>video game devs
>at a video game convention
>discussing game design
I don't understand why pic related gets deleted on /v/ every time
>>379197
Probably because it will just cause a racist shitshow of /pol/ shit. Then again nearly everything does so it begs the question on whether any discussion on the industry should be allowed on /v/.
>>379197
I didn't know slideshows were video games
>>379205
So then we need some board where you can freely discuss this shit. Mods really are abusing their power more and more
>>379205
>you can't talk about the video game industry on the video game board
Wut?
> literally non-stop Undertale threads calling it a meme game and tumblr this or reddit that
Okay
> post an actual video game convention where devs are trying to influence future game design
Not okay
>>379216
There are some people, mostly cowadoody types, who hate the idea of discussing how video games are made.
It would be like trying to discuss film without discussing filmmaking.
>>379220
Because the mods have the same agenda as those people, and people calling out the agenda scares them
Identity politics aren't videogames
Let me guess, next year E3 threads will be deleted because they'll say you tried to start a flame war right?
>>379228
And yet people within the games industry are pushing identity politics
That makes it very much related
>>379231
>haha, Sony won E3!
>you are banned: reason - inciting a flamewar
>>379232
Well then we need a vidya culture board so people can freely talk about this stuff there
>>379235
I agree
>>379235
So would say a game getting content cut due to political reasons be a thread for /v/ or the culture board?
>>379232
To bad threads in /v/ rarely discuss the industry itself and just devolve into le epic SJW bogeyman gaymergate shitfests
>why does my thinly-veiled attempt at activism keep getting deleted?
>>379213
>we need some board where you can freely discuss this shit
It's called /pol/. No one would bat an eye at this thread there.
>>379243
We should be allowed to have discussions about games getting censored because it is video game related. But the real problem is, how do you control the SJW and flame wars that could break out? You can't just ban them outright
>>379253
If you want any sort of sensible discussion about anything /v/ is the wrong board really
>>379240
Nice response mod.
>>379242
If the thread itself is all about the censorship of the game take it to the culture board. If it's about the game and gameplay it stays on /v/.
I would also consider splitting /v/ into a board for eastern and western gaming, but that would mean bringing in new mods
>>379197
no one on 4chan is mature enough to handle things like racial issues, so the thread will be 100% shit
>>379265
This is blatant deflection and you know it.
>>379197
OP can I get a serious response out of you? just prove to me you aren't a shitter for one second.
Do you really think this is suited for /v/ and will bring good discussion about video games? I'm asking honestly, do you REALLY think that?
>>379217
Good. Then maybe we can discuss games instead of this insipid poorly veiled /pol/ proxy war. You can go there if you want to cry about how a minority kekd you.
>>379295
it's the truth and you know it
jesus, what a terrible convention.
>>379232
They also masturbate and have autism, but autism and masturbation aren't video games either (yet).
>>379197
>misquoting the one line everyone fucking knows by heart
Jesus Christ dude
That isn't a video game thread, it's a thinly veiled bait thread.
If the OP of threads like that actually wanted to discuss the real issues behind it, they would post a source for the image, supplementary information about both sides of the argument, and their own personal opinion on the matter as well as an invitation for others to share.
But no, it's always just a single picture along with 'what do you think about this /v/?' or 'is she right, /v/?' or 'it's 2015, why don't you want your video games to be diverse, /v/?'
I swear to christ, you guys are the worst type of shit posters, trying to hide behind technicalities. The mods are using common sense and applying context and for that I applaud them.
>>379437
>technicalities
how the fuck is it a technicality? It's an issue related to games.
>>379487
Read the rest of the post.
So where is this actually from? Willing to bet they are not the influential game designers they are claimed to be.
>>379631
Guy whose head you can see is Tim Schafer, who has defined the adventure genre for multiple decades. Next to him are Jade Raymond and Alexey Pajitnov, creators of Tetris and Assassin's Creed respectively.
>>379633
Pfft Tim Schafer is a hack. All those people are has-beens
>2015
>still playing vidya or god forbid talking about some normalfag activity
just delete /v/
vidya is shit these days
>>379197
Mods on /v/ ban anything political even if it has to do with video games.
-even if it is on topic
-even if it's current
-even if it can change a certain game that has a huge fanbase on /v/
Anything that can be remotely interpreted as Gamergate discussion is removed.
Not sure why other than that they dont want to deal with the legal trouble again.
>>379734
There's no legal trouble though. Its not illegal at all! Only The Fappening was
>>379213
>4chan needs a board for every topic
No, it should just be outright banned until /v/ is mature enough to not collectively shit all over their own board when meta industry discussion comes into play
>>380021
>There wasn't anything illegal about the GG nonsense
Activism isn't allowed on here anon and that's exactly what it was, there is no two ways about it. And no, activism isn't something the mods use to blanket kill things they don't like, because the term activism is pretty fucking simple and kinda hard to twist into 'complaining about things'
Just because the industry shit all over themselves when it becomes to meta discussion, doesn't mean /v/ should as well. Even more so when /v/ermin do that shit, it leaks onto the other boards as well
/v/'s mods are complete garbage, and there've been several completely and utterly off-topic threads (where it's not even like "oh hey, videogames but mostly something else") that hit post limit but several far more gaming related threads being deleted.
that being said, >>379437 is right, posters don't actually frame this shit as something to be discussed, they just throw the pic up and go
>well, /v/?
which doesn't inspire anything but shitposting
>>380023
Isn't allowed here =/= illegal.
>>379197
Why is it important to have niggers designing games?
>>380486
>niggers
You're part of the problem.
>>380486
liberals believe diversity is important
incidentally, dissecting that point (which you basically can't have a discussion without doing) is inevitably going to take you miles and miles away from "video games", which is probably why it gets preemptively nuked
Diversity is okay as long as it's not forced IMO.
>>380513
I'm pretty damn sure that people like you specifically are the complete and total sum of the problem with 2015 era 4chan. Only the newest of the new complain about somebody using the word nigger on this place.
>>379197
>identity politics
>design
anita pls go
>daily reminder that this is what happens when you let SJWs in your dev team:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/25640
they talk about this paper:
http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs5204/fall11-kafura/Papers/Languages/CSP.Hoare.pdf
>>380533
>derpa derp you're new
Ironic considering you behave like an "edgy 4chan army culture" idiot.
>>380513
If race is a social construct, how come it makes a difference to have niggers in your team?
checkm8 SJWs
cya later, i'll be playing my superior white/asian developed games
>>380634
lurk moar newfag
>>380639
Ironic considering you behave like an "edgy 4chan army culture" idiot.
>>380634
Lurk moar faggot
Nigger has always been said on the site and has never been a problem. People like you complaining about it are the problem. It has never been for 'edgy' purposes and at best its been used as shock humour
>>380645
go spew your toxic anti freedom rhetoric somewhere else, faggot
>>380634
I hope youre not serious.
>>380657
preferably in the afterlife
>what if hell is being tormented by anon's love of censorship and oppression for eternity
>>380636
BTFO
T
F
O
>>379205
Is this 2002 again? I remember web forums raging about "flame wars" and banning anything that was even remotely controversial. Of course the asskiss board would find it perfectly acceptable to do this on 4chan.
This board needs more attention. Not enough 4channers come here, it hardly represents even 5% of the board. It represents the type of people who would come here to whine about bans or suggest all sorts of censors. This is the type of people replying to this thread. This is why you have both these kinds of responses and memeposting at the same time.
>>379251
You go to /pol/ with this image to talk about politics. You go to /v/ with this image to talk about this image related to video games.
I absolutely love how blunt and arrogant people on this specific board are. "It's called /pol./." Did you have a moment inbetween pounding these words on your keyboard where you actually considered what it meant? Why would someone go to /pol/ when they want to talk about this image in respect to the video game community?
>>379811
>No, it should just be outright banned until /v/ is mature enough to not collectively shit all over their own board when meta industry discussion comes into play
So, never? If you suggest this, you're going to need a big list of things to be outright banned. And it will forever be banned as there is no chance in hell /v/ is going to "mature enough". People are going to argue about what they disagree with. Deal with it, and learn to live with it.
>>380747
There is a difference with people disagreeing with shit and collectively spamming your board with so much garbage and shit it leaks out onto the others
>>379314
>instead of this insipid poorly veiled /pol/ proxy war.
What a delusional person! Because the topic is controversial and is about diversity, you automatically call it a "/pol/ proxy war". As if there are not people on /v/ who legitimately have these opinions. This is what it boils down to. You want people to go to /pol/ because you disagree with the topic and you are upset that people are arguing about it. Face it, most political discussions on 4chan are going to end up with a taste of /pol/. This is because /pol/ is on 4chan and /pol/ consists of 4channers.
>>380754
>collectively spamming your board
How are they collectively spamming the board? Try to answer this without "because I see the discussion too many times for me and it annoys me".
>>379249
this
>>380747
>You go to /v/ with this image to talk about this image related to video games.
Where it will inevitably become a discussion about the purpose of diversity in civic society and a general discussion of liberalism / racism in general. You could have a discussion about blacks in boardrooms or in films and the discussion would 99% be the same..
At least with the feminism issue there's a number of very video-game-specific cultural aspects at work.
>>380771
>Where it will inevitably become a discussion about the purpose of diversity in civic society and a general discussion of liberalism / racism in general. You could have a discussion about blacks in boardrooms or in films and the discussion would 99% be the same..
This happens on every board, it doesn't mean any thread that could veer off course should be banned. This is also a natural part of human discussions. Most posts on /v/ aren't 100% related to the OP after a while. If the OP is video games related, the only issue are the users derailing the threads. And that's hardly an issue when you can simple ignore the thread and go elsewhere.
Ban people for making video game related threads because they veered off course and an argument broke off? There goes the rest of 4chan. How crazy.. actually think about what you're suggesting here.
>>379197
Fuck off, meanie. Being a meanie always has and always will be against 4chans rules since 2003. /pol/ will be deleted in our time.
>>379207
ANZU
N
Z
U
>>379213
we need a /metav/
