Posted by: seanmalstrom | March 16, 2015

Email: New Overwatch Character Response

Master Malstrom,About the reactions to the new butch Overwatch character: I think it’s a good change. I know it’s been put in there for basically no other reason than to appease a very loud, very vocal subset of west-coast feminists, but allow me to give my reasons:1. It’s a strong female type that actually, gasp, looks physically strong. I know the art is stylized, but in most movies and games, a heroine almost always has to know kung-fu or some other martial art. I think the reason why is because the body types of these women doesn’t allow them to look like they could actually hurt a man. Seriously, look at ANY Joss Whedon production and you’ll see some 110 pound girl twirling her feet around as if she’s got the force behind it to knock a guy out. The truth is that the whole karate crap is there to hide the fact that the women don’t have enough power to hurt the men they’re beating up. It’s the reason why every single fist fight in a movie with Angelina Jolie makes me cringe. She’s scrawny and you expect me to believe she can go toe to toe with your average man? What a LAUGH.That’s why I feel a character like Brienne of Tarth in Game of Thrones is such a breath of fresh air: when she hits someone, her body type makes you feel as if she’s actually hitting someone.

I’m still pissed at the casting choice for Wonder Woman. More like Stick Chick.

2. This is additional content. In my opinion, any additional content to appease a vocal minority with twitter cred doesn’t really hurt you. It’s literally throwing them a bone. The only reason to get mad will be if the totalitarian demands of the SJW: i.e., the censoring and removal of content, is met. If blizzard starts removing characters like Widowmaker, Symmetry, or Mercy, then it’s time to get mad.

Thankfully, this character is not that. Blizzard is not removing anything. The game will not be adversely affected by the inclusion of this character.

TLDR: Including content isn’t bad; don’t worry until they start excluding content.

This is the type of response I am seeing from the Game Industry. It is the ‘we are not changing anything old, but we are adding new iconic characters that fit whatever the SJWs want.’Blizzard currently sees itself as a ‘hero factory’ and other game companies see themselves as ‘making characters’. In other words, we are back in the mascot-era mindset of gaming. Remember mascot gaming? Mario and Sonic. Everyone had to get a mascot.Remember Bubsy? He wasn’t successful as a mascot. In fact, most video game mascots are never heard from again. Even Nintendo has a hard time creating new mascots.

OK, this is what is going to happen. Let us read this article together reader. In it, we find:
.

The trends have rattled the entertainment industry, with broadcast and cable networks scrambling to take on new competitors on the Web. Cable networks have seen steep ratings declines, which got much worse in the last six months of 2014. Cable ratings among adults fell 9 percent in 2014, three times the rate of decline over 2013, according to Michael Nathanson, an analyst at Moffett Nathanson research.

“It’s hard to ignore our belief that technology is disrupting viewer consumption of linear network programming,” Nathanson wrote in a recent research note.

In response, companies such as HBO, NBC and CBS are launching their own streaming services. The moves could unleash a fast demise of the cable and satellite industries that have fed TV networks with licensing fees.

Disrupting viewer consumption! Oh disruption! Oh that word!According to disruption literature, the disruptor and the disruptee co-exist side by side for quite a while. Then, all of a sudden, the floor falls out from under the disruptee as all the consumers flee to the disruptor. This certainly looks like this is what is happening.But if you talk to people who watch TV only through streaming (which is nearly everyone I know), they do so mostly for the content. If the content they like was available on satellite TV, they would still be watching satellite TV. Football lovers still subscribe to watch their football.

The key line I am seeing from the above quote is that ‘the move could unleash a fast demise of cable and satellite industries that have fed TV networks with licensing fees.’ Take Al Gore’s TV channel. No one watches it. No one. Yet, it still makes money because a satellite or cable package pays for the licensing of it. You may not be watching Al Gore’s TV channel, but you are certainly paying for it.

Much of the SJW hysteria over gaming may be related to the collapse of TV viewing as well as traditional book reading. The people are rejecting their content.

The future of gaming is not a split industry where one side makes profitable casual games that fund ‘hardcore’ games. Rather, the future of gaming may be a split industry where profitable games (of characters that make the cash register go ding like Lara Croft) pay and subsidize SJW content that no one buys. This may be the future because this is how TV cable was for a long time. The few shows people wanted to watch paid for all the crappy shows no one wanted to watch (but that the industry wanted to make because ‘social justice’).There is a reason why I’ve always said that the definition of a quality video game, or any quality product, is that it is profitable, is that it brings in cashflow. Now, this means longterm cashflow not cashflow of three months. Good games keep selling once the marketing campaign ends. Marketing is just to direct people to the product. Once the consumer is there, it is up to the product to satisfy. If it doesn’t, then sales drop off like a rock once the ‘marketing blitz’ ends.
One reason why I love GoG or the Virtual Console is that it keeps classic games as financial assets. While the cashflow these games are bringing in is not much, it is enough to buy everyone lunch now and then. Good games will keep selling.

These games heavy with SJW content will be declared ‘masterpieces’ by game journalists and all. They will be subsidized by other games, by the Maddens, Call of Dutys, and Warcrafts. But are these games profitable? Show me the money!

Above: The motto to live by: show me the money!

 

 

 


Categories

%d bloggers like this: