Support NeoGAF

[plagiarize]

The longer this goes on the more people will react like Sam did which sucks. I hope gamergate slows down soon.

They aren't going any where any time soon. We're thrusting them into the spotlight so that most rationals can see what they're really like and write them off.

Again, I think it's better for people to hear about GamerGate from a major news source within a breath of the words 'death threats' and 'sexism', than for someone to hear about it from a friend who is part of the 'cause'.

Mainstream press coverage of the anti vaccine movement has ultimately crippled them, imho. I mean sure, they're still around, but they can't do nearly as much harm as they could without mainstream condemnation of them.

 

[Palette Swap]

I for one don't really care what stance he has in this controversy, his comments are despicable.

Agreed. That was absolutely uncalled for. You don't promote diversity and understanding with that kind of distasteful bullshit.

edit: going after advertisers is awful too. It's funny that for all the times the censorship strawman has been brought up whenever someone discusses representation, GG have been the ones effectively carrying out censorship.

 

[JackDT]

I saw #GamerHugs going around a little... so silly but seeing random gamers hugging did put a smile on face.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/gamerhugs?f=realtime&src=hash

 

[endless dave]

Biddle has made a career of being an asshole to the endless supply of assholes in the tech industry and aggravating them in order to show how shitty they really are. I personally love it, but I guess I can concede that maybe it wasn't the most "helpful" thing. But come on, "despicable?" I still will not equate him making snarky, troll-y comments to no one in particular is anywhere near the low, flickering, constant hum of shit that's come from the GG side of things

 

[L Thammy]

I'm sure he wrote that just to piss off gamegaters and doesn't earnestly believe it. But it's still kind of an awful thing to say regardless, seeing how many people unironically believe bullying builds "character" or whatever.

He's a journalist, isn't he? Influencing people through words is his career. He should be more careful about using them in the future.

Similarly - and I'm not condoning any of the abuse she's received, just to be clear - Leigh Alexander should have been more tactful when writing the "gamers are over" article. It's a good article for people who are going to read it all, but the simple reality is that a lot of people just see headlines and react to them. It's easier to alter how you write than to alter the behaviour patterns of the human race.

There's another hashtag: #tweetlikeagamergater. A lot of it is childish, but at least its pointing out the true nature of the campaign.

Childish nothing. Gamergaters are like bizarre cartoon characters. The best thing that's coming out of this campaign is the mockery of them and their ideas, because no matter how over the top you get, you're still spot on.

 

[bonercop]

Nah, it's not that absurd. Just look at a lot of the language, and substitute "feminists" for "communists".

eh, this isn't a state-approved and society-wide witch-hunt though. it's an insular group cutoff from the mainstream, spreading and repeating insane, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories amongst themselves until they start believing it.

I think the comparision to anti-vax crazies or john birch society types is more apt.

Biddle has made a career of being an asshole to the endless supply of assholes in the tech industry and aggravating them in order to show how shitty they really are. I personally love it, but I guess I can concede that maybe it wasn't the most "helpful" thing. But come on, "despicable?" I still will not equate him making snarky, troll-y comments to no one in particular is anywhere near the low, flickering, constant hum of shit that's come from the GG side of things

I agree. But I think him not apologizing for it and instead doing the whole "double down on the stupid thing i said"-routine(as people on the internet are often wont to do) isn't helping his case.

 

[mo60]

They aren't going any where any time soon. We're thrusting them into the spotlight so that most rationals can see what they're really like and write them off.

Again, I think it's better for people to hear about GamerGate from a major news source within a breath of the words 'death threats' and 'sexism', than for someone to hear about it from a friend who is part of the 'cause'.

Mainstream press coverage of the anti vaccine movement has ultimately crippled them, imho. I mean sure, they're still around, but they can't do nearly as much harm as they could without mainstream condemnation of them.

It looks like the gamergaters are talking about how Sam Biddle's terrible twitter posts are representative of the SJW movement now.

 

[Ayt]

I don't like people going after advertisers either (because games writers needs LESS influence from advertisers, not "watch your step with your opinions or we'll email Activision"), but Biddle was being a jackass by saying that, even jokingly.

And it wasn't like it was a heat of the moment type slip up. He merely thought it was safe to spew that kind of garbage because there was so much anti-GG sentiment that day. Being mean just because you think you can get away with it without repercussions is disgusting.

 

[faceless007]

Not that it wouldn't be warranted because what the Gawker writer wrote is pretty reprehensible, but my spider-sense is tingling about that photo. Doesn't look like a real email client (why is the MB logo above the conversation), From line and signature is just first + last initial instead of full name, no position or title information, no contact information or email address, the phone number is the customer support and roadside assistance line and not a corporate office, "The opportunity to respond is appreciated" is kind of a weird sentence that sounds like someone imitating PR-speak. Just strikes me as off. Or maybe MB's email really is manned by oddly impersonal and nameless drones.

 

[mo60]

Not that it wouldn't be warranted because what the Gawker writer wrote is pretty reprehensible, but my spider-sense is tingling about that photo. Doesn't look like a real email client (why is the MB logo above the conversation), From line and signature is just first + last initial instead of full name, no position or title information, no contact information or email address, the phone number is the customer support and roadside assistance line and not a corporate office, "The opportunity to respond is appreciated" is kind of a weird sentence that sounds like someone imitating PR-speak. Just strikes me as off. Or maybe MB's email really is manned by oddly impersonal and nameless drones.

Can someone find out if that is how MB writes there emails. What you described makes the email look a bit suspicious.

 

[The Blackrose]

Nah, it's not that absurd. Just look at a lot of the language, and substitute "feminists" for "communists".

Except that the Red Scare involved government personnel heavily invading the private lives of the people based on (mostly faulty) suspicion that they had ties to Communism.

It's a terrible analogy, given the full breadth of what occurred versus what is essentially a group of people who can't even decide what the hell they're mad about to begin with.

 

[L Thammy]

Can someone find out if that is how MB writes there emails. What you described makes the email look a bit suspicious.

There's a marketing option on their e-mail support page. I'll ask if they can confirm this.

EDIT: Cool, they even let me upload the screenshot.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Gotta have accountability or things fall apart. It'll be great if those turn out fake but honestly I've seen similar stuff pop up in real time (substitute nerd w/anime avatar, brony, etc.) so those aren't far-fetched

 

[NoCryingUntilTheEnd]

It's also National Bullying Prevention Month, so choosing to Tweet "bring back bullying" during this month is especially bad.

 

[jstripes]

eh, this isn't a state-approved and society-wide witch-hunt though. it's an insular group cutoff from the mainstream, spreading and repeating insane, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories amongst themselves until they start believing it.

I think the comparision to anti-vax crazies or john birch society types is more apt.

I'm not comparing the reach of it, just the mindset. The idea that feminists have quietly been infiltrating the industry to destroy it from within and indoctrinate everyone on their ideals, and those who associate with the feminists (ie: journalists) should be considered enemies of the industry and be silenced. Sarkeesian, Quinn, and Alexander have become figures like Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, there to take away the "freedom" of gamers.

It's just a comparison.

Except that the Red Scare involved government personnel heavily invading the private lives of the people based on (mostly faulty) suspicion that they had ties to Communism.

Then what is all the doxxing?

 

[Galactic Fork]

edit: Going to just agree to disagee with most and leave it at that... thanks for the response Galactic Fork but I feel like I'd just be repeating myself if I responded to that. My opinion is she's purposefully being insulting to a wider swatch of gamers than she needed to be to make her point. There isn't much else to say about it; if you think she wasn't purposefully being offensive I disagree. Gamasutra's audience isn't only professionals any more than ESPN is only for athletes to read. It's a different view of the industry; but the site is meant to be read by people interested in the indusrtry.. not just people in the industry.

I'm OK with agreeing to disagree. But I do want to point at one last thing in your quote: "My opinion is she's purposefully being insulting to a wider swatch of gamers than she needed to be to make her point. There isn't much else to say about it; if you think she wasn't purposefully being offensive I disagree."

These two bolded parts are not opposites. (Note: I will conflate "insulting" and "offensive" here...) I never said she wasn't insulting in an absolute sense (I don't think I did... If I did I was wrong). I think our disagreement is more "who she is insulting" or "being purposely offensive to." And eh, I'm OK with that.

 

[SenorArdilla]

It's also National Bullying Prevention Month, so choosing to Tweet "bring back bullying" during this month is especially bad.

 

[MYeager]

It looks like the gamergaters are talking about how Sam Biddle's terrible twitter posts are representative of the SJW movement now.

Huh, but they assured me that troll posts on the internet are no big deal and should be ignored.

 

[Galactic Fork]

It's also National Bullying Prevention Month, so choosing to Tweet "bring back bullying" during this month is especially bad.

Yeeeah. There are soooo many ways he could have made what I think his point was supposed to be without... Any of that. Geesh.

 

[andymcc]

ahahahaha

 

[Manderley Raps]

Can someone find out if that is how MB writes there emails.

Depending on the type of inquiry and the region where the sender is, the Mercedes-Benz email format will vary.

Here is a mail sent after a MB service request was completed from an authorized dealer in the US.

Here is a generic marketing mailer from Mercedes Benz USA.

 

[Kinyou]

ahahahaha

Wow, talk about irony

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

ahahahaha

this hypocritical accuracy. I'm dead!

 

[FlyinJ]

It looks like mercedes-benz has removed their advertising campaign from gawker because of what sam wrote on his twitter account.

Good.

However, now we're going to have to listen to gamergate stomp and howl for the next 5 months about how they are victims of an organized harassment campaign using this as the example.

Fuck.

Thanks, Gawker.

 

[The Blackrose]

Then what is all the doxxing?

The conduct of a private individual (or series of private individuals, in this case) to elicit harassment via the release of personal information are not cut of the same cloth as a government faction using the resources and power (questionably) afforded to them by social contract to perform a wild goose chase because god forbid a person may or may not have a difference of opinion regarding your economic construct of choice.

Now say that last sentence three times fast.

That also does not go into the repercussions in the event that a government chose to actually drop all information on an individual out in the open. Which, I'd like to say, would be pretty severe.

--

RE: Malcom X - I'm going to go facepalm over here...

 

[endless dave]

I'm not going to take the bait and engage with them about it, but boy oh boy would I just be pleased as peach if this Mercedes email is fake

 

[L Thammy]

ahahahaha

Big fans of Malcolm X over there.

 

[endless dave]

Good.

However, now we're going to have to listen to gamergate stomp and howl for the next 5 months about how they are victims of an organized harassment campaign using this as the example.

Fuck.

Thanks, Gawker.

They already believed this and forever will, so I'm not too upset about it. Can't be bothered about a small spark if they already believe in an imaginary wildfire

 

[Orayn]

Big fans of Malcolm X over there.

To be fair, most of the replies to that post were certain negative, if only because the threats make them look bad. But yeah, the fact that those posts happen at all and some of them are inevitably serious is bad enough.

 

[JackDT]

I just had a conversation with someone claiming Tropes vs Women is a form of bullying against gamers. (More specifically, Tropes vs Women is a tool to bully gamers, because of how mainstream media will use it). I don't think this person is trolling they genuinely feel that. I really have no idea how to respond. I'm a gamer and to me a large part of gamergate is trying to bully the best games writers and gaming journalists out of the industry.

 

[Kinyou]

I'm not going to take the bait and engage with them about it, but boy oh boy would I just be pleased as peach if this Mercedes email is fake

Eh, if he spouts shit like this during anti bullying month some actual consequences might bring him back to reality a bit.

 

[guggnichso]

eh, this isn't a state-approved and society-wide witch-hunt though. it's an insular group cutoff from the mainstream, spreading and repeating insane, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories amongst themselves until they start believing it.

I think the comparision to anti-vax crazies or john birch society types is more apt.

Especially as there are weird pseudo celebrities supporting and signalboosting it. They only lack a celebrity mother whose child became "SJW" after playing Gone Home. And a medical doctor publishing faked data about video games.

