game got. The point of a review is to tell you about the game, not to say "OMG I can't believe other reviewers said X!" People are supposed to write reviews to give you their opinion, not to complain about other people's opinions. THAT'S what makes it clear those reviews are simply an angry rebuttal from people looking for a fight, not an honest reaction to a video game.

I mean, come on. The cat was out of the bag pretty early on for Gone Home. The Steam page makes it very clear what kind of game it is, as do all the reviews written about it. While it's likely some people didn't pay attention to what they were buying and got buyer's remorse, there is simply no reason for so many more gamers to have purchased Gone Home than Spec Ops (which, again, was given away for free to PS+ members), knowing damn well what kind of game it is. FFS, I really like Gone Home, but I got it in a bundle I probably payed less than 2$ for and there's NO WAY I would consider spending 20 bucks for it. It's the "controversy" that drove those user reviews and nothing more.

So... not ready to admit you were wrong about that other stuff yet? That's OK, I'll ask you again the next time you go on one of your wild goose chases. I'm a patient guy.

Khorum: "but both Nungesser and Mattress Girl admit they had consensual sex AFTER that incident anyway"

Can anyone back this up with something? I'm coming up short.




Gavinmad: "If you continually text the person after the alleged rape talking about how you can't wait to have sex again, you weren't raped. How is this difficult to grasp? "

That isn't even remotely a factual statement.

(about what happened, at least)

http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/05/yes-emma-sulkowicz-appeared-in-a-pornogr

Pretty reasonable look at the current situation.

Best line: "Both critics and supporters of Sulkowicz will probably try to read something into her decision to make this film, and maybe that's exactly what she wants."