6 ms·

Depression Quest has no business being on that list. "understanding depression (esp. for ones who never experienced it)" Even the description is elitist and p

Depression Quest has no business being on that list. "understanding depression (esp. for ones who never experienced it)" Even the description is elitist and pretentious. Everyone has experienced depression. It's an extremely common mental disorder. DQ is nothing more than a lackluster text-based visual novel (if you can call it that) cashing in on an easily exploitable group.

mbel 9y ago
> Even the description is elitist and pretentious. It may or may not be elitist and pretentious (what kind of art isn't?), but that has no influence on whether it is science based or not. > Everyone has experienced depression. Well, this is simply not true.
- newswriter99 9y ago
  Have you played DQ? Where's the science behind it? If that counts as a science-based game then you might as well throw in Call of Duty so that people can "experience" the horrors of war or Darkest Dungeon so players can learn about PTSD.
  - mbel 9y ago
    I never said or implied that I believe it is science based. I highly doubt it is. However I hadn't played it so I'm not going to argue about that. What I said is that your argumentation is absolutely incorrect and wrong in this context.
    - newswriter99 9y ago
      So you're not debating the scientific-accuracy of DQ, or its merit whether it belongs on the list, you're merely debating whether the words I used were correct. Basically you're not taking part in the point of the original discussion?
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - mbel 9y ago
        I am taking part in the discussion indirectly by pointing out that your argumentation is irrelevant and does not support your opinion. It's not the words that were incorrect. The logic behind them is flawed. The list is supposed to convey games with element of science in them. The entries which are not based on science should be removed from the list. Therefore correct argumentation for removing DQ from the list should explain why the game has nothing to do with actual science.
        newswriter99 9y ago
        The critics aren't on your side. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/depression-quest/user-reviews http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/depression-quest/user-revi...
        the_af 9y ago
        Before the, um, "popular" backlash, Depression Quest was actually well received by critics. In my opinion, looking at metacritic user reviews now is not a good metric in this case: Depression Quest is one of the games that was a big part of the whole GamerGate debacle (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy). Tensions ran high, people made unfortunate comments and personal attacks, and things quickly ran out of control; a lot of gamers simply set out to punish some games and authors with negative reviews. Unfortunately this means many reviews are suspect and not entirely about whether the game is scientific or not, or about the game itself or its quality for that matter. As I'm sure you're aware of. In fact, getting too hung up about this particular entry in the list is (to me) suspect.
        newswriter99 9y ago
        Part of the reason DQ was "well received" initially was because at face value it appears as though it's for a cause. Plus, (as mentioned by Gamergate) there's an unwritten rule about criticizing anything even remotely appearing "progressive." It's not hard to find overwhelming posts pointing these facts out: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2dw9hh/why_is_zoe_quinn_maker_of_depression_quest_so/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2dw9hh/why_is... Any the cherry on top is your last line. "Suspect" Once again, either people are forced to cave in, or otherwise be "suspect" or "problematic" or "misogynist" or just the bad guy. Am I not allowed to point out the simple fact that DQ has no scientific educational value and as such does not belong on that list? If so, why am I not allowed to state this simple truth? Because it's inconvenient?
stared 9y ago
As person who added it to the list, I maintain that it has a place here. (And yes, I know it is controversional. And yes, I have had depressive episodes. And I had been leaving with a close person with depression for a prolonged time.) Description may be not ideal - so feel free to propose a different one (via PR). > Everyone has experienced depression. Not everyone. And people who have never had it go into annoying and counterproductive 'get over it' as they really think that it is about typical sadness, laziness or (very temporary) low mood. Or that people suffering are just too dumb to realize that some activities may help them. And I found this game useful in explaining depression to such people. Especially as: - very often one is well aware of beneficial steps, yet having no energy/will/hope to do them (captured wonderfully in this game!), - that even positive things (committed relationship, social gathering etc) are at best small steps, they aren't enough just to "cheer someone up". For a better resource (but not a game), I send: http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-part-two.html http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-par.... EDIT: That said, I don't mean that Depression Game is a good game for everyone. EDIT2: IT is here are its mechanics is mechanics of depression (psychology).
- simias 9y ago
  But is it "science-based"? One can relate to a piece of art (music, games, movies, paintings...) but it doesn't have much to do with actual science. Is the actual game based on scientific research in one way or an other?
  - stared 9y ago
    Read dscription, not only title.
    - simias 9y ago
      What description? I've tried "playing" the first few screens of the game here: http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html So far it looks like any other visual novel and I can't find any mention of scientific research anywhere. I really don't understand what's scientific about any of that. It would be like saying that the movie "Memento" is scientific because it features anterograde amnesia.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

mbel 9y ago

> Even the description is elitist and pretentious. It may or may not be elitist and pretentious (what kind of art isn't?), but that has no influence on whether it is science based or not. > Everyone has experienced depression. Well, this is simply not true.

newswriter99 9y ago
Have you played DQ? Where's the science behind it? If that counts as a science-based game then you might as well throw in Call of Duty so that people can "experience" the horrors of war or Darkest Dungeon so players can learn about PTSD.
- mbel 9y ago
  I never said or implied that I believe it is science based. I highly doubt it is. However I hadn't played it so I'm not going to argue about that. What I said is that your argumentation is absolutely incorrect and wrong in this context.
  - newswriter99 9y ago
    So you're not debating the scientific-accuracy of DQ, or its merit whether it belongs on the list, you're merely debating whether the words I used were correct. Basically you're not taking part in the point of the original discussion?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - mbel 9y ago
      I am taking part in the discussion indirectly by pointing out that your argumentation is irrelevant and does not support your opinion. It's not the words that were incorrect. The logic behind them is flawed. The list is supposed to convey games with element of science in them. The entries which are not based on science should be removed from the list. Therefore correct argumentation for removing DQ from the list should explain why the game has nothing to do with actual science.
      - newswriter99 9y ago
        The critics aren't on your side. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/depression-quest/user-reviews http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/depression-quest/user-revi...
        the_af 9y ago
        Before the, um, "popular" backlash, Depression Quest was actually well received by critics. In my opinion, looking at metacritic user reviews now is not a good metric in this case: Depression Quest is one of the games that was a big part of the whole GamerGate debacle (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy). Tensions ran high, people made unfortunate comments and personal attacks, and things quickly ran out of control; a lot of gamers simply set out to punish some games and authors with negative reviews. Unfortunately this means many reviews are suspect and not entirely about whether the game is scientific or not, or about the game itself or its quality for that matter. As I'm sure you're aware of. In fact, getting too hung up about this particular entry in the list is (to me) suspect.
        newswriter99 9y ago
        Part of the reason DQ was "well received" initially was because at face value it appears as though it's for a cause. Plus, (as mentioned by Gamergate) there's an unwritten rule about criticizing anything even remotely appearing "progressive." It's not hard to find overwhelming posts pointing these facts out: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2dw9hh/why_is_zoe_quinn_maker_of_depression_quest_so/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/2dw9hh/why_is... Any the cherry on top is your last line. "Suspect" Once again, either people are forced to cave in, or otherwise be "suspect" or "problematic" or "misogynist" or just the bad guy. Am I not allowed to point out the simple fact that DQ has no scientific educational value and as such does not belong on that list? If so, why am I not allowed to state this simple truth? Because it's inconvenient?

stared 9y ago

As person who added it to the list, I maintain that it has a place here. (And yes, I know it is controversional. And yes, I have had depressive episodes. And I had been leaving with a close person with depression for a prolonged time.) Description may be not ideal - so feel free to propose a different one (via PR). > Everyone has experienced depression. Not everyone. And people who have never had it go into annoying and counterproductive 'get over it' as they really think that it is about typical sadness, laziness or (very temporary) low mood. Or that people suffering are just too dumb to realize that some activities may help them. And I found this game useful in explaining depression to such people. Especially as: - very often one is well aware of beneficial steps, yet having no energy/will/hope to do them (captured wonderfully in this game!), - that even positive things (committed relationship, social gathering etc) are at best small steps, they aren't enough just to "cheer someone up". For a better resource (but not a game), I send: http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-part-two.html http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-par.... EDIT: That said, I don't mean that Depression Game is a good game for everyone. EDIT2: IT is here are its mechanics is mechanics of depression (psychology).

simias 9y ago
But is it "science-based"? One can relate to a piece of art (music, games, movies, paintings...) but it doesn't have much to do with actual science. Is the actual game based on scientific research in one way or an other?
- stared 9y ago
  Read dscription, not only title.
  - simias 9y ago
    What description? I've tried "playing" the first few screens of the game here: http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html So far it looks like any other visual novel and I can't find any mention of scientific research anywhere. I really don't understand what's scientific about any of that. It would be like saying that the movie "Memento" is scientific because it features anterograde amnesia.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]