Green Yoshi
Member
I hope this will happen to all Oculus Rift games.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
SUPERHYPERCUBE cancels Oculus support
- Thread starter FelipeMGM
- Start date
/r/The_Donald isn't your ordinary group of Trump supporters. The place is pretty damn despicable, and it's damning that Luckey got involved with them.
FWIW I don't think all Trump supporters are racist. I think many of them are low information and don't understand what his policies will do to minority groups. Doesn't make it right, but understandable. If Luckey had just said "I'm voting for Trump", or even donated directly to his campaign, it would be reasonable to just point to him as a white 1%er who doesn't get it, and who has said as much in interviews (I read some piece today where he admitted that he doesn't have a damn clue the challenges that low income people or minorities face). The fact that he donated to a nonprofit associated with those shitheels, including Milo, who have a history of overt racism, even moreso than their candidate, is a different story.
FWIW I don't think all Trump supporters are racist. I think many of them are low information and don't understand what his policies will do to minority groups. Doesn't make it right, but understandable. If Luckey had just said "I'm voting for Trump", or even donated directly to his campaign, it would be reasonable to just point to him as a white 1%er who doesn't get it, and who has said as much in interviews (I read some piece today where he admitted that he doesn't have a damn clue the challenges that low income people or minorities face). The fact that he donated to a nonprofit associated with those shitheels, including Milo, who have a history of overt racism, even moreso than their candidate, is a different story.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Basically. But I guess this doesn't really affect the users since they can use their oculus headsets on apps bought from steam.
ShadowKingpin
Member
Phil Fucking Fish. So much respect right now!
NoFaceNico
Member
Start by telling me how you resolve this logical inconsistency. What you argue makes no sense.
How could I leave the voting booth in 2012 being 100% in favor of the death penalty and 100% in favor of abolishing it at the same time? You would agree that makes no sense, right? But according to your rules it's perfectly alright because I voted for a candidate that was in favor of it and another one that was opposed.
The only solution is to abandon your absolutist view and accept that people don't always agree with 100% of what their candidate says.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Honestly your position seems more like sophistry than his position seems like a generalization.
The President isn't "in favor of keeping the status quo", he's strategically chosen not to speak about the debate because of political capital and Overton window issues. But suppose he was a supporter of the death penalty and my claim that it's strategic on his part is wrong. The death penalty is not a majorly salient issue, it wasn't a part of the campaign, it wasn't the lynchpin driving support for Obama, it wasn't even an issue where there was a material difference between the Presidential candidates. The federal death penalty is also used very sparingly so it's sorta unclear to what extent a President is really even a relevant actor in the process. Moreover, he has appointed two justices who seem anti-Death Penalty, possibly to the point of abolition. If you asked Obama to list the top 20 most important changes he planned to make or beliefs that he had on policy, the death penalty would not be in that list.
Trump opened his campaign with the rapists and murderers speech. The racial elements--namely, a closed immigration policy based around fighting globalism and restoring citizenship and nationalism; expelling an enormous amount of people even at the cost of tearing families apart; considering new applicants disparately by race and religion; arguing that non-white public servants are not impartial on issues of race; and a "law and order" criminal justice policy designed to be harshly punitive despite or because of the racial implications of such moves and ignoring the discussion on race and criminal justice over the last ten years--have been upfront and center. They have been the defining way in which he differed from other members of his party. They have been the things he wants to stake his reputation on. If you asked Trump to list the top 3 most important changes he planned to make and beliefs that he had on policy, and then you discarded "I Want To Be A Winner!!!" until you got policy answers, all three would be racialized policies. The spinal cord of his convention speech was a series of racialized arguments.
George Wallace. ran for president on an explicitly racial segregation based ticket. "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" was his motto. That's a quote from a guy who took his oath of office at a monument to the confederacy and Jefferson Davies, and described himself as a representative of "the greatest people [whites] that have ever trod the earth." He never explicitly said "Don't vote for me for any reason other than segregation". Wallace had stances on Vietnam and stances on non-racial cultural issues and stances on healthcare. But what he put front and forward was: 1) End desegregation; 2) Impose law and order policies on crime; 3) Hippies are garbage communists and I don't like them. I am sure there are people who voted for him based on tax issues or mining issues or because they liked his hair. But it would be stupid to say "Wait, we don't actually know anything about why people supported George Wallace". We need only look at why Wallace run, what he said when he run, and what he claimed were his priorities to draw a very tight correlation.
I think if you're a person who wants to vote for Trump because he has fewer vowels in his name and you're a single issue vowel voter which is why you voted for Romney, McCain, Kerry, and Gore, that's fine. You have that right and it is rational given your aims. But perhaps people would be excused from instead judging you based on the values and issues that were front and center in those campaigns. The other benefit is that no one can prove what you think, but you can easily clarify misconceptions. You deliberately chose not to clarify your actual position on the death penalty when you dared someone to figure out what your position was and provided them with apparently incongruent information. This strikes me as a bad move when you're trying to argue for more empathy and understanding. People should try to understand you, but when they don't, you have more power than anyone else in the world to help correct them.
This is really College 101 level sophistry and for an appeal to nuance surprisingly lacking in nuance. His claim is not that people are 100% identified with all of the contradictory positions that the people they vote for support, his claim is that voting is at least minimally informative as to what someone believes in. If you vote for Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama, we don't know where you stand on the issues they disagree on, but we can reasonable infer that you probably aren't as conservative as Ted Cruz. Or maybe you are and you just always vote for law professors no matter the election. But you don't get to play coy when someone infers you are likely to be progressive.
People vote on what matters to them most. If you strongly disagree with something you will not be anywhere near it. I dont agree with racism so I will NEVER vote for a racist. If Hillary said half of the things Donald Trump has said I just will not vote for her at all. I will find a candidate who matches most of my views.
BumblebeeCody
Member
I never had an issue with Phil Fish so nothing really changed
LordOcidax
Member
Can wait for a big Dev to jump on this.
charlequin
Banned
Explicit, violent white supremacy is not the same as most of the issues that have historically come up in presidential elections. You're engaging in a super semantic nitpick argument that just isn't really relevant to the actual topic here.
? I've never stated the bolded anywhere, and I've said multiple times that I am voting for someone whose views don't line up with mine 100%. I don't think I've ever voted for someone whose views were 100% in line with what I want, hahaha.
I'm not gonna answer your dumbass question about telling you what you think, because that's up to you. What you did do was endorse two candidates separate views, and it's up to them, once elected, to decide how far they want to go in pushing those views/political stances into actual policy.
i legitimately don't understand how you don't understand, lmfao. i'm baffled, even more so that you think you have me in some kinda 'gotcha' trap with your dumb example.
so you tell me, man. what do you think? are you for or against the death penalty? and is that something that made a significant impact on your decision in voting for either the congressman or the president?
therealist
Member
Tell me, what is productive about calling half of America racist? You don't educate people by insulting them. Do you tell little kids that they are stupid because they have trouble with long division? Or do you phrase it in a different manner that encourages them to continue developing?
adults are not children. try again.
Lys Skygge
Member
I'm not surprised that Phil Fish was the first to cancel support of the Rift after yesterday's revelation. His views always tended to lean more left despite stirring the internet pot from time to time.
charlequin
Banned
If you keep wringing your hands that hard you're gonna get blisters.
John Kowalski
Banned
Didn't know Fish was working on this, glad to see him working in games again. Sorry to the rest of the team for not knowing your names tho. You're probably cool too.
ShadowKingpin
Member
It's a remarkable experience. The game is so well-made.
Vegetable Lasagna
Member
Calling a racist a racist is now an insult? Sounds more like a fact to me. And hating other races is no different than struggling at math? I expect most people to have the innate ability to decipher right from wrong. I don't expect most people to just know math.
But yeah, if we were all extremely nice to racists it would probably cause racism to cease to exist in our country. Problem solved, guys! And we thought this was a complicated issue? I suggest we use tax payer money to provide extremely nice, personal tutors to fill racist's hearts with joy and love. If you can teach math you can teach love!
These are not children (or are you implying they are?). They are being willfully ignorant - you can't help those that don't want to be helped. It is not the job of minorities to educate those who CHOOSE to remain ignorant (nevermind the ones who are proud of said ignorance).
I'm beyond impressed and will be looking seriously at the game as a result. People treating this as a simple electoral choice between the status quo and change are kidding themselves and need to look at the candidates more closely. Trump doesn't just say something offensive now and then, his entire platform is deeply rooted in xenophobia, racism, scare tactics, and obsessive self-interest. There was a time when I could have said "at least he isn't rampantly homophobic and transphobic" but he has hooked his wagon directly to those who are, so even that faint praise no longer applies.
SUPERHYPERCUBE, eh?
SUPERHYPERCUBE, eh?
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I think he is saying it's not the best way to promote them to change their views. It probably just sets them on the defensive, justifying their own beliefs regardless of "facts".
Oculus/Facebook have been silent. Who knows how long they'll wait to say something.
These devs announcing this now is good.
Those are not the sort of people that are open to changing their views.
GillianSeed79
Member
It's not hard to understand. Voting for a Republican or being a Republican doesn't automatically make you a racist, but voting for Trump, who is a Republican AND is a racist AND has racist policy positions makes you at the very least a supporter of a racist and racist policies.
Arkam
Member
Thank you for posting this. Some sanity during these dark times. Scared people act irrationally. We need to try to heal this divide not wedge it wider.
therealist
Member
I'll try again.
Do you tell adults who are learning long division that they are stupid? Or do you phrase it in a manner that is conducive to their development?
I didnt read much on the Palmer Luckey thread other than that he was supporting some sort of white supremacist group
But then this quote from this thread says
So was Luckey just supporting Trump, or was he supporting white supremacists? And no, they're not synonymous phrases. Just because I prefer Trump to Hillary (honestly both arent that great) doesn't mean I'm a racist. Curious as to exactly who Luckey supported
But then this quote from this thread says
So was Luckey just supporting Trump, or was he supporting white supremacists? And no, they're not synonymous phrases. Just because I prefer Trump to Hillary (honestly both arent that great) doesn't mean I'm a racist. Curious as to exactly who Luckey supported
EatinOlives
Member
How do you heal this divide when one side wants solely to swing a sledgehammer?
Just look at the 8 years of obstructionism and "Obummer was born in Kenya!" They have no desire to heal anything.
Majmun
Member
This.
Nothing wrong with being a republican or voting for one. But supporting Trump makes me think you're either ignorant or a racist scum.
if you think they aren't synonymous, you haven't been paying attention. if you're voting for trump, you're supporting racism, xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, and only you can decide whether or not you're okay with that.
i expect ADULTS to be able to have the knowledge necessary to know how to educate themselves, and if they need help, I will try my best to support them, but I'm not going to sit around teaching an adult long division when they could pick up a damn math book or google step by step instructions that will teach them better than I could, and I expect them to take initiative, if they actually give a fuck about learning long division.
Vegetable Lasagna
Member
I don't think they care about the facts, or this wouldn't be an issue today. And maybe it's about time these people take a break from attacking and go on the defensive. Ever went outside and interacted with humans before? Maybe even have children? Being nice at inappropriate times is a lesson in how to get taken advantage of and not much more. But at least they know you care, right?
Baron von Loathsome
Member
I actually laughed out loud at this.
White people need to stop being so damn defensive when someone tells us we're being racist. Rather than stomping our feet and plugging our ears, we can listen, consider, and rethink our actions/attitudes. White supremacy constantly prioritizes white comfort, and we become conveniently ignorant to race dynamics even while we know those dynamics intimately well. White people have ABUNDANT opportunities to unlearn our racism if we actually prioritize that work.
Also, we as a nation (and species) are trying to heal from centuries of violence and trauma here. To ask the people who've been oppressed to be more nice about their cries for basic human rights is insulting at best.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
It's amazing how some people don't get that.
brandonh83
Banned
Because he doesn't give one fuck and is, what looks like to me based on his own words, extremely proud of the fact.