Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tiruin]

The researches provided are limited in that they don't define the population or gender as a whole. It's even explicitly stated in the 'research' itself that it isn't to be used as an accurate cover in general x_x

How would you model it, then? Certainly in the Wild West fiction Rimworld draws much of its inspiration from, relationships are usually initiated by the men. For what it's worth, I don't think the exact numbers really matter -- I think it's more important that the numbers feel believable, and in that regard, I think Rimworld models things quite well (admittedly as a cis/hetero white male in a Western country).

Generally just by snipping part of the code so that it's neutral. I've nothing against the code despite what's written in the article because it's malleable and able to be changed and it's more like a skeleton construct here with culture and stuff, so less or no fault at all unless the developer really states it that way [I'd be disappointed in the tiniest bit though]. (Wherein western usually means 'countries to the west of the Meridian, as far as I understand it, it's also VERY different despite the general idea being 'from America or such')

So...it's more like 'added research can help, especially social research and such '. Generally just making the code being neutral at the moment until more time can be put to it. Yeah it's believable, but there is the note of an international audience so...it'll feel very off when those numbers are presented in that way (although the article is lacking in its openness), although it is quite minor, along with that it's sensationalized by the article. >.<

Right now, I don't mind it because it was never said to be as is. It's like judging the developer because of what he researched and 'oh my goodness whyyyy'.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Just read that article, I literally didn't know people got TRIGGERED so easily. Why is this even a big deal? Big Pharma Patriarchy crashing this game's Feminist Niche Market party?

[Chiefwaffles]

Ooh boy.
Here comes le ebil feminists and sjws
responsible for all things bad and awful.


The article is fairly dumb, sure, but for the love of god is the "EVIL SJWS OUT TO GET MEEEEE!!!!!" narrative tiring.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

I think it's more about how RPS thinks yellow journalism is okay.

... Well it should be anyways.

[Scripten]

Ooh boy.
Here comes le ebil feminists and sjws
responsible for all things bad and awful.


The article is fairly dumb, sure, but for the love of god is the "EVIL SJWS OUT TO GET MEEEEE!!!!!" narrative tiring.

Pretty much this. Anyone who's followed TS on Twitter pretty much knows the kind of views he's on about. This isn't exactly libelous and, frankly, the article itself was hardly combative.

Honestly not much different from Scott Adams' "demonization", which mostly boils down to hotlinking his own blog.

[Yoink]

The article is fairly dumb, sure, but for the love of god is the "EVIL SJWS OUT TO GET MEEEEE!!!!!" narrative tiring.

Erm. Not nearly as tiring as the narratives the people in question actually do plaster across all forms of media available to them on a regular basis.

Honestly not much different from Scott Adams' "demonization", which mostly boils down to hotlinking his own blog.

Who is that? Are they related to videogames, or is this a more general comparison to a politician or some such?

[Scripten]

Honestly not much different from Scott Adams' "demonization", which mostly boils down to hotlinking his own blog.

Who is that? Are they related to videogames, or is this a more general comparison to a politician or some such?

Ah, sorry. Scott Adams is the creator of Dilbert. Fashions himself to be intellectual. Doesn't play the part very well.

[Yoink]

Well he does look rather goofy judging by the first photos that pop up upon Google searching for him...
But I won't judge him purely by his overbite. Poor guy.

[IronyOwl]

and, frankly, the article itself was hardly combative.

Oh come on. It's clickbait right from the title, and by paragraph three explains that "it’s not really their fault – Rob and Boots can’t stop hitting on her because they’re men, and because she’s just so gosh-darned pretty." You could make the argument that once it gets rolling the actual data portion is purely informative, but even that's a stretch and there's a pretty beefy end section vaguely stating how problematic this thing is without having the stones to explain what's wrong with it.

The only reason this article isn't "combative" is because it's too sniveling to say anything outright or back itself up.

[Capntastic]

The reason the article blew up is because of the dev's reaction to the relationship modelling being critiqued, not because of the relationship modelling on its own.

[sluissa]

Definitely an aggressive click-bait article. Dev's reaction, while slightly short tempered to begin with was very reasonable and he did a good job of explaining his position and what went wrong with the journalism process there.

Very disappointing RPS went back to this sort of behavior after they'd seemed to have somewhat learned their lesson over the last year or so. Guess not.

[Scripten]

and, frankly, the article itself was hardly combative.

Oh come on. It's clickbait right from the title, and by paragraph three explains that "it’s not really their fault – Rob and Boots can’t stop hitting on her because they’re men, and because she’s just so gosh-darned pretty." You could make the argument that once it gets rolling the actual data portion is purely informative, but even that's a stretch and there's a pretty beefy end section vaguely stating how problematic this thing is without having the stones to explain what's wrong with it.

The game literally programs men and women into different roles.

The only reason this article isn't "combative" is because it's too sniveling to say anything outright or back itself up.

The author of the article listed code from the game. You can't really get much more "backed up" than that. But let's face it, you're not mad about the tone of the article. You're mad because you disagree with it.

[Capntastic]

I sincerely don't see what's click-bait about "the game models the behavior of attraction in some specifically bad ways, maybe that should be addressed"

edit: And, again, the reason most people I know are talking about the article is because the dev proclaiming full on nonsense like that bisexual guys don't exist in real life.

[thvaz]

The reason the article blew up is because of the dev's reaction to the relationship modelling being critiqued, not because of the relationship modelling on its own.

Well, not really. It was pretty flame-y in the comments before he posted. And he was not reacting against the model being criticized, but against the denying of not having his words edited in a possible interview, that Graham (from RPS) understood as him asking for "editorial" control of the article.

Come on - it is obvious that interviews have to be edited someway or another - but this doesn't mean you should trust the journalist to edit in a way it won't change the meaning of your word or taking them out of context. Asking for a final word on how your interview (not the entire article) is going to be presented is just common sense, given the sensitive subject.

[Malus]

The game literally programs men and women into different roles.

Backed up by data. What's the issue?

edit: And, again, the reason most people I know are talking about the article is because the dev proclaiming full on nonsense like that bisexual guys don't exist in real life.

He never said that. He actually said all of the "bisexual" guys he knows personally later came out as gay, but he's sure bisexual men exist. Maybe stop misrepresenting what he's saying, yeah?