• 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.

#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dryk

Member
Right. You are 100% spot on. But nuance like that is lost when people's arguments come in the form of meme-style images with big red lines all over them to denote "conflicts of interest" uncovered by 4chan and Redditors.
That sort of behaviour is completely unacceptable. Especially what happened to Jenn in light of her blog post on the matter:

The Guardian actually nixed the disclosure of my relationship with Ms. Quinn, simply because it didn’t strike editors or legal—that is, The Guardian’s legal department, which approved the final draft—as a “conflict of interest” in an op/ed about abuse. The publication determined the disclosure I provided didn’t matter, since my piece is not a review of her work, but a 500-word blog about Internet harassment.

Anyone serious about tackling industry corruption should be talking about the systemic issues in the publisher-press-consumer relationship instead of playing harrasment whack-a-mole with people who dared to be a girl in this industry.
 

mbpm1

Member
There is no "endgame." We've been having this discussion for a while, and we will continue to have. There's no law to pass, no election to win, and no system to replace.

The issues raised won't be fixed anytime soon. The people debating will just forget about it for a while until something happens that brings it back to the forefront.

I think that's kind of the sad part, but that goes with the territory of "raising awareness" or starting a conversation. It'll be a long time before this discussion will bear real, concrete fruit. Until then we're all kind of trekking through manure.

The only way anything will come of this is if reasoned discussion causes people to change their ways, I think.

Unfortunately, since a lot of people do not seem inclined to that, and more of hurling invective, this seems hopeless.
 

Mononoke

Banned
Can someone give me a quick summary of what this is, I read of Forbes it started with a blog about some female named Zoe?

Basically, over the last couple of years there has been criticism of the industry's press because of supposed cronyism, corruption and various other things. A mistrust of the consumer and the media. The Zoe Quinn incident happened (ie. her ex boyfriend leaked a bunch of information of their failed relationship, which alleged that Zoe cheated on him and slept with various members in the industry), and misogynistic assholes took the information and said that there could be a possible breach of ethics, as one of the people Zoe was sleeping with is in the press (and she is a Dev). That press guy did in fact write something about her game, but it was a VERY tiny piece, that barely mentioned it at all (and it was an article about a collection of games on Steam). There was no proof that she was sleeping with him prior to that article going up. So it was basically a non issue. What it came down to was, Zoe Quinn and her boyfriend had a personal private affair put online, and gamers that have long been resisting any kind of criticism from the feminist sect in the press/industry, jumped on this chance to go after Quinn (who comes from this feminist activist area, and has many friends in the media that also are in this area). They then used this to push a "supposed" movement against corruption in the games media.

Now, this issue has taken off under this supposed "criticism" of the games media with corruption. The problem is, the intention of this movement to supposedly criticize the media for corruption was really being pushed by a small group of gamers that don't want to hear any criticism of their hobby (that's putting it lightly. They actually wage war against anyone that has anything critical to say). However, since what they were pushing is "criticism of the media and its corruption", a lot of people joined in, because this was already an issue that a lot of gamers had for the past couple of years.

So what the GamerGate movement says it is, and what it actually started as is two different things (as is the actual intention of the movement). However, then the media made a collected effort when 20 + articles came out at the same time on how "the gamer label is dead" and that "people should not identify themselves as gamers". This was IMO a poorly handled message pushed by the media (as it was actually aimed at the minority that are assholes and who are harassing and waging war on anyone that has any criticism of their hobby). Because of the way the message was worded, it just pushed a lot of people away from their message, and got people to join the GamerGate cause, because on the surface they already had criticisms with the media, and this gamer label stuff pretty much (at least to them), was an extension of their criticisms (even when this message wasn't even actually aimed at them).

TLDR; most people don't actually know what the intention of GamerGate is, and two issues are being conflated. This really boils down to a small minority of gamers waging war on journalists/activist for having an opinion or criticism of their hobby. But now a lot of regular gamers are now jumping into the fray, as their issues with the media is now being conflated.
 

firehawk12

Subete no aware
It's already hit Slate (with a fairly reasonable article, in OP) and Al Jazeera (apparently with a completely shitty one). I didn't read and won't link the Al Jazeera one, but it sounds like they singled out Jenn Frank extremely hardcore and unfairly. I'm not sure anyone reasonable thinks bringing this to "mainstream" journalism will solve anything, they never cover stuff like this well.
If nothing else, I assume the traditional press will be allowed to claim moral superiority over "upstarts" for a bit.
 

unbias

Member
Those are some great articles in the OP.

