Game Theory: Gamers, You're Getting Played

Gamers, You're Getting Played

Okay, so first off, it's not a FNAF video...and I know that's going to drive people insane, especially since I use FNAF imagery in both the thumbnail and opening. Truth be told, this video was written BEFORE FNAF3 was released, with me already having my heart set on this as the thumbnail. I personally think it's the strongest way to convey the message of the video -- we are being used as puppets and so what better image to represent that than gaming's most iconic puppet? Anyway, that's the reason there.

Watch Video

Wait, this is a repeat right? I saw this episode like 4 months ago...

This isn't news, it wasn't news 20 years ago. C'mon, tell us something we don't all know, please?

And please get your facts straight. The BBFC actually refused Carmageddon a certificate until the blood was changed to green. It took 10 months of appeal to get it actually released intact.

*edit* Possibly i'm not the target audience as i remember all this crap from when it actually happened

Quellist:
This isn't news, it wasn't news 20 years ago. C'mon, tell us something we don't all know, please?

And please get your facts straight. The BBFC actually refused Carmageddon a certificate until the blood was changed to green. It took 10 months of appeal to get it actually released intact.

*edit* Possibly i'm not the target audience as i remember all this crap from when it actually happened

I don't think that most of the quiet majority are the target audience.

"Whaaaat?! Publishers want to spread controversy so that people will fling shit across the internet?! NOOO!! That's just not true!!1!1"

*cough* EA Dante's Inferno Dead Space 2 *cough*

Also: "Sunday Times"
>credible sources
>Sunday newspapers
>lol

I mean honestly. All you need to do is google "pre-order exclusives" to see what publishers think of their customers.

I hear that SA2 music when you're showing Carmageddon. Radical Highway is actually appropriate.

I'm amused by the fact that pointing this out won't change anything. Gamers for the most part are like any group of consumers, comprised mostly of sheeple easily played.

... Yeah, and you would know would't you Matt.

Love the explanation given in another video about how carefully game theory plays youtube and it's subscribers to maximise views... XD

Also...
"Smartest show in gaming" ... >_>

I don't know whether I should applaud that or feel offended that a show which routinely stretches logic and credibility to breaking point calls itself that...

So many episodes have been so absurdly offensive to my inner scientist... But, eh. Sure controversy. Why not.
All publicity is good publicity?

Unless you get banned I guess...
Though even then...

CrystalShadow:
... Yeah, and you would know would't you Matt.

Love the explanation given in another video about how carefully game theory plays youtube and it's subscribers to maximise views... XD

Also...
"Smartest show in gaming" ... >_>

I don't know whether I should applaud that or feel offended that a show which routinely stretches logic and credibility to breaking point calls itself that...

So many episodes have been so absurdly offensive to my inner scientist... But, eh. Sure controversy. Why not.
All publicity is good publicity?

Unless you get banned I guess...
Though even then...

He stretches the use of the word "manufactured" pretty liberally. I think that knowing how to ride the media wave is a little different to disingenuously creating the media wave by a good margin. If a developer/publisher is LYING or HYPING to garner media attention that's one thing, but I wouldn't put it past a ton of people to be legitimately 'outraged' (soap-boxing) about the lack of morality in the gaming scene when a game like Hatred comes out. Especially with a supposed child-specific psychologist (not verified) in one forum I go to saying it degrades the morality of society and certain sites definitely being genuine when they made comments calling gamers sadists or disturbed. It was obviously Hatred's intention to be full-on edgy and campy. The trailer was actually no exaggeration of how cringey it was going to be. Cringe all the way! However, if no one had been bringing it up on forums or in articles, I wouldn't have thought that it was controversial for it to be a game.

Being a game in and of itself is akin to a target board nowadays, seemingly regardless of the context. Hatred just wanted to use brighter paint.

game theory videos overall are the weakest production on escapistmag I'd say... Not near as half as smart arguments as experienced points, for example!

I didn't sit through the whole video, admittedly, but the point was made no matter how poorly. And one need look no further then the recent furor over Far Cry 4's cover art and how 'racist' it was, until of course it turned out not to be. And then there were the efforts to begin such a controversy by using a male voiced character with out addressing the female gender selection issue in Fallout 4's trailer. It is no longer simply 'bad' publicity. They aren't debating the merits of violence in games, their making the audience whine for something at top volume and sometimes in accusatory tones... then revealing it was there all along.

It is fascinating this mind set... A game like the recent Batman gets released as a port, PC gamers are naturally pissed at it's condition, and once more Producers and IP holders are more then thrilled to announce how 'entitled' gamers are. Yet when they complain about aspects of a game that frankly no mention at all has been made of, in a knee jerk way, that's never mentioned at all. If anything the companies are gracious in their revelations that there was never a worry there to begin with. Fascinating...

And naturally the more often this happens, the more often support is thrown behind radicals who facilitate this sort of PR campaigning be it directly or indirectly, it does damage to the image of progressivism as a whole. After all if they knee jerk at nothing what else is nothing that they complain about? If games media is this 'liberal' could Fox News be right? I realize corporations don't care, if anything that sort of self doubt and question serves them. What I can't figure out is why supposed progressive supporting people would allow their cause to be so flogged and abused? So potentially discredited. Grim business this.

CrystalShadow:
... Yeah, and you would know would't you Matt.

Love the explanation given in another video about how carefully game theory plays youtube and it's subscribers to maximise views... XD

Also...
"Smartest show in gaming" ... >_>

I don't know whether I should applaud that or feel offended that a show which routinely stretches logic and credibility to breaking point calls itself that...

So many episodes have been so absurdly offensive to my inner scientist... But, eh. Sure controversy. Why not.
All publicity is good publicity?

Unless you get banned I guess...
Though even then...

I feel you. At least he usually provides the methodology behind the experiments, but conclusions do often come to be pretty far-fetched.

TranshumanistG:

CrystalShadow:
... Yeah, and you would know would't you Matt.

Love the explanation given in another video about how carefully game theory plays youtube and it's subscribers to maximise views... XD

Also...
"Smartest show in gaming" ... >_>

I don't know whether I should applaud that or feel offended that a show which routinely stretches logic and credibility to breaking point calls itself that...

So many episodes have been so absurdly offensive to my inner scientist... But, eh. Sure controversy. Why not.
All publicity is good publicity?

Unless you get banned I guess...
Though even then...

I feel you. At least he usually provides the methodology behind the experiments, but conclusions do often come to be pretty far-fetched.

He does indeed explain the methodology... But meanwhile there's the almost... Gleeful way in which he seems to build ever more elaborate, contrived and ridiculous things one on top of each-other.
Just because there's a method to it, doesn't stop it being incredibly silly at times.

It's like the logical equivalent of building a Rube Goldberg machine...
Yes, it all follows in a logical cause and effect sequence from one another, but the overall effect is really rather absurd, and often doesn't really go anywhere that makes any sense. XD

CrystalShadow:

TranshumanistG:

CrystalShadow:
... Yeah, and you would know would't you Matt.

Love the explanation given in another video about how carefully game theory plays youtube and it's subscribers to maximise views... XD

Also...
"Smartest show in gaming" ... >_>

I don't know whether I should applaud that or feel offended that a show which routinely stretches logic and credibility to breaking point calls itself that...

So many episodes have been so absurdly offensive to my inner scientist... But, eh. Sure controversy. Why not.
All publicity is good publicity?

Unless you get banned I guess...
Though even then...

I feel you. At least he usually provides the methodology behind the experiments, but conclusions do often come to be pretty far-fetched.

He does indeed explain the methodology... But meanwhile there's the almost... Gleeful way in which he seems to build ever more elaborate, contrived and ridiculous things one on top of each-other.
Just because there's a method to it, doesn't stop it being incredibly silly at times.

It's like the logical equivalent of building a Rube Goldberg machine...
Yes, it all follows in a logical cause and effect sequence from one another, but the overall effect is really rather absurd, and often doesn't really go anywhere that makes any sense. XD

Whaa? No. Deduction works even if it might be counter-intuitive sometimes and allows to build a big base of proven statements that will make sense if you follow the chain of logic. That's what's so good about it.

That breaks down though if either the premises or reasoning are wrong.

On a side note, I like how he profusely explained that his conclusion might've been wrong in the GTAV episode because of insufficient data samples.

TranshumanistG:

CrystalShadow:

TranshumanistG:

I feel you. At least he usually provides the methodology behind the experiments, but conclusions do often come to be pretty far-fetched.

He does indeed explain the methodology... But meanwhile there's the almost... Gleeful way in which he seems to build ever more elaborate, contrived and ridiculous things one on top of each-other.
Just because there's a method to it, doesn't stop it being incredibly silly at times.

It's like the logical equivalent of building a Rube Goldberg machine...
Yes, it all follows in a logical cause and effect sequence from one another, but the overall effect is really rather absurd, and often doesn't really go anywhere that makes any sense. XD

Whaa? No. Deduction works even if it might be counter-intuitive sometimes and allows to build a big base of proven statements that will make sense if you follow the chain of logic. That's what's so good about it.

That breaks down though if either the premises or reasoning are wrong.

On a side note, I like how he profusely explained that his conclusion might've been wrong in the GTAV episode because of insufficient data samples.

deduction is a meaningless waste of time if your starting premise makes no sense.

Unless your assumptions hold, no amount of deduction can save you.
A logical deduction from a silly premise remains a silly premise no matter what convoluted tricks you play with it.

And I've seen matt pile one silly thing on top of another, on top of another quite regularly.
Not matter how good your logic or deduction, combining 20 nonsensical points still creates a nonsensical result, no matter how well those points agree with one another.

Yes, it's internally consistent, but it's nonetheless insulting to my intelligence to have someone proclaim something absurd using a rational method, but flaky assumptions.

Just because something sounds clever, it doesn't mean it is.

CrystalShadow:

deduction is a meaningless waste of time if your starting premise makes no sense.

Unless your assumptions hold, no amount of deduction can save you.
A logical deduction from a silly premise remains a silly premise no matter what convoluted tricks you play with it.

That's what I said. You didn't say anything about false premises, only that "overall effect is really rather absurd".

TranshumanistG:

CrystalShadow:

deduction is a meaningless waste of time if your starting premise makes no sense.

Unless your assumptions hold, no amount of deduction can save you.
A logical deduction from a silly premise remains a silly premise no matter what convoluted tricks you play with it.

That's what I said. You didn't say anything about false premises, only that "overall effect is really rather absurd".

I implied it with my first post. >_>
You clearly didn't get that, so I felt I had to clarify it. So... What exactly were you objecting to me having said again?

My point the whole time was that because the premise is often silly, and many of the details to support the argument, the overall effect of the entire thing is absurd, no matter how well researched it may be, or how much logic was used in the process.

CrystalShadow:

I implied it with my first post. >_>
You clearly didn't get that, so I felt I had to clarify it. So... What exactly were you objecting to me having said again?

My point the whole time was that because the premise is often silly, and many of the details to support the argument, the overall effect of the entire thing is absurd, no matter how well researched it may be, or how much logic was used in the process.

Oh, I guess, the implication went way over my head. I understood it as you having no problem with his premises(assumptions that something is true) or logical reasoning and instead criticizing the amount of conclusions leading from one to another and leading to counter-intuitive results, which I think is fine as long as it's done properly.

An engaged audience is a moronic audience?

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Not loving your work.

I think people are taking the series a little too seriously. I mean the series has always struck me as at least a little bit tongue-in-cheek, and while MatPat can make some well-thought-out arguments at times, or at the very least, get some complicated issues put into more bite-sized questions, just as often he strikes me as just indulging and rationalizing some silly head-canons, which there's nothing wrong with.

As for this particular video, controversy machines have been a marketing tool for a long time, but now it's just starting to reach a critical mass, what with the growing "socially sensitive" crowd ready to pounce, where companies are going to have to find a balance between making enough controversy to stir up attention, but not so much controversy as it gets their games banned/glorfed. Maybe this will lead to the death of this BS style of marketing. One can dream, can't they?

Good. As long as there are people willing to give in to moral outrage and print stupid headlines this will happen. and those people deserve it. the moral crusaders deserve to loose in their outrage. And yes, Games artistic integrity has a right to exist no matter how many people get outraged or "Shocked".

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here