Page 79 of 82 FirstFirst ...
29
69
77
78
79
80
81
... LastLast
  1. #1561
    https://www.wowhead.com/news/gorge-t...updates-324531 Not sure if it's been talked about here yet... but what an absolute joke. That was a classic rant by Corpsegrinder against the alliance when the game was popping and there was still faction pride. that anyone with a functional brain and knows George.... knows that it wasn't homophobic, and it was 2007! Only people offended are shmucks with no clue about death metal. He always showed his love of the game in multiple interviews... dudes been playing and supporting the game and developers through every expac, even getting a horde tattoo on his arm lol. I hope he can remove the tattoo like they did him. Nothing suprises me with this company anymore.. Who in the the company has any credibility any more?

    WoW news these days = more reasons to play FF14.

  2. #1562
    Quote Originally Posted by GratsDing45 View Post
    https://www.wowhead.com/news/gorge-t...updates-324531 Not sure if it's been talked about here yet... but what an absolute joke. That was a classic rant by Corpsegrinder against the alliance when the game was popping and there was still faction pride. that anyone with a functional brain and knows George.... knows that it wasn't homophobic, and it was 2007! Only people offended are shmucks with no clue about death metal. He always showed his love of the game in multiple interviews... dudes been playing and supporting the game and developers through every expac, even getting a horde tattoo on his arm lol. I hope he can remove the tattoo like they did him. Nothing suprises me with this company anymore.. Who in the the company has any credibility any more?

    WoW news these days = more reasons to play FF14.
    Guys it was 2007. Come on, that was ages ago!

    Back when it was okay to say homophobic things and pretend like they’re not homophobic.

  3. #1563
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorgar Aurelian View Post
    They had no legitimate trademark when it came to the book which is why they didn’t follow through and take it to court they were just trying to bully some one else not to use the name.
    "Space Marine" is a strong part of their branding, not just in the toy/model market but also for their publishing side. There was a whole series (sort of) called Space Marine Battles published by Black Library and Space Marine was the name of the first novel set in 40k. GW have registered "Space Marine" as their trademark and as such are obligated to defend it in some way. It may well be that simply objecting to a product with "Space Marine" in the title is enough of an effort to ensure their rights are reserved.

    Like a game or a book series or even just using them for total war 3 like they did in 2?
    https://www.totalwar.com/blog/the-greenskins/
    It’s not like it’s some term they rarely use.
    They haven't filed for a trademark for "greenskin" or "green skin" and even if they had it doesn't stop someone using the phrase in a body of work.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenJesus View Post
    When the changes are so retarded and asinine its hard to believe it was because of rational decisions. So all we have to do is speculate on what actually happened or assume all the developers are SJW's that have 25 pronouns in their Twitter bio.
    So you can't imagine why anyone would object to a group of people being referred to derogatorily by their skin colour so you have to conjure an invading army of strawmen or a ridiculous application of IP law?

  4. #1564
    Quote Originally Posted by Culex View Post
    I keep hearing more and more about how they are changing things so they can virtue signal to the minority, I have never been so glad I quit this game.
    They're not even speaking on behalf of a lot of the people they claim to be supporting.

    As a gay guy myself, I'd rather not see excessive pandering and censorship to appease a vocal minority who are not even speaking on behalf of every member of the LGBT community. Or whatever the expanded name is these days - I legitimately can't keep up which is a sign in itself that it has long since been hijacked, I suppose!

  5. #1565
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Guys it was 2007. Come on, that was ages ago!

    Back when it was okay to say homophobic things and pretend like they’re not homophobic.
    Like calling a Night elf hunter that ganks you an emo cock sucker and faggot? Ever get camped over and over on a pvp server? Ever hear of nerd rage? While at the same time doing vocals for a band that writes about mutilation and rape? Wonder why he chooses Undead and Orcs over Alliance races? If you knew anything about the guy youd know he is the most lovable guy in death metal and wouldn't hurt a fly. There's a reason why they put his name as an Orc in the game.

    Did you ever hear of nerd rage? If you really think those comments in context are homophobic and George should be removed from the game... Meanwhile that racist writer for Blizzard is still in thegame. I feel sorry for you. Nice brain.
    Last edited by GratsDing45; 2021-10-18 at 11:01 PM.

  6. #1566
    Quote Originally Posted by GratsDing45 View Post
    Like calling a Night elf hunter that ganks you an emo cock sucker and faggot? Ever get camped over and over on a pvp server? Ever hear of nerd rage? While at the same time doing vocals for a band that writes about mutilation and rape? Wonder why he chooses Undead and Orcs over Alliance races? If you knew anything about the guy youd know he is the most lovable guy in death metal and wouldn't hurt a fly. There's a reason why they put his name as an Orc in the game.