I said I was going to avoid this as it was messing with my head, but here I am again.

All this blew up for a few reasons but to me there is one big one. Gamer's for a long time has been talked down to by the gaming "press" and big devs and publishers. Whether it be the ME3 ending, DLC abuse or what have you, most gamers feel that most of the press have been in the back pocket of the game maker's for a while now and have told gamers to stop being whiny entitled children. In other words, animosity has been brewing within our hobby for a while now. When the same gaming "press" blame the "gamers" for the industries problems and then shout down to the same gamers that they are irrelevant it reached critical mass and blew up.

Pretty much. Then when you look at twitter stat research:

Journalism is the only category where women received more abuse than men, with female journalists and TV news presenters receiving roughly three times as much abuse as their male counterparts.

For clarity if you follow the link and download the spread sheet you see this.

  • Overall Tweets (male)45792 (female)60048
  • Abusive Tweets (male)898 (1.96%) (female)3136 (5.22%)

About 60% abusive tweets from male and around 40% from female

This tells you that for whatever reason female persons in the press get a lot of hate. The reason for this, I honestly dont know, but because of this, guess who is going to get most of the mob hate when the hate is focused on the media?

This means whenever a mob gets created in the game industry, and it is about the journalists, they will suffer and female celebrity media will suffer the most(since we have no politicians or celebrities really, outside of a small handful of youtube celebs).

So, when the mob goes on the attack you have to expect that the mob will attack by around 4x the women in media (this is me assuming that the 1% from celebrities transfer over to the journalist), more then the male journalists. This can very easily look like gamers have more of a sexist problem then other industries, by journalists.

You are not sexist or misogynists, however the mob WILL have them, and statistically since we have no celebrities or politicians the mob will near exclusively go after the media and the women will experience the hate by a factor of 4... That is a noticeable difference when you compare yourself among your peers.

So ya, it is never good to join in on a mob, specially when that mob is on twitter(and looting). If people cant figure out, from this, that people will assume you are a misogynist because some of the mob(regardless of the accuracy of the accusation), I would hope people can see why the perception is there. 4x the amount of abusive from twitter responses is a hard thing to deal with, specially if you are getting attacked more then the male counter part.

So to me, because the way the media and the industry as a whole is setup I think the game industry has to be more careful then most, because the perception is very easy to be construed as a large % of "gamers". I also think this means the male journalists have to be more careful to not fan the flames, because by doing so you are actually keeping the pressure on the women, I think.
The moderation team has been asked for a thread dedicated specifically to the #gamergate phenomena currently exploding on a Twitter near you.
2. Don't drop a link and say, "That's how I feel!" If you can't be bothered to put your opinions into your own words, don't post.

Haha, at 1st I was worried this wasnt going to get followed.
 

Mik2121

Member
Basically, over the last couple of years there has been criticism of the industry's press because of supposed nepotism among other things.

Been seeing the word "nepotism" thrown around a lot here recently. You sure it means what you think it does?

I don't think the gaming press industry is old enough to even have any sort of nepotism happening.
 

Laughing Banana

Weeping Pickle
The whole relationship between gaming journalism-gamers is really bizarre.

It seems like often times anyone with a clear sense of mind and a pair of working eyes can see that they hate each other so deeply, and yet at the same time each one of them has a longing/dependence on the other that is also deep to the point where one cannot exist without the other

I don't know what to call it. It is truly a bizarre relationship.
 

Mononoke

Banned
Been seeing the word "nepotism" thrown around a lot here recently. You sure it means what you think it does?

I don't think the gaming press industry is old enough to even have any sort of nepotism happening.

I'm not saying it, I'm just saying what people have been complaining about. Really my point was, people have had issues with the press for a long time. Whether it's legitimate or not, it's been something boiling under the surface for a while now. Basically, there has been criticisms of the press for the last couple of years. And people with these criticisms are joining a cause that on the surface level claims to be pushing against these issues, when in reality it's actually a cause being pushed by misogynistic assholes that don't want anyone to criticize their hobby.
 

Canucked

Member
If anyone wants to read a academic perspective on this: http://culturedigitally.org/2014/09/a-4-front-war/

The Ouroboros metaphor is fitting, I think.


Thanks for this.

I find myself getting further and further away from gaming culture. It used to be so welcoming. Now it's so scary. The few loud angry voices drown out so much of the good. An inclusive gaming world is sooooooo important to me. I don't agree with all of Sarkeesin's points but I respect that she's talking. I love that she's contributing in a way where people aren't shamed and hurt. As a gay man I often find the gaming world kind of cold nowadays, and I can identify with those who want to expand the audience. Who want to see representation and fair views

I respect everyone participating in the discussion and feel that those who are just yelling instead of talking are making the game world smaller.

I also respect games journalism who can never catch a break. I don't understand the need to vilify them instead of discuss the topics.
 
The only way anything will come of this is if reasoned discussion causes people to change their ways, I think.

Unfortunately, since a lot of people do not seem inclined to that, and more of hurling invective, this seems hopeless.


But something already has come of all this. The loudest, angriest people under the #gamergate banner have at least partially achieved what they set out to do by forcing people to leave the industry. That isn't something you should just handwave away as "it can't be helped."
 

alstein

Member
This particular article is very, very good. The author went out and actually spoke to many people who were tweeting with the #gamergate hashtag, and asked them various questions. Please, if you do nothing else before participating in this thread, read this piece.

Good for the most part- their last point, about forming your own news/reviews, I kinda feel that sites such as GAF kinda fill that role already- it's one of the reasons I frequent forums in general, here for some things, another one for different things.

I don't know if game journos are dead, but the business model is one I don't need to support anymore because the stuff I used to rely on it for, I can get through forums.

I do believe it's a good thing if the audience is expanded. I don't believe it's a good thing if we throw one group out to replace it with another. I believe in inclusion- I don't believe in replacing one form of exclusion with another.

If game journos were able to expose scandals and were more antagonistic with devs, there would be a lot more value in them to folks like myself. People like Tom Chick- I know I can trust his reviews because he will call out crap, even if it's from his friends, and even when he pays the price (publishers generally refuse to give him review copies for that reason) I don't agree with his opinion on everythin, but I know I can trust it to be honest.
 

duessano

Member
"Gaming" culture has never been more then a mirage.

But it isn't a mirage to me. To paraphrase a famous quote: "Gaming is still real to me, dammit!" I can self identify as a gamer because even though I meet people with totally different religous, political, racial and social economic backgrounds, we can bond over the idea of "Gaming" and being a "gamer"

When I come across these threads, I have to go back to this video to remind myself why I am a gamer: http://youtu.be/uGU2B-_Foy8
 

mbpm1

Member
But something already has come of all this. The loudest, angriest people under the #gamergate banner have at least partially achieved what they set out to do by forcing people to leave the industry. That isn't something you should just handwave away as "it can't be helped."

I meant, anything good, that is. Things can definitely get worse.
 

Dryk

Member
I'm not saying it, I'm just saying what people have been complaining about. Really my point was, people have had issues with the press for a long time. Whether it's legitimate or not, I'm not saying saying one way or the other.
The correct word is cronyism. They're similar terms (nepotism for family, cronyism for friends), but he's right that the incorrect term is being used.
 
The whole relationship between gaming journalism-gamers is really bizarre.

It seems like often times anyone with a clear sense of mind and a pair of working eyes can see that they hate each other so deeply, and yet at the same time each one of them has a longing/dependence on the other that is also deep to the point where one cannot exist without the other

I don't know what to call it. It is truly a bizarre relationship.


Gamers aren't that dependent on journalists. Honestly, if a journalist hates his audiance so much then feel free to live, I'm sure there a hundred others who want the job. It's just baffling how some of the press is so quick to insult that audiance that puts food on their tables
 

graywolf323

Member
it's interesting how this has just kept growing over the past several weeks especially with bigger name outlets like Slate picking up on it as well as someone like Christina Sommers starting to weigh in

honestly it seems that the attempts at censorship helped explode it

Been seeing the word "nepotism" thrown around a lot here recently. You sure it means what you think it does?

