I think the amount of outrage a Steam Curator group has generated solely by pointing out that $game used $consultancy_service indicates that there is something deeper about the subject. No smoke without fire and all that.
People said the same shit during Pizzagate. And look what happened there. There isn’t smoke here, it’s made up outrage, which is more akin to folks kicking up dust. In this case I think they’ve huffed too much of their own fart dust.
People have poor mental health, no control of their lives, no control over the industry through their consumerism like they pretend (the average person buying Spiderman 2 doesn’t give a shit about this controversy), and so they are looking to shit on a consultancy company to make themselves feel like they have any power. The reality is most people just care whether a game is good or not, not whether it has DEI elements included or whatever else.
“Sure, this guy might be a bigot, but look how upset people are by his bigotry! There must be something to what he’s saying, it can’t just be that people really don’t like bigots!”
That may be the dumbest take I’ve heard on this. With that kind of “logic”, it would mean maybe the Earth really is flat, because so many people are outraged that someone could believe something that stupid. More “We’re just asking questions here” bullshit used as a smokescreen for rampant bigotry and misogyny.
So let me get this straight in terms of your POV: things that are incorrect shouldn’t be corrected? Especially in the context of a bunch of neckbearded incels who doxxed, swatted, and generally hounded people during that whole GamerGate stupidity?!
Yeah, I really can’t understand why someone looking at the history might want to investigate and correct if needed wildly inaccurate claims. /s
Well apparently the people down voting you prove that you have a point! Why else would they be outraged? Where there’s smoke there’s fire (or some stupid bullshit).
I think the amount of outrage a Steam Curator group has generated solely by pointing out that $game used $consultancy_service indicates that there is something deeper about the subject. No smoke without fire and all that.
People said the same shit during Pizzagate. And look what happened there. There isn’t smoke here, it’s made up outrage, which is more akin to folks kicking up dust. In this case I think they’ve huffed too much of their own fart dust.
People have poor mental health, no control of their lives, no control over the industry through their consumerism like they pretend (the average person buying Spiderman 2 doesn’t give a shit about this controversy), and so they are looking to shit on a consultancy company to make themselves feel like they have any power. The reality is most people just care whether a game is good or not, not whether it has DEI elements included or whatever else.
“Sure, this guy might be a bigot, but look how upset people are by his bigotry! There must be something to what he’s saying, it can’t just be that people really don’t like bigots!”
That may be the dumbest take I’ve heard on this. With that kind of “logic”, it would mean maybe the Earth really is flat, because so many people are outraged that someone could believe something that stupid. More “We’re just asking questions here” bullshit used as a smokescreen for rampant bigotry and misogyny.
If it’s really so misguided why does it need this much attention?
So let me get this straight in terms of your POV: things that are incorrect shouldn’t be corrected? Especially in the context of a bunch of neckbearded incels who doxxed, swatted, and generally hounded people during that whole GamerGate stupidity?!
Yeah, I really can’t understand why someone looking at the history might want to investigate and correct if needed wildly inaccurate claims. /s
Well apparently the people down voting you prove that you have a point! Why else would they be outraged? Where there’s smoke there’s fire (or some stupid bullshit).
Imagine hate speech attacking games for having variety in their characters upsetting people.🤷🏼♀️