Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7824015" data-attributes="member: 4937">Since no one has been more critical than me, I feel you are owed an explanation.First of all, I think these are important topics, but that your journalistic style while appropriate in some contexts does you no favor in this case. The distance that it puts you from the topic is off-putting given the relative informality of the setting.  Secondly, I don't think anyone* wanted to discuss the topics, with the possible exception of myself. You were derailed as soon as you brought 'Consent in Gaming' into the topic, complicating what would have already been a complex discussion. I think you would have been better off sticking to what is (IMO) being unfortunately labeled as "bleed" and not complicating the topic with issues of "consent" that are not closely related, much less referring to the "Consent in Gaming" document.No it isn't. At the risk of being that guy shaking the cane going, "You kids get off my lawn", the trouble with young gamers is that they really lack perspective. The level of immersion I was putting into games in the early 90's back when I had time for it because I didn't have a family, a career, a spouse, and other adult responsibilities makes what I do now seem like kid's stuff. And there is nothing new under the sun here. This generation didn't invent the LARP or the dramatic RPG. I know for a fact that the same sort of stuff existed as far back as at least 1983 when I was too young to experience it, and that this isn't the first generation with black gamers, or female gamers, or gamers with diverse sexual habits. We got there a good 30 years before you.There is nothing new about "bleed". I wrote a paper on the topic for my Communication class in college. I didn't call it "bleed" then, and I don't think I've kept that paper through all the moves, but this isn't a new topic or a new topic of concern. Again, I know for a fact it goes back to at least 1983, and I remember talking about this with people and them thinking that I was suggesting, by suggesting that it was possible for gaming to be unhealthy, that I was suggesting it was unhealthy and I was some sort of B.A.D.D. actor.Again, we weren't all just doing glorified war gaming 30 or 40 years ago, so don't try to tell me that the kids are experiencing things differently than the established players.This thread has nothing to do with what I think of "bleed" because no one has been willing to discuss it.   I have 4000 words of a partial essay sitting on my home computer as to what I do actually think of "bleed", and maybe in between all my other work and writing I'll finish that and start what I hope won't be as dysfunctional of a thread as this one by starting in a much less provocative place than you did.This isn't a change.*And by 'anyone' I mean the people complaining about 'sea lions' and that the people who disagreed with them didn't really want to have a discussion were the ones that least wanted to have a discussion, because by 'discussion' they meant 'I only want to hear from people who affirm and validate what I've already chosen to believe'.</blockquote>

Verification