I don't think the gaming press industry is old enough to even have any sort of nepotism happening.

nepotism doesn't have to be hiring of children, it's also used when it comes to family in general

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nepotism
 

Mik2121

Member
it's interesting how this has just kept growing over the past several weeks especially with bigger name outlets like Slate picking up on it as well as someone like Christina Sommers starting to weigh in

honestly it seems that the attempts at censorship helped explode it



nepotism doesn't have to be hiring of children, it's also used when it comes to family in general

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nepotism

I know what nepotism is. So what's exactly the big problem in the "gaming journalism" industry related to nepotism? Someone hired his niece or something?
 

Fredescu

Member
You're going to need some place to interact with and keep up with developers and such, and even if that method is completely private and foolproof, there's still contact emails, article comments, GAF threads. It would be really hard to just up and ignore everything coming at you and you probably wouldn't be able to perform your job properly if you managed to find a way to do so.

They all have better methods to stop hate trains than Twitter. That said, as I posted earlier, I can understand that leaving Twitter altogether may not be feasible if you want to continue as a freelancer or indie developer. One of my favourite political writers bemoans the fact that she has to be active on Twitter to get work, so I should have thought of that.
 

Antiwhippy

the holder of the trombone
Good for the most part- their last point, about forming your own news/reviews, I kinda feel that sites such as GAF kinda fill that role already- it's one of the reasons I frequent forums in general, here for some things, another one for different things.

I don't know if game journos are dead, but the business model is one I don't need to support anymore because the stuff I used to rely on it for, I can get through forums.

Forums which take most of their topics either from gaming sites or the same publisher PR sources which people say the gaming press is corrupt with.

Which makes you question: does it really matter?
 

Mononoke

Banned
The correct word is cronyism. They're similar terms (nepotism for family, cronyism for friends), but he's right that the incorrect term is being used.

Sure. I think a lot of the criticisms people have the media isn't even really that well thought out. To be clear, I was never arguing that it was. I was just saying that there has been a divide growing over the years between some gamers and the media. And this perceived idea that the media is in bed with the devs, and not looking out for the consumer.

Problem is, people that have long had this opinion are now joining a cause who's true roots/intentions are NOT to actually hold the media accountable for corruption, but is to snuff out anyone that has a criticism of their hobby.

This isn't to say there isn't a debate to be had about the industry and its practices. I think a debate is healthy (when it's actually substantial and well thought out).
 

Adam Blue

Member
I think the root of a lot of this is the anonymity and the nature of trolls.

This is true. So, I say this a lot around here, but I work in social media. It's best to let things go, ignore, etc. But, gamers hold this medium close to our hearts, and it's easy to have an elitist attitude.

This elitism is why #gamergate encompasses everything. Even the whole thing being a hashtag. Elitism with social justice, elitism with journalism - and there's nothing wrong with it really, except we do not know how to use social media properly. Combine that with the fact that there are assholes everywhere - even gamers that use the internet, and now we have a problem.

I've unfollowed a lot of journalists and critics on Twitter the past week. The problem is they keep at it - when they shouldn't. Phil Kollar constantly retweets loaded comments. Developer Josh Tsui tweeted that he is blocking users. He gets it. That's for the best.

Social Media is the real-world - it's pre-automobile revolution but with higher reach. In public, I won't go wondering around to places I have beef with and start shouting - assholes do that, and I avoid assholes. That's not how you have a happy life or get anywhere. But gamers, who are first to the scene in technology, will grasp something like social media and be the forerunners of how to use it. This is true with the internet in general. But, there are assholes among us.

As for feminism, this is a tough one because of, again, the nature of technology. This is one is so tough I won't even explore it here.

TL;DR - It's social media. Every facet of this has always existed, but now we're doing it in a medium that few know how to use.
 
Gamers aren't that dependent on journalists. Honestly, if a journalist hates his audiance so much then feel free to live, I'm sure there a hundred others who want the job. It's just baffling how some of the press is so quick to insult that audiance that puts food on their tables

I personally think it is much worse for a journalist to write something they do not believe in simply because it is what their audience wants to hear.
 

graywolf323

Member
I know what nepotism is. So what's exactly the big problem in the "gaming journalism" industry related to nepotism? Someone hired his niece or something? I haven't been able to read through everything, but it just seems like such a silly thing to talk about. Nepotism in something like politics can be an issue, but in the game journalism circle?

nepotism is a problem in any setting if someone hires a family member over someone more qualified

but yes having now read more I see that people are using it instead of cronyism which is the better term for someone hiring a friend
 

alstein

Member
Forums which takes most of their topics either from gaming sites or the same publisher PR sources which people say the gaming press is corrupt with.

Which makes you question: does it really matter?

Well, in terms of actual hard news, most of that is press releases, very little actual digging, so it doesn't matter too much there.

In terms of reviews and game discussion- it most definitely does matter, as reviewers are dependent on revenue.

In a way , it's not a surprise that the dissonance occured- we're naturally suspicious of anything with that business model, and yet we're unwilling to pony up money to ensure a financially independent game journo place.
 

Laughing Banana

Weeping Pickle
Gamers aren't that dependent on journalists. Honestly, if a journalist hates his audiance so much then feel free to live, I'm sure there a hundred others who want the job. It's just baffling how some of the press is so quick to insult that audiance that puts food on their tables

Really? There has been so many examples of people championing occurrences such as when site A gave their favorite games a 9 or 10 to the extent that is, in my eyes, borderline ridiculous, and you can even see it here in GAF.

Not that I disagree with you, however, in that I also view it as a strange thing that these game journalists are so open in admonishing their own audiences... but then again those same audiences will be back when the same journalists are giving great reviews towards the games they like, etc etc.

Like I said, really bizarre. "Gamers" sure are a fickle bunch.
 

unbias

Member
I personally think it is much worse for a journalist to write something they do not believe in simply because it is what their audience wants to hear.

Sure, but if you believe in and participate in gonzo journalism, that talking head in the media should be upfront about it, so people can choose to participate(knowingly).
 

duessano

Member
I'm also just wondering why people are stating #gamergate is an attack on women in gaming?

I haven't seen any attacks on Corinne Yu or Amy Hennig?

Until #gamergate appeared, I didn't even know who Zoe Quinn was.
 

unbias

Member
I'm also just wondering why people are stating #gamergate is an attack on women in gaming?

I haven't seen any attacks on Corinne Yu or Amy Hennig?

Until #gamergate appeared, I didn't even know who Zoe Quinn was.

Neither of those people are part of the media or associated with the media. Women in media are the ones who get attacked on twitter disproportionately, not the developers.
 

Mononoke

Banned
I'm also just wondering why people are stating #gamergate is an attack on women in gaming?

I haven't seen any attacks on Corinne Yu or Amy Hennig?

Until #gamergate appeared, I didn't even know who Zoe Quinn was.

To answer your question, it's because it started out that way. The initial "campaign against corruption in the media", was actually an aimed campaign to go after this section of the industry that is pushing this criticism and being a voice for women/diversity in the medium.

It started out as an attack on these people, and has now snowballed into something else.
 

SerTapTap

Member
Am I alone in thinking GamerGate is the dumbest name for a... thing anyone could have come up with? Especially with there being a site called "GamersGate"

"X Gate" is a pretty awful naming convention anyway...I mean Watergate wasn't about water. I'm also a bit confused honestly, people I've seen using the hashtag are mostly defending the term gamer and talking about positive stuff, but a lot of people seem to consider it a source of harassment. I've avoided using the hashtag at all, lots of room for misinterpretation. I figured it was "gamer gate" because of the "gamers are over" silliness but maybe not? My opinions are more complicated than a hashtag so I'd rather stay out of that part though.
 

nynt9

Member
I think that's a pretty good code of ethics, and I can't think of any of those rules I don't try to follow, but no, Kotaku does not require its staff to follow any sort of external list of rules.

Just out of curiosity, do you guys have an internal set of rules that staff members are required to follow?
Rules relevant to this subject, that is, and if you're allowed to talk about it, of course.
 

Lime

Member
Neither of those people are part of the media or associated with the media. Women in media are the ones who get attacked on twitter disproportionately, not the developers.

Zoe Quinn is a developer.

Other developers who happen to be women have also experienced harrassment and fear in the last couple of weeks.

This isn't relegated to "media" people.
 
I suspect that the journalism issue is being used as a decoy to muddy and distract from most of the heinous shit being done.

Remember in the 80s and 90s when EGM kept naming publishers who threatened to and did pull credentials and advertising when they wouldn't change reviews? Remember the uproar and demand for industry standards that resulted?

Cause I don't.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Neither of those people are part of the media or associated with the media. Women in media are the ones who get attacked on twitter disproportionately, not the developers.

