1. #1601
    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.

  2. #1602
    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.

  3. #1603
    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.

  4. #1604
    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.

  5. #1605
    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.

  6. #1606
    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.

  7. #1607
    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.

  8. #1608
    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.

  9. #1609
    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.

  10. #1610
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    443
    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.

  11. #1611
    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.

  12. #1612
    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.
    New BiS for 9.1!

    [ twitch ][ Retired Semi-retired as of 2018 ] [ The Official MMO-Champion Bingo Card. ] [ WoW's Community in 2021, illustrated ]
    [ That time I predicted the future...twice. ] [ How do you know if somebody posting on a WoW forum is a FFXIV player? Don't worry, they'll tell you. ]

  13. #1613
    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.

  14. #1614
    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.

  15. #1615
    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.
    They're just words at the end of the day. People say all sorts of dumb things during their lives and particularly when experiencing stress or strong emotions.

    I don't believe in punishing people and condemning them to misery over isolated incidents.

    Some people get extremely offended by such words, certainly. Yet as a gay guy myself if someone insulted me based on my sexuality and it wasn't explicitly targeted in such a manner I'd just shrug and move on with my life.

    Most of this recent trend of people being offended is coming from grifters and narcissists who stand to profit, at any rate. Either financially or through being seen as virtuous in the eyes of their peers...or both.

    History works in cycles, at any rate. I just hope that the pendulum doesn't swing too far in the opposite direction once the masses tire of supporting this sort of nonsense. I believe most people just want to get on with their lives without other people serving as curtain twitchers in an effort to find something to get others in trouble over.

  16. #1616
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeham View Post
    I don't believe in punishing people and condemning them to misery over isolated incidents.
    Good thing only someone out-of-touch and living in comfort, with no grit or backbone, would consider that to be happening here.

  17. #1617
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    Good thing only someone very sheltered, with no grit or backbone, would consider that to be happening here.
    That doesn't even make sense in the context of what I said. Nice try, though!

  18. #1618
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    Good thing only someone very sheltered, with no grit or backbone, would consider that to be happening here.
    the drama some people experience over a few words is something to behold.

  19. #1619
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacia Ultan View Post
    Good thing only someone out-of-touch and living in comfort, with no grit or backbone, would consider that to be happening here.
    Well considering George is a massive WoW fan boy, getting a horde tattoo, always rocking Warcraft 3 shirts, promoting shadowlands on CC's last album promo, probably already struggling to continue playing and supporting the game after the whole lawsuit. Removal of his name in game he loves because of some comments he made in 2007... I'd imagine anyone would be miserable to a degree. I think most WoW players are miserable. It seems that way anyway compared to FF14
    Last edited by GratsDing45; 2021-10-19 at 02:06 AM.

  20. #1620
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeham View Post
    That doesn't even make sense in the context of what I said. Nice try, though!
    Actually, it does. Only an incredibly soft, oversensitive person would seriously consider anyone to have been "punished" or "condemned to misery" by these changes.

Posting Permissions

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