An unexpectedly candid response as far as these things go… though I guess that’s just how Phil Spencer usually is. I appreciate the deliberate choice to avoid double-speak even though he’s basically blanket declining to discuss the topic.
A stand-up move from Re-Logic. You love to see it when the people at the helm of a lucrative publisher are industry stakeholders rather than the all-too-common quarterly cash extractor types[^1].
[^1]: Yes, I am all too aware that such seemingly altruistic gestures can be calculated PR moves in disguise. I certainly understand that this move will earn them (as a publisher) brownie points with various indie studios who may just so happen to be seeking publisher funding in the wake of an expensive mid-project engine switch. Such is the way of the world; sometimes a move can be simultaneously altruistic and good business.
You love to see it. Putting their money into these open source engines will hopefully give those devs a better work-life balance and enable them to do even greater things. 🤘
Steam controller is in its own league, but hell, even the PS and Nintendo controllers have supported gyro control through steam for quite awhile. The Xbox controller is finally advancing past 2003, and into the modern era.
I’m more talking about API level. There isn’t a proper standard operating-system-level interface in Windows for gyro, so 3rd party controllers don’t have it, so it’s not really a thing in Windows/Xbox-first games.
This will raise the floor so every gamepad will be expected to have gyro.
I hope it actually has gyros, so XBOX can finally get gyro aim. I don’t play on XBOX, but maybe support for that in XBOX controllers would make devs more inclined to support it. But the document only mentions an accelerometer.
Also, what’s up with controllers dropping face button colors? The PS5 did the same thing.
Also, what’s up with controllers dropping face button colors? The PS5 did the same thing.
From an aesthetic standpoint it just looks better^1 , and by now gaming consoles are so Mainstream that the additional accessibility the colors offer is not a good enough reason to keep them anymore.
^1 subjective, of course, but if you look at modern, big corporate design a lot of it is trending towards minimalism, very little use of color, etc.
There’s very little constructive discussion to be had about this, if any.
Civility is one thing, but there’s not really anything to debate here. What complexities?
The mod’s only function was to hide an options menu. Its only purpose is to hide the fact that other people might wanna choose something else than the default, it literally did nothing else.
It didn’t add any option.
If it added any option at all, like to replace pronouns in dialogues with your character’s name or anything that’d be something else but it’s not.
I doubt that mod was made in good faith, but I don’t really care either way to be honest.
I’m not triggered by that mod’s existence, nor by its removal because it’s all mostly outage bait.
That other poster knew that was going to be a dumpster fire before they hit the button to post.
I honestly doubt this one is meant to do any better.
I understand your perspective on the mod and its likely intent. My original aim was not to discuss the mod per se, but to explore how moderation decisions are made. If we can’t have an open debate, it becomes difficult to understand where we draw the line on what is or isn’t acceptable content.
Shouldn’t users have the liberty to tailor their gaming experiences according to their personal preferences, especially in a game known for its moddability? It’s also important to note that not everyone who might use such a mod is necessarily doing so with the intent of exclusion.
“Why should it be removed?”
Because it hurts real people.
“But shouldn’t people be able to modify the game as they want?”
Sure, they can do it themselves, but no one has to host content that causes real-world harm.
“But why draw the line at this mod?”
See answer 1.
Ya know, I love it when people like you use “civil discussion” as a mask, because it’s always the most transparent thing ever. Your real goals are always on your sleeve, but you just keep pushing the same things over and over again so that, in the end, you can say “Look, I was civil, they weren’t!”
Do you know what gives you away? It’s the way no answer you ever receive is satisfactory. It’s never enough. And it’s usually cyclical, too, which is exactly the behavior you’ve displayed here.
First, the mod in question is not adding a new feature to the game but removing an existing one, a fundamental difference when discussing user agency in customization. If someone finds this feature unappealing or unnecessary, they might opt for its removal via the mod, thus tailoring the game to their preferences. This is in the spirit of game moddability, which celebrates personalization.
Second, the concept that ‘no answer I ever receive is satisfactory’ misconstrues the purpose of engaging in discourse. Discussion is not a box to be checked off but a mechanism for deeper understanding. If the answers received were universally satisfactory, the discourse would be stagnant, wouldn’t it?
Lastly, if a mod does not align with one’s values, the solution is straightforward: do not download it. The presence of such a mod doesn’t mandate its use. Assigning a single motive to all users of a mod is not just an oversimplification but also an assumption that does not stand up to scrutiny. Therefore, as we engage in this dialogue, let’s not make broad generalizations but aim for a nuanced understanding.
Claim whatever motivations you want, but reading through this series of comments does a great job of showing everyone your real motivation. You are not here for rational discussion of moderation policy. Your trying to argue that bigoted materials should be allowed.
I can’t stop looking at this train wreck. But ima try.
Sure, buying Nintendo would be a win for Microsoft, but Nintendo would gain absolutely nothing from the deal. Sure, there are people like myself who loudly and rightfully complain about Nintendo's business practices, but at the end of the day, it took until THIS year for Playstation 5 to finally outsell them in a single year, and they're not even CLOSE to matching total unit sales, and Xbox is doing worse than THAT. Add to that Nintendo's software attach rate, and as much as I don't like HOW they do their business, they're WILDLY successful at it and making more money as a function of their costs than anyone else in the industry, so they can't be faulted for continuing to do what is working.
I honestly don't know what Phil Spencer thinks would be different than the previous meeting in another sales proposal today, especially given Microsoft's INCREDIBLY weakened industry market position compared to Nintendo's. Microsoft is only able to approach the idea from a position of power based on its market capitalization funded by its other businesses - in the gaming industry, Nintendo simply occupies the more advantageous market position.
There cannot and should not be balanced and open discussion on this issue. You cannot “polite” your way into finding a way to say that non-binary people are not legitimate.
This is paradox-of-tolerance stuff. Maintaining an inclusive community requires being intolerant of intolerance.
The existence of non-binary people does not hurt you.
Insisting on finding ways to deny that they exist hurts them.
While the concerns you’ve raised resonate with many, it’s worth remembering JFK’s words, ‘Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.’ As a society, we must consider the nuance that exists in any debate, even one as sensitive as this. Open discussion should serve as a mechanism to understand what defines intolerance and how to appropriately combat it, rather than shutting down dialogue altogether.
You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nr, nr, nr.” By 1968 you can’t say “nr”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nr, nr.”
Republican strategist Lee Atwater.
Atwater’s point here is that dogwhistles work, and they’ve been a core strategy of regressive bigots for decades.
Today’s hateful bigots understand that they can’t openly say “I want to legislate trans people out of existence, even if that means they all die.” So they engage in layers of abstraction, and wrap their abstractions up in leftist talking points. They claim to be defenders of “free speech” even as they support laws that empty out libraries of books, remove shows from television or make discussion of anything LGBTQ related impossible online.
So to you, the innocent rube, removing a pronoun selection from a game might not sound like an attack on trans people, but it very much is. The mod was a rallying cry, a call to fellow bigots to express themselves while pointedly saying to every trans person watching “You are not safe. We are here, we hate you, and we want to erase your existence.”
The existence of the pronoun selector impacted them in absolutely no way, shape, or form. There was nothing to be gained from its removal other than the statement it made, the proud declaration of their hatred encoded in a language of abstraction that made it visible only to their allies and their targets.
And the fact that they can get away with this; the fact that they can openly torment their chosen victims while the average idiot pats them on the head and calls them a “victim of censorship”… That’s their favourite part.
I understand the concept of dog whistles and the historical usage of coded language to advance certain agendas. My primary concern here is not the mod itself, but rather how moderation decisions are made and the criteria used. If we can’t openly discuss these topics, it’s hard to determine what is or isn’t acceptable. I’m not advocating for intolerance; I’m advocating for clarity in community guidelines.
Just leaves the other half of the game to be fixed. I swear I gave it another go a month ago, and it was as buggy as the first time I played it. Just with new bugs, this time around.
I never suffered from the game-stopping bugs others had, but IMO the other half of the game that needs fixed is the storyline itself. The character’s storyline itself is so linear that nothing you really do makes a difference, your background is just reduced to a set of extra dialogue choices. It’s all just window dressing over a very on-rails game. All they needed to do was just copy GTA V more and it’d be an improvement over this game.
games
Gorące
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.