There's no relevant distinction. The attacks on on women in the media are attacks on women gamers and attacks on women period.
 

Mononoke

Banned
Thank You very much. The "Gamer" tag to me was always dumb to me anyway.

This whole subject is little to dark for my taste. IMO I come to realize, since the internet all types Journalism has become a joke.

While I can understand why people are upset and offended by the poorly collective message by the media about the supposed death of the gamer identification (as a response to the assholes that have been waging war on anyone that has a criticism of this medium)...

People should really step back and look at the bigger picture. There are women/journalist in this industry that CAN NOT enjoy their hobby they way many do. They put up with harassment on a daily basis, and have had to deal with a toxic environment for years. And that's not even taking into consideration that the industry has been pretty poor at representing women in this medium in general.

So again, I understand why people are angry/upset. I get that people have criticisms separate from all this (criticisms of the media and corruption). But I really think people need to step back, and look at this big problem in this industry. Where is the empathy. In the end I feel this is getting lost in the mix though.
 

unbias

Member
Zoe Quinn is a developer.

Other developers who happen to be women have also experienced harrassment and fear in the last couple of weeks.

This isn't relegated to "media" people.

I specifically said associated with for a reason. Anyone attached to Zoe is getting the mob hate.
 

sk3

Banned
"Gamergate" is specifically referring to the event in which no less than 5 articles espousing the "death of the gamer" appeared within 24 hours of each other, by different authors on different sites.

People already had their conspiracy theories with the incestous nature of the indie game dev/games journalism/norcal scene, but that kind of put it right there front and center.

If they had not had done that, there would be no "movement" if you even call it that.
 
Thanks for this.

I find myself getting further and further away from gaming culture. It used to be so welcoming. Now it's so scary. The few loud angry voices drown out so much of the good. An inclusive gaming world is sooooooo important to me. I don't agree with all of Sarkeesin's points but I respect that she's talking. I love that she's contributing in a way where people aren't shamed and hurt. As a gay man I often find the gaming world kind of cold nowadays, and I can identify with those who want to expand the audience. Who want to see representation and fair views

I respect everyone participating in the discussion and feel that those who are just yelling instead of talking are making the game world smaller.

I also respect games journalism who can never catch a break. I don't understand the need to vilify them instead of discuss the topics.

I'm in the same boat as a straight Asian dude. I think this is why Leigh Alexander's article made sense to me where it offended so many others--because I feel like the "gamer" identity has increasingly narrowed over the years. We spend so much time in this industry deciding who is and who isn't a "true" gamer. We hear about the phenomenon of the "fake geek girl." We hear about "casuals." We hear about "Call of Duty bros." We hear about people who like "walking simulators" and how those aren't "real games." (I think I've used up my allotment of scare quotes so I'll stop now.)

As a result, I don't really identify as a "gamer" except in the most prosaic terms, as "someone who plays video games." Aspects of gaming culture are really great, like that one time I went to PAX East and saw all these people who were able to just be themselves and express their enjoyment of games, whether it be Mass Effect or League of Legends or Thirty Flights of Loving or Plants vs. Zombies. But there's the flip side: you may also know these games as "Hamburger Helper hurr hurr," "stupid MOBA kids," "pretentious claptrap" and "casual garbage" respectively.

So I think I know where Alexander's coming from when she says "gamers are over." The idea of the "gamer" as someone who's very particular about their chosen games to the exclusion of all else, regardless of what those chosen games actually are, should be dead. For Alexander, she stopped being a "gamer" a long time ago, even though she still plays games, because many of the popular games don't speak to her anymore. Luckily for me, I still enjoy many of the games she doesn't, but I feel the same way about identifying as a "gamer": if there was ever a point where I'd embrace that label, that time is now past.

But it isn't a mirage to me. To paraphrase a famous quote: "Gaming is still real to me, dammit!" I can self identify as a gamer because even though I meet people with totally different religous, political, racial and social economic backgrounds, we can bond over the idea of "Gaming" and being a "gamer"

When I come across these threads, I have to go back to this video to remind myself why I am a gamer: http://youtu.be/uGU2B-_Foy8

And that's the sad part to me: from my perspective, we don't have this anymore. I can meet people of the same religious, political, racial or socioeconomic backgrounds, discover that we're both gamers, and still discover I have next to no common ground with those people. I've known people who loved video games but, besides some common touchstones, were hard to discuss games with. How do you talk about, say, the character designs that you're not totally comfortable with in Dragon's Crown to someone who's basically told you "dat ass"? Or, alternatively, how do you talk to someone about that awesome Atelier game you've been playing recently when the cover is basically an anime schoolgirl in old-timey dress? How do you even talk about Gone Home to someone who doesn't give a shit about LGBT issues?

And all that would be fine if it's just people disagreeing with your opinions on those things. But increasingly it feels like there's a war between whose vision of gaming gets to reign supreme, one that disavows even the concept of different visions. How else to explain the vitriol directed towards people like Anita Sarkeesian for engaging in the sort of basic literary criticism present in almost every other artistic genre?

The idea of gaming culture isn't a mirage to me, but it's not always clear to me that I fit in with it. I've definitely never thought of it as a unifying force.
 
Really? There has been so many examples of people championing occurrences such as when site A gave their favorite games a 9 or 10 to the extent that is, in my eyes, borderline ridiculous, and you can even see it here in GAF.

Not that I disagree with you, however, in that I also view it as a strange thing that these game journalists are so open in admonishing their own audiences... but then again those same audiences will be back when the same journalists are giving great reviews towards the games they like, etc etc.

Like I said, really bizarre. "Gamers" sure are a fickle bunch.

Reviews don't matter unless they are relevant to someone's personal agenda or cause. I don't believe there's a mythical segment of gamers that buys games solely based on what the metacritic is, reviews are just ammunition for people debating with themselves or debating with other people about the merits of whatever game.

Nobody cared about Polygon's score for Gone Home was til it became ammunition in the cause to discredit the critical praise around the "non-game" indie game movement, and by proxy the cause to discredit Zoe Quinn. Nobody cared about the Polygon scores for Sim City, Diablo 3, or Mass Effect 3 until they diverged so sharply from popular opinion amongst consumers. I'm sort of curious what sorts of stats there are about what benefits game reviews actually provide to consumers, how much does it actually influence buying decisions for people who haven't already decided to like or dislike a game?
 

down 2 orth

Member
I can't help but think that much of the attack on gamers has to do with the role they play in the industry.

Compared to other industries, consumers in the video game industry tend to be a lot more critical over things that they disagree with, which we saw when gamers flocked away from the X-Box brand after the next gen reveal, and when they called out Ubisoft on their many slip-ups at around the time of the Watch Dogs release. From this perspective, gamers have a lot of power, in that their views alone can strongly influence the income of a large company. Its easy to see why some folks in the industry (from PR to corporate) might resent them, especially if they are on the wrong end of gamer criticism.
 
This "both sides" nonsense needs to stop until someone can show me examples of #gamergate people receiving the type of harassment Sarkeesian, Quinn, Frank, Fish, etc have received.

http://gamergateharrassment.tumblr.com/ is a pretty good collection of anti-#gamergate people being assholes. Prime examples being "I have more respect for ISIS than the anti-Quinn people" and "#gamergate is a good example of why we need to #killallmen"

Neither side has a monopoly on bad people, just like how neither side has a monopoly on good people.
 
Really? There has been so many examples of people championing occurrences such as when site A gave their favorite games a 9 or 10 to the extent that is, in my eyes, borderline ridiculous, and you can even see it here in GAF.

Not that I disagree with you, however, in that I also view it as a strange thing that these game journalists are so open in admonishing their own audiences... but then again those same audiences will be back when the same journalists are giving great reviews towards the games they like, etc etc.

Like I said, really bizarre. "Gamers" sure are a fickle bunch.


I see what you mean but that's just because those scores still hold weigh and people care about metacritic scores. Outside of that, forums like this and reddit get info out much faster than any journalist could. And user impression are way more valuable than some random reviews.

I feel journalists are scared crapless that they're livelihood is under threat, as they honestly aren't really needed anymore.

I personally think it is much worse for a journalist to write something they do not believe in simply because it is what their audience wants to hear.

Sure but one thing I hate is when journalists try pushing their own agenda. Like the whole GTA or TLOU fiasco at Gamespot, or Sessler's overreaction to God of War. I'm not saying they shouldn't voice their opinion at all but they should try keeping agendas out of reviews. They can write about separately if they so please.

At the end if the day, journalists are, in my opinion, incredibly easy to replace in the gaming industry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom