A curation page is made to inform users if Sweet Baby worked a game or not. Sweet Baby employees started to harass (mass flag campaign) the curation page and it’s maker.
Apparently they don’t like Sweet Baby’s focus on “promoting inclusivity”, so just some bigot getting their panties on a twist that the “out-group” is being treated with a basic level of human dignity. They then spent a bunch of time and effort to let the world know they think inclusivity is bad.
yes of course because inclusivity always just means inclusivity and not that you want to shove your political agenda into places where it does not belong. games have always been inclusive sweet baby are essentially just sensitivity readers for games. and by that totally missing the point of what games are. showing they should have nothing to do with video games in the first place. nobody said inclusively is bad. what is bad is using inclusively as shield for your own politics. and its also bad to mischaracterize what the argument is really about.
and not that you want to shove your political agenda into places where it does not belong
Do you have any direct examples instead of just names of games (screenshots, quotes, etc)? What specific"political agenda" is being pushed, and is this falling into the pit of “everything is politics, but this is politics I don’t like?”
games have always been inclusive
That’s just a lie. It’s always telling when on Steam discussion pages I see people complaining that they can’t customize their character and to play a certain class they have to be female or a minority, as if for 99% of games the protagonist doesn’t have to be a white male. “I feel included so it’s inclusive.”
its also bad to mischaracterize what the argument is really about.
When trying to get a direct answer as to what the argument is really about is like pulling teeth, then people are going to misunderstand. Even in your post you’ve provided no sources to show that Sweet Baby lowers the quality of games, but you *do" complain about inclusivity. So the only “fact” that I can actually pull away from your post is that you don’t like them because of their focus on inclusivity. You say it’s because it makes the games worse, but you have shown no evidence of that.
i have as much examples as you have examples of just saying inclusivity is good means its actually good. its a stupid tactic and i don’t appreciate it. keep your debate tactics to yourself. talk like a normal person im not in a plant debate with you. if you really want sources use some yourself first but we all know that would just be stupid in a comment section.
inclusively does not just mean that you can create a character that looks like you that’s very superficial it also means that everybody can appreciate a story and like it because its a good story and has good characters no matter what race minority status or sexuality. if you need to focus on superficial characteristics your doing wrong
like i already said sweet baby does never make there own games they leech of other peoples games and get payed for it. people are making educated guesses from what the company says and what the people who work there say. they create the problem that they are the Solution to. they focus on representation as business model and they represent it in the most superficial performative hollow fake way this will never help anybody actually have good story’s in games it just helps sweet baby make money by riding the wave of fake performative hollow inclusivity
if you really want sources use some yourself first
“This company does bad work! Everyone needs to avoid anything they’ve work on!”
“Okay… can you give me some examples of their bad work?”
“No! First YOU prove that the work they are trying to do is good!”
How hard you work to deflect the conversation speaks volumes towards what the real issue is here.
I tried going to the Sweet Baby Inc detected page to see what the actual issue is but nothing is explained. Just a list of games and the comment “SBI worked on this.”
Why should I care? It’s never explained. You say they do bad work, and when I ask for an example you give a long winded no. For someone who feels so passionately about them being bad you are very reluctant to actually back up your claims.
You are upset that I “mischaracterize[d] what the argument is really about” but it is impossible to find any direct statements as to what the argument is really about. Any clear statements of the curation page would help prevent “mischaracterization”, but people are twisting themselves in knots in order to not make direct statements.
I have no strong opinions about SBI, I could be convinced that they are bad and best avoided, but nobody wants to present any actual arguments no matter how much people ask. Makes it really sound like a group of people too afraid to say the quiet part out loud because it wouldn’t be acceptable.
sweet baby does never make there own games they leech of other peoples games and get payed for it.
You mean games hire them for a service? Lots of games do that. I’ve yet to see any example of the service they provide being bad.
for someone complaining about deflecting the conversation you sure do know how to deflect the conversation. i m not going to repeat myself on what the issue is.
a service that should not exist and that makes games worse. if you want proof maybe ask if you can see the scripts they wrote for the games they worked on. maybe you can show us sources and proof. because you really like sources and proof. and your not using this at all as a distraction from the point . and the point is that sweet baby is shit company that does shit work that makes games worse. if you just want to say its a company that promotes inclusion that’s your problem not mine. but that would be missing the point.
I am not arguing that SBI is good, I’m trying to get a clear argument as to why SBI is bad and keep hitting brick walls. I don’t know what type of “source” you expect for that other than gestures broadly at the comments.
and the point is that sweet baby is shit company that does shit work that makes games worse
There’s lots of shit companies that make shit games. I don’t need a curated list of shit games do be able to avoid them, I can look at reviews and even get a refund through Steam. What makes SBI special such that reviews and refunds are insufficient to be able to avoid poor quality games?
That first paragraph is the most cringe inducing thing I’ve ever read. If you had written guttural sounds and whines you’d have sounded less stupid. Go and learn something you embarrassment.
you have not seen much have you. you assume to much and you like to talk for people because you like talking to yourself and make up conversations don’t really know if that’s good state of mind to have maybe look into that. you seem like someone that’s very sensitive someone not made for the internet.
I’m not talking for anyone, so you seem to have gotten a little lost again. It’s ok, go back and re-read, do it slowly and sound the hard words out loud so you can work out what they are. Maybe you’ll extract some of the actual meaning from the word, then you can finally make a comment that actually follows a conversation instead of this weird straw man about someone “not made for the internet.”
And dude, the conversations I’m responding to are literally right there above my comments, where is it you think that stupid line of thought is going? Everyone can see what you said. Are you struggling with object permanence as well?
A curation page is made to inform users if Sweet Baby worked a game or not. Sweet Baby employees started to harass (mass flag campaign) the curation page and it’s maker.
Why?
Apparently they don’t like Sweet Baby’s focus on “promoting inclusivity”, so just some bigot getting their panties on a twist that the “out-group” is being treated with a basic level of human dignity. They then spent a bunch of time and effort to let the world know they think inclusivity is bad.
yes of course because inclusivity always just means inclusivity and not that you want to shove your political agenda into places where it does not belong. games have always been inclusive sweet baby are essentially just sensitivity readers for games. and by that totally missing the point of what games are. showing they should have nothing to do with video games in the first place. nobody said inclusively is bad. what is bad is using inclusively as shield for your own politics. and its also bad to mischaracterize what the argument is really about.
Could you please stop shoving your political agenda into places where it doesn’t belong, like this thread?
what is this political agenda you speak off? and what made it so important to you that you felt the need to send a reply.
Do you have any direct examples instead of just names of games (screenshots, quotes, etc)? What specific"political agenda" is being pushed, and is this falling into the pit of “everything is politics, but this is politics I don’t like?”
That’s just a lie. It’s always telling when on Steam discussion pages I see people complaining that they can’t customize their character and to play a certain class they have to be female or a minority, as if for 99% of games the protagonist doesn’t have to be a white male. “I feel included so it’s inclusive.”
When trying to get a direct answer as to what the argument is really about is like pulling teeth, then people are going to misunderstand. Even in your post you’ve provided no sources to show that Sweet Baby lowers the quality of games, but you *do" complain about inclusivity. So the only “fact” that I can actually pull away from your post is that you don’t like them because of their focus on inclusivity. You say it’s because it makes the games worse, but you have shown no evidence of that.
i have as much examples as you have examples of just saying inclusivity is good means its actually good. its a stupid tactic and i don’t appreciate it. keep your debate tactics to yourself. talk like a normal person im not in a plant debate with you. if you really want sources use some yourself first but we all know that would just be stupid in a comment section.
inclusively does not just mean that you can create a character that looks like you that’s very superficial it also means that everybody can appreciate a story and like it because its a good story and has good characters no matter what race minority status or sexuality. if you need to focus on superficial characteristics your doing wrong
like i already said sweet baby does never make there own games they leech of other peoples games and get payed for it. people are making educated guesses from what the company says and what the people who work there say. they create the problem that they are the Solution to. they focus on representation as business model and they represent it in the most superficial performative hollow fake way this will never help anybody actually have good story’s in games it just helps sweet baby make money by riding the wave of fake performative hollow inclusivity
“This company does bad work! Everyone needs to avoid anything they’ve work on!”
“Okay… can you give me some examples of their bad work?”
“No! First YOU prove that the work they are trying to do is good!”
How hard you work to deflect the conversation speaks volumes towards what the real issue is here.
I tried going to the Sweet Baby Inc detected page to see what the actual issue is but nothing is explained. Just a list of games and the comment “SBI worked on this.”
Why should I care? It’s never explained. You say they do bad work, and when I ask for an example you give a long winded no. For someone who feels so passionately about them being bad you are very reluctant to actually back up your claims.
You are upset that I “mischaracterize[d] what the argument is really about” but it is impossible to find any direct statements as to what the argument is really about. Any clear statements of the curation page would help prevent “mischaracterization”, but people are twisting themselves in knots in order to not make direct statements.
I have no strong opinions about SBI, I could be convinced that they are bad and best avoided, but nobody wants to present any actual arguments no matter how much people ask. Makes it really sound like a group of people too afraid to say the quiet part out loud because it wouldn’t be acceptable.
You mean games hire them for a service? Lots of games do that. I’ve yet to see any example of the service they provide being bad.
for someone complaining about deflecting the conversation you sure do know how to deflect the conversation. i m not going to repeat myself on what the issue is.
a service that should not exist and that makes games worse. if you want proof maybe ask if you can see the scripts they wrote for the games they worked on. maybe you can show us sources and proof. because you really like sources and proof. and your not using this at all as a distraction from the point . and the point is that sweet baby is shit company that does shit work that makes games worse. if you just want to say its a company that promotes inclusion that’s your problem not mine. but that would be missing the point.
Seems like it would have been trivial to copy past if it had already been made clear.
Of what? That nobody is making a clear statement as to what the issue is with SBI? Okay, here’s one source that implies SBI is bad but gives no reasons as to why: https://store.steampowered.com/curator/44858017-Sweet-Baby-Inc-detected/
I am not arguing that SBI is good, I’m trying to get a clear argument as to why SBI is bad and keep hitting brick walls. I don’t know what type of “source” you expect for that other than gestures broadly at the comments.
There’s lots of shit companies that make shit games. I don’t need a curated list of shit games do be able to avoid them, I can look at reviews and even get a refund through Steam. What makes SBI special such that reviews and refunds are insufficient to be able to avoid poor quality games?
That first paragraph is the most cringe inducing thing I’ve ever read. If you had written guttural sounds and whines you’d have sounded less stupid. Go and learn something you embarrassment.
you have not seen much have you. you assume to much and you like to talk for people because you like talking to yourself and make up conversations don’t really know if that’s good state of mind to have maybe look into that. you seem like someone that’s very sensitive someone not made for the internet.
I’m not talking for anyone, so you seem to have gotten a little lost again. It’s ok, go back and re-read, do it slowly and sound the hard words out loud so you can work out what they are. Maybe you’ll extract some of the actual meaning from the word, then you can finally make a comment that actually follows a conversation instead of this weird straw man about someone “not made for the internet.”
And dude, the conversations I’m responding to are literally right there above my comments, where is it you think that stupid line of thought is going? Everyone can see what you said. Are you struggling with object permanence as well?