    Did you ever hear of nerd rage? If you really think those comments in context are homophobic and George should be removed from the game... Meanwhile that racist writer for Blizzard is still in thegame. I feel sorry for you. Nice brain.
    Excusing something as nerd rage doesn't make it any less toxic. And just because he's a 'nice guy' doesn't excuse his behaviour.

  7. #1567
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Excusing something as nerd rage doesn't make it any less toxic. And just because he's a 'nice guy' doesn't excuse his behaviour.
    So this character insults the intelligence of everyone who disagrees that the "context" in which Fisher used said slurs somehow makes it not homophobic (and ignores the suicide-baiting altogether). But then, they turn around and call Madeleine Roux "racist" for making fun of white male entitlement (and for making fun of people who interpreted that as hatred of white men, no doubt; after all, that was also in the infamous collage), while clearly fancying themself An Intellectual™. Amazing. No blatant double standards there; no sirree!

    Anyway, for the people who still aren't getting it? He basically told every gay Horde player that their existence was comparable to making the choice to level a gnome rogue and gank questers in Nagrand. (And then, there's the suicide-baiting.) People who don't have an issue with queerness—at least on some level—tend not to use it as an insult (unless they themselves are queer and doing so ironically; but reclamation isn't relevant here). Get that through your skulls.
    Last edited by Dacia Ultan; 2021-10-19 at 12:22 AM.

  8. #1568
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    "Space Marine" is a strong part of their branding, not just in the toy/model market but also for their publishing side. There was a whole series (sort of) called Space Marine Battles published by Black Library and Space Marine was the name of the first novel set in 40k. GW have registered "Space Marine" as their trademark and as such are obligated to defend it in some way. It may well be that simply objecting to a product with "Space Marine" in the title is enough of an effort to ensure their rights are reserved.



    They haven't filed for a trademark for "greenskin" or "green skin" and even if they had it doesn't stop someone using the phrase in a body of work.

    - - - Updated - - -



    So you can't imagine why anyone would object to a group of people being referred to derogatorily by their skin colour so you have to conjure an invading army of strawmen or a ridiculous application of IP law?
    There's nothing wrong with fictional characters referring to each other in derogatory ways. The World of warcraft is based on races being racist to each other. That was basically the whole story of Mists of Pandaria and Battle for Azeroth. When races are racist against each other and wage genocidal wars its understandable that they would insult each other.

    Calling an orc green skin is bad, but actually the killing orcs is fine.

  9. #1569
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Excusing something as nerd rage doesn't make it any less toxic. And just because he's a 'nice guy' doesn't excuse his behaviour.
    It's only toxic if you have no spine, idea what real metal is and forget that you are playing an online video game called WARCRAFT, with brutal savage orcs and evil undead. Horde vs Alliance once a upon a time was a thing. You 'hated' the other faction , especially when they ganked you.
    Remember the midnight releases out side of stores? Faction pride and the love for the game was a thing , but there was no actual aggression. We were nerds.
    The only people offended were offended were a small minority of alliance players who of course, in spite had to make it an outrage because they were jealous The Chieftains band was a celebration of the Horde. That small minority is now the WoW dev team and they want the game to be faction less and push Alliance and Horde working together because their racials suck and hate being forced to play Horde. And the game sucks now so the only thing Blizzard knows how to do is censor/remove things from a time when the game was still fun.

    So basically the Chieftains are gone, faction means nothing, and the game is being run by a bunch of incompetent whiny former Alliance players advocating for Social Justice. And they are trying to appeal to people who don't even play the game, and don't even know what Warcraft is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    So this character insults the intelligence of everyone who disagrees that the "context" in which Fisher used said slurs somehow makes it not homophobic (and ignores the suicide-baiting altogether). But then, they turn around and call Madeleine Roux "racist" for making fun of white male entitlement (and for making fun of people who interpreted that as hatred of white men, no doubt; after all, that was also in the infamous collage), while clearly fancying themself An Intellectual™. Amazing. No blatant double standards there; no sirree!

    Anyway, for the people who still aren't getting it? He basically told every gay Horde player that their existence was comparable to making the choice to level a gnome rogue and gank questers in Nagrand. (And then, there's the suicide-baiting.) People who don't have an issue with queerness—at least on some level—tend not to use it as an insult (unless they themselves are queer and doing so ironically; but reclamation isn't relevant here). Get that through your skulls.
    Wow, it's like reading a #cancelDaveCappelle tweet.

    Who is Blizzard making this game for? Do they even know it's called Warcraft and the racism and war in this game?

    Why can't they leave it alone and make a new game and universe based on their values and bubble world?
    Last edited by GratsDing45; 2021-10-19 at 12:52 AM.

  10. #1570
    Really? Y'all are still trying to spin the backlash against Fisher's outburst as being about in-game faction bullshit, rather than the slurs and suicide-baiting? At this point: y'all are clearly just accepting whatever narrative you choose to believe as gospel truth, and the facts of the matter be damned; real galaxy brain logic you've got going on there.

  11. #1571
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrst View Post
    Excusing something as nerd rage doesn't make it any less toxic. And just because he's a 'nice guy' doesn't excuse his behaviour.
    It's funny, because in my experience as a gay guy the least likely people to rush to my defence when it matters are those overly concerned with policing language...whereas those who swear like sailors and embrace crude humour are in actuality much more likely to offer up meaningful assistance.

    It's almost as if the people policing such things are, in fact, out of touch individuals paid far too much and living in comfort whereas those they criticise are, often, people who live lives that make them a little rougher around the edges than those seeking to 'police' them.

  12. #1572
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeham View Post
    It's funny, because in my experience as a gay guy the least likely people to rush to my defence when it matters are those overly concerned with policing language...whereas those who swear like sailors and embrace crude humour are in actuality much more likely to offer up meaningful assistance.

    It's almost as if the people policing such things are, in fact, out of touch individuals paid far too much and living in comfort whereas those they criticise are, often, people who live lives that make them a little rougher around the edges than those seeking to 'police' them.
    I mean, I'm not even sure where to start on your false equivalences and jumps to conclusions here, but go off or whatever.

  13. #1573
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    I mean, I'm not even sure where to start on your false equivalences and jumps to conclusions here, but go off or whatever.
    I wouldn't expect a different take from someone who clearly has a perpetual chip atop their shoulder. Let's not beat around the bush - that seems to be the common thread when it comes to most people cheering on censorship and a lack of nuance when it comes to volatile outbursts.

    There's also a pretty clear trend throughout history showing that when a society begins to concern itself overmuch with 'correcting' speech it never leads anywhere pleasant. Because it never stops at 'hate speech', nor is the definition ever applied fairly across the board. Furthermore, the definition changes as needed to suit a particular agenda at any given time.

    But, hey, that's just my two penny's worth. No matter how much Blizzard destroy WoW with their bizarre actions of late, I'll always have the fond memories of a more easy going and pleasant era when more gamers had some grit and backbone to them.

  14. #1574
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    Really? Y'all are still trying to spin the backlash against Fisher's outburst as being about in-game faction bullshit, rather than the slurs and suicide-baiting? At this point: y'all are clearly just accepting whatever narrative you choose to believe as gospel truth, and the facts of the matter be damned.

    The fact that they are changing the game and making it for people who spend more time outraging and posting on sites like this and twitter? I accept that as fact and it is depressing , because I love the game.

    Blizzard is best for accommodating the lowest common denominator. Defending Blizzard changing things because of virtue signalling is pretty low. The game and company is in a horrible state, and it has nothing to do with George Corpsegrinder calling Alliance emo cocksuckers back in 2007.

  15. #1575
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeham View Post
    I wouldn't expect a different take from someone who clearly has a perpetual chip atop their shoulder.
    Opening with an ad hominem is always a great start.

    Let's not beat around the bush - that seems to be the common thread when it comes to most people cheering on censorship and a lack of nuance when it comes to volatile outbursts.
    "Cheering" and "censorship," you say? Great joke...oh, wait; it's even funnier if you were actually serious. (And, believe it or not: the fact that it was a "volatile outburst" is not a defense.)

    There's also a pretty clear trend throughout history showing that when a society begins to concern itself overmuch with 'correcting' speech it never leads anywhere pleasant. Because it never stops at 'hate speech', nor is the definition ever applied fairly across the board. Furthermore, the definition changes as needed to suit a particular agenda at any given time.
    Slippery slope fallacy. And everything defined as "hate speech" would fall under harassment, threats, and defamation—none of which are protected—to begin with.

    But, hey, that's just my two penny's worth. No matter how much Blizzard destroy WoW with their bizarre actions of late, I'll always have the fond memories of a more easy going and pleasant era when more gamers had some grit and backbone to them.
    Consider this: it has precisely fuck-all to do with "grit and backbone," no matter how much that notion may comfort you. If anything: it takes more "grit and backbone" to risk getting mocked for challenging a fucked-up status quo.
    Last edited by Dacia Ultan; 2021-10-19 at 02:27 AM.

  16. #1576
    Bloodsail Admiral
    3+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    1,074
    I think a lot of people (and some intentionally) missed the cause of these changes. These changes are being put in place because Blizzard is under Federal investigation for widespread sexual harassment charges. So of course their response is to remove anything in-game that might reflect supporting that behavior as a knee-jerk reaction. They are not removing them coincidentally right now in the middle of that investigation due to 'cancel culture' complaining about them, or because people are picketing in from of the Blizzard HQ due about flirts and jokes, despite what some have tried to paint it as. Most of them have been in-game for many years and no one in the past or recently has complained. It's simply because they are trying to limit criminal and civil liability.

    This is often the reason complaints about cancel culture don't hold much water, since they usually try to ignore or downplay from the act that was done in the first place to cause the 'cancelling'. Instead of taking responsibility for bad behavior, they try to shift the blame to those pointing out on what they did and pretend they are overreacting.

  17. #1577
    It isn't unreasonable in the eyes of many to think that it's overkill for someone to be punished for a comment made over a decade ago. I'm pretty sure you can dig up dirt on pretty much anyone if you look hard enough, though in my view all such comments merit is at best an apology.

    What many seem to desire is vengeance, though. Then there's those who stand to profit by being perpetually offended and finding things to work themselves up into a frenzy over.

    At any rate, in itself these changes are not a big deal. Anyone who truly cared ditched WoW a while back and voted with their wallets to put their money where their mouths supposedly are. The decline has been in motion for quite some time, arguably.

  18. #1578
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeham View Post
    No matter how much Blizzard destroy WoW with their bizarre actions of late, I'll always have the fond memories of a more easy going and pleasant era when more gamers had some grit and backbone to them.
    The good 'ol days when you could get into voice chat and spew a nonstop stream of gamer words and it just meant you had a backbone.

    ...of all the things to romanticize.

  19. #1579
    Quote Originally Posted by Biglog View Post
    I think a lot of people (and some intentionally) missed the cause of these changes. These changes are being put in place because Blizzard is under Federal investigation for widespread sexual harassment charges. So of course their response is to remove anything in-game that might reflect supporting that behavior as a knee-jerk reaction. They are not removing them coincidentally right now in the middle of that investigation due to 'cancel culture' complaining about them, or because people are picketing in from of the Blizzard HQ due about flirts and jokes, despite what some have tried to paint it as. Most of them have been in-game for many years and no one in the past or recently has complained. It's simply because they are trying to limit criminal and civil liability.
    My thought was that some of the items may have been removed for that reason. That said: I have heard tell that some things were removed because the devs didn't like them. However: the context of that was actually the devs talking about the addition of incubi; and that story broke before lines started getting removed or changed.

    It was still pretty damn stupid to remove fart jokes and "LOL, I'm a bull in leather." And Gerald Abernathy is never not going to be creepy. Again: I suspect some of the lines may have been removed because someone decided they were dated or just lame.

    This is often the reason complaints about cancel culture don't hold much water, since they usually try to ignore or downplay from the act that was done in the first place to cause the 'cancelling'. Instead of taking responsibility for bad behavior, they try to shift the blame to those pointing out on what they did and pretend they are overreacting.
    Right; the whole narrative in which the removal of a sketchy thing (or the presence of something that offends reactionaries) is somehow "political," but the presence of the sketchy thing in the first place (or something being removed over reactionary outrage) is somehow not. Somehow: it always slips people's notice what a glaring double standard that is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Relapses View Post
    The good 'ol days when you could get into voice chat and spew a nonstop stream of gamer words and it just meant you had a backbone.

    ...of all the things to romanticize.
    There's also the whole matter of spinning complacency as "grit and backbone," spinning being uncompromising on certain matters as weakness, and how little sense that continues to make.
    Last edited by Dacia Ultan; 2021-10-19 at 01:57 AM.

  20. #1580
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    Right; the whole narrative in which the removal of a sketchy thing (or the presence of something that offends reactionaries) is somehow "political," but the presence of the sketchy thing in the first place (or something being removed over reactionary outrage) is somehow not. Somehow: it always slips people's notice what a glaring double standard that is.
    Well since Fisher is the vocalist for Cannibal Corpse, which if pick apart their lyrics and it would hold more water against removing his name than what he said in the interview..
    Putting his name in a game based around War and dark fantasy... People with common sense and can take a joke didn't really see much sketchy-ness.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •