The Miscellaneous PC & vidya Games Thread

[Tamas]

JK Rowling pretty much made anything related to Potterverse political all on her own.

Should have known better than having an opinion.

Nobody is stopping her from having an opinion, but people can also call it out and boycott her work because it's a shitty opinion.

Ok but then say so, don't write a "review" that seems to go drastically against other feedback on the game. Say that she is a POS and anyone who spends money on the HP franchise is also a POS. That's a clear enough position, and also far quicker to convey.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

JK Rowling pretty much made anything related to Potterverse political all on her own.

Should have known better than having an opinion.

Nobody is stopping her from having an opinion, but people can also call it out and boycott her work because it's a shitty opinion.

that's their opinion, and not necessarily fact.

[garbon]

JK Rowling pretty much made anything related to Potterverse political all on her own.

Should have known better than having an opinion.

Nobody is stopping her from having an opinion, but people can also call it out and boycott her work because it's a shitty opinion.

that's their opinion, and not necessarily fact.

I think it is pretty clear that JK Rowling has some shitty opinions.

[Josquius]

Yeah... Whether Harry Potter is forever tainted and you're a scum bag for buying anything related to it... Highly debatable.
But that Rowling has some pretty offensive stupid views is fairly beyond fact.

[Grey Fox]

She doesn't only have an opinion. She actively funds anti-trans organization. By buying that game you are contributing to fund hate.

That's why you review it to make a political point.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

again, that's just an opinion.
Many of her detractors however, appear to be batshit insane and extremely hateful towards anyone (especially -in this case- fellow progressives) that doesn't follow the dogma of the day (making them heretics, and those are always fought with more fervour than unbelievers).
Also an opinion, but maybe closer to reality.

[Josquius]

When your views cross into the domain of opposing the existence of a vast group of innocent people and working to charge the law to restrict their rights then the its just an opinion defence falls down.

That there are a minority of idiots who go way too far with defending the rights of trans people doesn't change the fundamental that they deserve the right to live their lives without even their taking a shit being put into question.

[Tamas]

When your views cross into the domain of opposing the existence of a vast group of innocent people and working to charge the law to restrict their rights then the its just an opinion defence falls down.

That there are a minority of idiots who go way too far with defending the rights of trans people doesn't change the fundamental that they deserve the right to live their lives without even their taking a shit being put into question.

Yes but this topic is complicated by Rowling and others arguing on the grounds of protecting another vast group of innocent people i.e. women (or biological females if that's more precise). They may very well be wrong, but I cannot not sympathise with those women seeing men (biological or otherwise)  telling them what's in their best interest, and infringing on what they previously considered safe areas/places/concept, and not being thrilled.

[Josquius]

When your views cross into the domain of opposing the existence of a vast group of innocent people and working to charge the law to restrict their rights then the its just an opinion defence falls down.

That there are a minority of idiots who go way too far with defending the rights of trans people doesn't change the fundamental that they deserve the right to live their lives without even their taking a shit being put into question.

Yes but this topic is complicated by Rowling and others arguing on the grounds of protecting another vast group of innocent people i.e. women (or biological females if that's more precise). They may very well be wrong, but I cannot not sympathise with those women seeing men (biological or otherwise)  telling them what's in their best interest, and infringing on what they previously considered safe areas/places/concept, and not being thrilled.

I guess you meant you can sympathise at the end there?

The terf stuff is painful. So much of it is just a bad faith attempt to reframe picking on a vulnerable group to instead being the victim and on the defence.
See also how the far right are suddenly all for the rights of women or gay people when it's Muslims being against them. They've been so succesful in this though that they've managed to sway people like Rowling into backing their side.

The key thing with so much of what they come out with is simply that they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. They just echo each other in an endless loop with the origin being nonsense - trans people suddenly having access to women's shelters for instance and this being a grave threat to women... They've had this right for at least 15 years and there's been zero incidents in that time.

As to men telling them what to do... This is another area the terf front is so useful. A majority of people active in shouty online politics are men, so create a political issue anywhere then its men you'll face most likely. But needs remembering it's women too who think Rowling and her ilk are in the wrong - data consistently shows more tolerance for trans people from women than men.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Problem of course for the fanatics is that she didn't say anything that is out of line, or even radical.
Unlike what the fanatics are trying to hoist on society. And that there's anyone not towing their line makes them extremely angry and hateful.

[Josquius]

Problem of course for the fanatics is that she didn't say anything that is out of line, or even radical.
Unlike what the fanatics are trying to hoist on society. And that there's anyone not towing their line makes them extremely angry and hateful.

She started with potential foot in mouth stuff posting something that could have had an innocent explanation but which seemed to have a fair bit of the fanatics code wording in it.

In the process of trying to dig herself out of the hole she went ever more down the rabbit hole posting propeganda and revealed that oh god, she actually is one of the fanatics.

These days shes actively donating money to anti trans groups.

It's notable its not just the left wing equivalent of the fanatics who recognise she's gone rather off the rails on this stuff. Lots of people who aren't especially invested in trans issues have noted she has crossed quite a line too.

[The Minsky Moment]

Played most of the campaign tutorial of the West Front demo. Promising and may be fun but also a bit hard to see how it won't get repetitive very quickly.

General Haig said much the same thing, although a bit less fun when the brandy supply ran low.

[Barrister]

When your views cross into the domain of opposing the existence of a vast group of innocent people and working to charge the law to restrict their rights then the its just an opinion defence falls down.

I am 100% positive that JK Rowling does not oppose the existence of trans people.

She has her own views that I may agree or disagree with, but you are seriously strawmanning what her views are.

[Valmy]

Wired magazine gives Hogwarts Legacy a 1 out of 10.  Yes it mostly has to do with JK Rowling, but it quibbles with the gameplay - complaints which to me could apply to almost any computer game.

'religious' fanatics will be fanatic

Is it fanatical? I mean Rowling is a pretty weird person, deciding that oppressing people is what you want to spend your success in life on. I don't think it is fanatical or unreasonable take to think human rights are important.

I am definitely a death of the artist kind of person. Especially with literally dead artists, I never quite get that one. I have no interest in playing this game but that has nothing to do with Rowling. But I totally get people feeling differently about it. I don't agree, but I get it.

However yeah I don't see the point of reviewing something if you find it bad just because of the artist (or in the case of this game not even the artist, but owner of the intellectual property the artist is utilizing). You should refuse to review it if you feel like people shouldn't play it for that reason. Your review has no value if you have a bias like that.

Though I always found weird biases were problems in video game reviews. As a fan of RPGs and strategy games I was aware that most video game reviewers just didn't like those genres, at least back in the 1990s and early 2000s when I still read game reviews. So they would hammer games that I thought were genius, and are still regarded as classics, simply because they personally found them unfun. I mean what value does a review of a RPG from a person who just doesn't like RPGs have? Similarly here, what value does a review of a Harry Potter game have from somebody who just hates Harry Potter? That has always been a problem I think. There is just too much variety in video games to have a small-ish professional reviewer class reviewing everything.

[The Brain]

The game has Very Positive reviews on Steam. As far as it's possible to be right or wrong about these things it seems that 1/10 is likely wrong.