Conference Call

GWJ Conference Call Episode 442

Bloodborne, Pillars of Eternity, Orbital Gear, Games That Make us Feel Foolish, Special Guest Jeff Green!, Your Emails and More!

This week Shawn, Elysium and Julian are joined by Jeff Green to talk about games making us feel foolish.

To contact us, email [email protected]! Send us your thoughts on the show, pressing issues you want to talk about or whatever else is on your mind. You can even send a 30 second audio question or comment (MP3 format please) if you're so inclined.

Fish Tuxedo

Thread of The Week

Chairman_Mao's Timestamps

  • Subscribe with iTunes
  • Subscribe with RSS
  • Subscribe with Yahoo!
Download the official apps
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android

Show credits

Music credits: 

Intro/Outtro Music - Ian Dorsch, Willowtree Audioworks

No Regard - Echoside - http://echosidetracks.bandcamp.com/ - 50:50

Squeaky Clean - Echoside - http://echosidetracks.bandcamp.com/ - 1:02:14

Comments

IMAGE(http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/53fb613aecad04372cd26fa8/duck-hunt.gif)

The people demand a 3 hour spoiler section for Bloodborne!

These made my day.

"I'm not dead!"
"Yep, I'm dead."

And the comments are great, too.

"This is an ambitious project."

And i post this with only love, i am slow and old, and get trashed at this game.

Tanglebones wrote:

IMAGE(http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/53fb613aecad04372cd26fa8/duck-hunt.gif)

I've spent all day thinking of another gaming instance that made me feel like an idiot and yet I cannot think of anything better than this.

Man, I felt Elysium's 'could you?' when Certis said they could go on forever about Bloodborne. You guys did make it seem appealing, but I know I will never play it, or its predecessors.

Julian mentioned Adam Baldwin in Infinite Crisis. IC uses the same voice actors from the various DC tv series, and unfortunately Baldwin is the voice of Green Lantern and he's one of the tutorial guides, so he's very prevalent in the new player experience. It's very aggravating, but I can't hold it against the game or Turbine.

Incidentally, playing a bit of IC lately and I'm having fun, despite sucking. I think I may like it more than HOTS.

Love hearing the love for Pillars of Eternity. It's an amazing thing. The rare amount of time and work and detail and story devoted to it cannot be praised enough. Y'all get it.

Always great hearing Jeff Green. I wish you could sign him to a 10 year 10 million-a-year podcasting contract, like our American baseball. Bloodborne is specifically designed for fast players, which makes me worry -- I remember him saying in Darks Souls streams that it's basically a strategy game, slow enough to persist through, which this one is not. Bloodborne is very fast twitch muscle fiber. Definitely the hardest in the series and his hardest challenge yet. YOU CAN DO IT

Not sure it's what you guys meant, but I spent about five or six minutes trying to figure out why or how I was supposed to pass by a crumbling floor without the Speed Booster in Super Metroid before remembering the game had a separate dash button.

My wife gave me permission to share this one:

My wife loved Castlevania, but she got stuck in a level. Couldn't figure out what to do next.

She and her brother convinced her mother to let her call the 900 number tip line. They called, told the guy what level they were on and he said: "Okay, so start by walking to the left..."

The left?

My wife had not encountered a game that scrolled to the left yet.

She felt pretty silly after that.

doubtingthomas396 wrote:

My wife gave me permission to share this one:

My wife loved Castlevania, but she got stuck in a level. Couldn't figure out what to do next.

She and her brother convinced her mother to let her call the 900 number tip line. They called, told the guy what level they were on and he said: "Okay, so start by walking to the left..."

The left?

My wife had not encountered a game that scrolled to the left yet.

She felt pretty silly after that.

That actually proved to be a problem for folks that downloaded Super Metroid on the Virtual Console.

I got through to the castle of ordeals on Final Fantasy 1 before someone told me that weapons and armor aren't equipped simply because they're in the proper slots. You need to one-by-one make sure the "E-" is written next to each. Game felt quite easy for awhile after that.

doubtingthomas396 wrote:

My wife gave me permission to share this one:

My wife loved Castlevania, but she got stuck in a level. Couldn't figure out what to do next.

She and her brother convinced her mother to let her call the 900 number tip line. They called, told the guy what level they were on and he said: "Okay, so start by walking to the left..."

The left?

My wife had not encountered a game that scrolled to the left yet.

She felt pretty silly after that.

To the left!?!? O_o
Okay, confession. What happened to your wife could've happened to me. ^^

Keithustus wrote:

I got through to the castle of ordeals on Final Fantasy 1 before someone told me that weapons and armor aren't equipped simply because they're in the proper slots. You need to one-by-one make sure the "E-" is written next to each. Game felt quite easy for awhile after that.

Screw that noise, that's an accomplishment right there.

That underlying hilarity of the Souls games that Shawn mentions is one of the reasons that I love them so much and continue to come back to them years later. On the surface, they are these dark, foreboding games, but they have made me laugh as much as any other game I've played in the past few years, especially when it comes to multiplayer shenanigans.

It could be something that one of your co-op buddies does while waiting for a 3rd:

Elaborate ploys to wear NPC enemy armor and pose as them during invasion:

Or just something absurd, like plunge attacking shotgun-wielding old man in a wheelchair off of a cliff and listening to him curse you for it on the way down (this clip is my own):

I always enjoy hearing Jeff Green on the cast, and I was so sorry to hear about his back! Hope you feel better soon, Jeff!

I hope Bloodborne comes to PC

Enjoyed the talk about Pillars of Eternity. Definitely enjoying playing that game. You also keep tempting me to try that new Cities game...

That said, what came after that talk has me a bit disappointed. I expected better of GWJ than the whole Adam Baldwin rant. I'm not a supporter of Gamergate, but I've seen the destruction that McCarthyism leads to, and when you're advocating for people losing work because you think their thoughts and speech are double-plus-un-good, then you're basically holding a mccarthyist position. It's one step below what some of the gamergater's are doing with the death and other similar threats. It's bringing internet discussion into meatspace force, which is against all of the original internet ethics and codes. Speech you don't like should be answered with more speech, not threats or arguments that someone should be fired.

Suggesting someone not represent a game or company IS speech. McCarthyism is falsely accusing people of things (being a Communist in this case) without actual evidence. Adam Baldwin is 100% aligned with the so-called movement and we're more than justified in saying it sucks he's the voice of a game and they should find someone else to represent it.

Certis wrote:

Suggesting someone not represent a game or company IS speech. McCarthyism is falsely accusing people of things (being a Communist in this case) without actual evidence. Adam Baldwin is 100% aligned with the so-called movement and we're more than justified in saying it sucks he's the voice of a game and they should find someone else to represent it.

So, you're essentially saying that it would have been perfectly alright to blacklist someone from hollywood and take away their livelyhood if they could be proven to be communists? Because it seems like you're agreeing with McCarthy on tactics, even if you think he wasn't rigorous enough.

No I think we're saying we don't have to pay for games that hire people we find distatestful to represent them. I'm not calling for any laws here. I'm saying it's unfortunate and makes me not want to play the game.

There's NOBODY in the universe you find objectionable? That would make you not want to watch a show they were an actor in or play a game where they voiced the lead? If that's the case, you lead a charmed life.

FWIW: Mccarthyism is an actual word:

"noun
1.
the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, especially of pro-Communist activity, in many instances unsupported by proof or based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence.

2.
the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism."

(Webster)

I'm saying I find Baldwin's actual public, stated OPINIONs here offensive. You can choose to be or not be offended. Totes fine. But there's nothing unsupported or doubtful about what hes done and said here. Maybe that makes you want to play stuff he works on MORE. Totally fine. Just stating my opinion. You can love or hate that too.

I find plenty of things and positions objectionable, but I think that as long as those things do not affect the political slant of the product, then I will purchase it on its other merits. I find Progressivism objectionable, but I still buy car insurance from a CEO that is so much of a progressive that he named his company progressive insurance. I find the political views of most people in Hollywood objectionable, but I still occasionally see a movie and buy DVDs. As long as the content they produce isn't exceedingly slanted towards a view I dislike and it's good enough in quality. Even if it is slanted in those directions, but it's well made and makes me think about things, I'll consume it.

Actually, as a conservative leaning libertarian, I probably find more things objectionable than you do. Just that being a libertarian, I think that as long as it doesn't hurt me directly, then it's OK to be those things I find objectionable. Live and let live. I'll espouse my counter-views on whatever forum I have and leave it at that. There's enough room in the world for all sides in the marketplace of ideas, but no room at all for intimidation to silence the speech of others.

BTW, restricting dissent or criticism is exactly what you're doing, even if it's not investigative practices that you're using, but rather calls for people to be fired. You're trying to intimidate people into being silent through the (admittedly not massive) power of your particular soapbox, just as those idiots making threats against people are trying to intimidate them into being silent.

Meatspace intimidation over internet arguments is bad, no matter how justified you think your cause is.

Lets put it another way. Being of my particular political persuasion, almost every show, made by every studio, in every part of the world has probably had at least one person involved in its production who has said something publicly that I find objectionable. You're lucky you've only found 1 thing that you enjoy that has rubbed you in such a way. As such, from someone who holds such unpopular views, I believe that it's better to allow people to express their views so you can see them for who they are without reprisals, because then it lets you know the biases of those people so you can spot them if they do creep into your media. If you intimidate people into silence, then you just push that underground and it makes those subtle biases harder to spot.

I for one was absolutely thrilled that you guys clearly nailed your colours to the mast in this regard. I know directly confronting these issues isn't easy and as a group you've seemed to shy away from it, so well done.

Free speech doesn't equal consequence free speech, and a few financial setbacks are minor consequences for supporting a movement that espouses emotional, and real, violence against women.

Kazriko, I actually largely agree with you on multiple fronts. I have socio-political beliefs that lean both right and left, and as such if I were to make judgment calls based on a corporation's political support I'd be forced to go live in the mountains as a hermit. Simultaneously, I don't like the idea that someone should "not get work" for their political or religious beliefs alone. If any of us were denied work for that reason, wouldn't we call it injustice?

But at the same time, there is the matter of Adam Baldwin being more prominent in the public eye, and the manner in which he is shamelessly pushing his politics is loud enough that, yes, anyone in that position for any company would likely get fired. He is confrontational, and I imagine a PR nightmare. This isn't the same as Tom Cruise being a sincerely nice guy that just so happens to have religious beliefs that many find questionable for a variety of reasons. This is a man going out for blood, and he just so happened to latch onto video games because it was an opportunity. I think a lot of people would be fired from their jobs for crossing the lines that he has.

So I can understand in this case why someone's personal politics would interfere with their decision to support a product. Unfortunately, I think the only real consequence we'd see if people boycott a certain game due to the actor, no matter how loudly they cried against Adam Baldwin specifically, would be publishers looking at the sales numbers and saying "Well, guess gamers don't want something like that. Let's stick to what we know sells".

Which leaves me without a definitive answer. I don't think there's a global "right" decision on this front. It comes down to your personal politics. If this was as simple as "I don't see Tom Cruise movies because of his religion", I'd be right alongside you. I'd hate to have trouble finding work because people disagree with my religion, whether that played into my work or not, and I shouldn't feel forced to be silent on the issue lest I be judged by people for it. But Adam Baldwin is confrontational and, ultimately, a negative force and I think people avoiding any product he is involved in is a legitimate thing for them to do.

Now if they told anyone that bought the game that they were horrible assholes or something? Then I'd have a real problem.

Now if they told anyone that bought the game that they were horrible assholes or something? Then I'd have a real problem.

Ah, I see you've met some of of my fellow evangelicals.

(In case you have: Sorry, on behalf of all of us.)

ccesarano wrote:

Kazriko, I actually largely agree with you on multiple fronts. I have socio-political beliefs that lean both right and left, and as such if I were to make judgment calls based on a corporation's political support I'd be forced to go live in the mountains as a hermit. Simultaneously, I don't like the idea that someone should "not get work" for their political or religious beliefs alone. If any of us were denied work for that reason, wouldn't we call it injustice?

But at the same time, there is the matter of Adam Baldwin being more prominent in the public eye, and the manner in which he is shamelessly pushing his politics is loud enough that, yes, anyone in that position for any company would likely get fired. He is confrontational, and I imagine a PR nightmare. This isn't the same as Tom Cruise being a sincerely nice guy that just so happens to have religious beliefs that many find questionable for a variety of reasons. This is a man going out for blood, and he just so happened to latch onto video games because it was an opportunity. I think a lot of people would be fired from their jobs for crossing the lines that he has.

Maybe, but I still think that only those who are spoiled enough to have barely ever had their views challenged in the public would have such a large reaction to this sort of thing. It's understandable, but still an urge that should be argued against when it pokes its head out. It's not the best thing when people are so afraid of real life reprisals that they can't speak their mind on a subject. Conservatives in entertainment have been hiding in the closet for a few decades, so it's shocking to some people when they actually speak up. It used to be other groups that were afraid to let their political views be known, and that was just as wrong.

kazriko wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

Kazriko, I actually largely agree with you on multiple fronts. I have socio-political beliefs that lean both right and left, and as such if I were to make judgment calls based on a corporation's political support I'd be forced to go live in the mountains as a hermit. Simultaneously, I don't like the idea that someone should "not get work" for their political or religious beliefs alone. If any of us were denied work for that reason, wouldn't we call it injustice?

But at the same time, there is the matter of Adam Baldwin being more prominent in the public eye, and the manner in which he is shamelessly pushing his politics is loud enough that, yes, anyone in that position for any company would likely get fired. He is confrontational, and I imagine a PR nightmare. This isn't the same as Tom Cruise being a sincerely nice guy that just so happens to have religious beliefs that many find questionable for a variety of reasons. This is a man going out for blood, and he just so happened to latch onto video games because it was an opportunity. I think a lot of people would be fired from their jobs for crossing the lines that he has.

Maybe, but I still think that only those who are spoiled enough to have barely ever had their views challenged in the public would have such a large reaction to this sort of thing. It's understandable, but still an urge that should be argued against when it pokes its head out. It's not the best thing when people are so afraid of real life reprisals that they can't speak their mind on a subject. Conservatives in entertainment have been hiding in the closet for a few decades, so it's shocking to some people when they actually speak up. It used to be other groups that were afraid to let their political views be known, and that was just as wrong.

Note the bolded - you're arguing that people (the CC) should be afraid to speak out about behavior they disapprove of (Adam Baldwin's engagement on a number of issues), because you want to discourage people (Adam Baldwin) from being afraid to speak out about behavior they disapprove of (a whole wide range of stuff).

kazriko wrote:

those who are spoiled enough to have barely ever had their views challenged in the public would have such a large reaction to this sort of thing.

Or those doxed and who've had their children threatened. Which happened to GWJ if you'll recall. Because we were a "sjw cuddle pile."

Nobody here threatening. Just saying that something made us sad. If at crosses a line for you, by all means. Please. Don't listen. Lots of other voices on games you can turn to. We've been astoundingly self restrained honestly, given the sh*t some of us have been through privately and semi-publicly in all this.

Last post from me on this. Sorry. Stressful.

If the folks at Infinite Crisis need convincing, I have my own super suit.

The Stanley Parable made me feel pretty foolish. Over and over and over and over and over again.
But so worth it.