Gejmerstina

Verterdegete wrote:

ostap bender wrote:ne znam na koji nacin zizek ili bilo ko sa levice podrzava bilo gejmergetase ili razlicite rabid/sad puppy pokrete.

verter ovu temu dozivljava uzasno licno i meni je glupo da se s njim svadim oko toga ali zaista je ta glasna gejmerska manjina na netu cist sljam. na ivici i preko ivice sociopatskog ponsanja.

Lol, ovo je dobro.

Verterdegete wrote:Evo je i ovde malo preglednija slika:







http://screenrant.com/joss-whedon-quits-twitter/



Dakle, kako i cime objasnjavas ovakav otrov i izliv besa?

Verterdegete wrote:


Brao!!!

Spoiler:

gagorder wrote:kako se ovo uopšte gleda? braateee. my name is flower princess. mljac mljac. like. just like. thats cause thats. i was like.
aaaaaaaaaaaaargh

[Content Warning: Bigoted language, sexual violence]

The definition of "safe spaces" varies depending on who you ask, but to me, a safe space is a place where you can be free of harassment regardless of your politics, race, nationality, sexuality, and gender or lack thereof. 

Currently, protests are being held at college and university campuses across the United States with students asking for safe spaces. But safe spaces aren't just for the real life and college campuses. The whole of gaming would be better off with more safe spaces as well.

The above message ("fuck lgbt you faggot" prim. vertera) was sent unprovoked by someone on my team in a multiplayer game of "Warzone" in Halo 5: Guardians. I had said nothing even remotely related to LGBT people when I was sent the above toxicity; nay, my crime was using the call tag "LGBT" that shows instead of my name, something I started doing after meeting another player that was using it as a means to find like-minded players to party up with, which I still think is a good idea.

Receiving this message got me to thinking, though: Why would Microsoft allow someone to send a message like this to strangers? I realize there are privacy settings to prevent strangers from sending you messages, but why should I block messages from others for fear of receiving messages like the one above? Why am I, the one playing within the rules, the person to lose privileges? Surely Microsoft should implement a blacklisted words filter for sending messages to strangers in the same way it has for Xbox Live usernames. 

Microsoft could even give players the option to enable or disable receiving messages with banned words, or the ability to censor blacklisted words. Popular free MOBA League of Legends offers this feature, but for some reason Microsoft doesn't, which seems like an oversight for a service that costs $60 a year. 

We need safe spaces, not just from hateful messages, but emotes and assholes humping your corpse. 

If you've ever played Hearthstone, you're probably familiar with its emote system. Instead of being able to directly message your opponents during matches you can click on your hero and select pre-made emotes that include: greetings, well played, thanks, oops, threaten, and sorry. At first glance, these emotes may seem pretty harmless, but when people spam them or say them at certain times, they can be downright angering. At what point during a player-versus-player competitive match can the sorry emote be used in a non-sarcastic way?
A survey of 5,100 people on reddit found that only 14 percent of players used emotes sincerely, while 30 percent of players would use an auto-squelch option if it existed. Can you blame the players when some emotes seem to encourage this kind of behavior? Yes, you can, but Blizzard is just as much to blame. An option to display only friends' emotes would undoubtedly benefit some players, myself included.

Sometimes players take a game mechanic and use it as a means of harassment with the prime example being crouching on dead players' faces as if to press their testicles against them, a practice better known as "teabagging." Teabagging is not only unsportsmanlike but also simulates sexual assault and abuse of a corpse, no matter how you twist it. Yet teabagging has become commonplace in first-person shooters ever since Halo 2's player-base popularized it. This virtual assault has become so prevalent and accepted that most of us are desensitized to it to the point that the following commercial for Call of Duty: Ghosts wasn't instantly lambasted and banned.
Call of Duty: Ghosts is especially guilty of normalizing this behavior by giving players afield order to "humiliate the next enemy you kill" for a reward. You do this, of course, by teabagging your opponent's corpse, earning a care package in the process. Gross. While teabagging in games may seem harmless to many of you reading this, I imagine more than a few people are uncomfortable with the act in general. 

There are a few easy fixes to teabagging like removing crouching animations from post-kill camera shots, something that would go a long way to possibly make someone's experience a little bit better. I'm not saying players should be forced or punished for teabagging, just having the option of not experiencing the act if you so choose would be a welcome option to many. 
These are just a few examples that come to mind when talking about creating safer spaces for everyone in online gaming, though I'm sure there are many more opportunities out there. I'm not saying players freedom of expression should be taken away; I'm just asking that we are given a way to avoid certain things if we see fit. A winning situation for everyone.

Aurini: Seeing Star Wars: The Force Awakens “is the equivalent of auto-castration”

December 26, 2015
 · 161 Comments

Davis Aurini: He’s a cowboy now


If you’re wondering what the racist cowboy cosplayer who’s also possibly the world’s worst filmmaker thinks of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, wait no longer!
Davis Aurini has given the film two burning crosses down — way down!

Verterdegete wrote:Uzgred receno, ovo je do jaja reklama.

Spoiler:

On November 12th 2014, European Space Agency spacecraft Philae achieved the first landing of a spacecraft on a comet in human history and subsequently during Nature Newsteam’s livestream coverage of the landing, Rosetta scientist Matt Taylor was interviewed in a unique Elly Prizeman shirt featuring pretty patterns of scantily clothed female cartoon characters. Needless to say not everyone was happy about this (maybe the planets just weren’t aligned or something) and #shirtstorm was born.


Now with an outstanding clothing range that’s globally recognised and frequently seen in the media, Elly devotes a sizeable chunk of her very precious time making clothing for International Rock stars, Hollywood celebrities and of course rock star scientists!  In company like that, you really do have to ask yourself; can you afford not to have a head turning Elly Prizeman item in your life? 

Spoiler:

Electronic Arts nedavno je izbacio nastavak popularne igre UFC.
No nisu svi borci presretni načinom na koji su prezentirani. Ruski borac avarskog podrijetla Khabib Nurmagomedov bio je bijesan nakon što je vidio da se njegov lik u igri EA Sports UFC 2 križa što je animacija nakon pobjede u kavezu, piše Fightsite .
- Ja sam musliman, a ne kršćanin. Zamolio bih EA Sports UFC da promijene način kako slavim pobjedu nakon borbe. Imam puno navijača i to biste trebali poštovati - napisao je ruski borac na Instagramu.

Pržun wrote:Dobar je Ubisoft. Jedino sto im igre u poslednje vreme sve vise promovisu fasizam (sa inkluzivnim likom). Hilari Klinton gejming izdavastva takorekuc.

Pržun wrote:Dobar je Ubisoft. Jedino sto im igre u poslednje vreme sve vise promovisu fasizam (sa inkluzivnim likom). Hilari Klinton gejming izdavastva takorekuc.

This is the paranoid fantasy of the right-wing brought into disturbing actualization by The Division. Look at the three gangs that form the main antagonists of the game: The “Rikers” are the prisoners of Rikers island prison that lies off the coast of The Bronx. They are the most obvious member of what The Division presents as societies’ dangerous underclass—known criminals. The “Cleaners” are former sanitation workers, who have decided that the solution to the virus is to burn it out of the city. A gang of blue-collar garbage men and janitors equipped with flamethrowers, they represent the lowest rung of the working class. The third gang are the “Rioters,” a majority black, generic street gang, decked in hoodies and caps that spend their time looting electronics stores and dead bodies. Perhaps the laziest and most repugnant of all the game’s representations, the Rioters might have been clipped from the one-sided and inaccuratemedia coverage of disasters like Hurricane Katrina. Their collective name even seeks to mark anybody who resists the dominant regime for execution. Together, these gangs present a trinity of soft political targets, those that can be killed with little social guilt or questioning. The Divisionmercilessly uses these skewed representations to justify its political violence.


It’s a perverse idea of society, one where the government and its agents are the only thing standing between the average man and a host of violent sociopaths that surround him; from the “hoods” hanging on his street corner to the janitor at his office. They want what he has, the man thinks, because it is what they lack. They want to take what he has earned—to destroy what he has built. It comes from a deep seated place of ignorance and selfishness, one that doesn’t seek to understand the world but to divide it up into property and power. This ideology is nothing short of poisonous and yet The Division uses it as the fuel for its world. It borrows, word-for-word, the rhetoric of the New Orleans police department command who after Hurricane Katrina gave the order to “take the city back” and “shoot looters.” It presents those disenfranchised by society as its greatest enemies. It follows neo-liberal dogma so blindly that in one bizarre mission it actually sends the player to turn the adverts of Times Square back on, as if those airbrushed faces and glimmering products were the true heart of New York City, shining down like angels on the bodies of the dead among the trash.