 

[KuwabaraTheMan]

ahahahaha

So this is an actor who is really dedicated to their craft, right?

 

[VibratingDonkey]

Gamers are Over is a bit insulting and a lot of anti-GG people for some reason refuse to admit it. She's also sarcastic in parts of it which makes it hard to even know what she's arguing at times, which detracts from how well it's written. I enjoy much of her work but didn't get much out of that article other than thinking she felt the need to vent; which is understandable.. but not entirely constructive how she presented it.

There's also a point to it that get's ignored by GG'ers, but outright claiming she wasn't being insulting (which I've noticed a lot of people here do) doesn't seem like the right message... There's a lot of "What she meant was this is how marketers see you!" and a lot of quoting that leaves out her "don't know how to dress or behave" comment.

Just ask GG"ers why it's so important? She's a freelance writer who writes editorials.. editorials in any context are the opinion of the writer and are meant to be debated.. not reacted to and cried about and used as the war cry for some cause.

Same with Zoe Quinn.. why in the world do these women's opinions matter so much to you? What exactly are they even changing so dramatically? Why is it such a big deal to you that they want less sexist portrayals in video games?

I agree and understand how the inflammatory language of that article could be perceived as offensive to some. She should've given it more consideration before hitting 'publish'. But it doesn't matter any longer. Those who joined up with Gamergate because they felt alienated and offended by that one article and by the perception of games media in general agreeing with this "gamer hate", need to realize that condemning the reprehensible, harmful, toxic behavior of the people they're standing next to, should take priority in the emotional discomfort department. And you can not condemn this behavior while opting to continue supplying momentum to the movement these people are clinging onto in order to spread their hatred and stupid bullshit. If you can not acknowledge this, then frankly I don't give a damn about your hurt feelings. It's incredibly petty and selfish. And as always, counterproductive to what you wish to accomplish, as you are associating yourself with a hate group, people will not want to listen to you, and even if they do, your argument gets drowned out by the loud, abrasive asshole contingency and their fucked up behavior.

I've sometimes felt offended by and disagreed with what various games media people have written (mostly because of leaning more pro-corporation than pro-consumer). What I do is, instead of endorsing a hate group that's harassing and mobbing people, I stop reading the things these writers write. It's been working out pretty well. I recommend it.

 

[endless dave]

I just had a conversation with someone claiming Tropes vs Women is a form of bullying against gamers. I don't think this person is trolling they genuinely feel that. I really have no idea how to responds. To many of us gamers, gamergate is a bunch of bullies keeping everyone else out of the gaming treehouse.

It's not surprising that people who have innate privilege but have never been able to tap into it are going to really bristle when they're told about it. I posted this already, but it got buried at the bottle of the page, so here's a small conversation from another board that I feel does a good job describing this

I'm sure a lot of people involved in just providing volume for harassment are younger but a lot of this as a thing seems driven by people who are out of school with not much to look forward to who feel like their one sphere is being invaded. I think if I were to stick an overly simple psych read on this situation I'd go with "status anxiety" over "adolescent sexual frustration" basically.

The ones that stand out from the egg accounts are mostly the ones who have some kind of youtube channel or online radio show. A lot of them are anonymous but through years of shit-slinging and stepping on toes with the likes of 4chan readers, their personal information is inevitably leaked and they conform to basically ever stereotype of the angry white neckbeard you would expect. White, late 20-something dudes from shit towns in Britain and the U.S., obsessed with video games, but living somewhere with no opportunities to get into the tech sector, either didn't go to school or went to a shitty one, etc.

The same is true of the guys who have latched onto the movement as "game devs," trying to lend some kind of industry-associated heft to the mob despite being aspirational outsiders who think their bland pixel-nostalgia game will make them the next phil fish. Since they're using real names to kickstart their projects, you can see all the same trends; white guy, shit town, no connections, freelances or works at the bottom of the bottom rung in tech. It's easy to see why these guys dig their claws into anyone who seems remotely ascendant in games or tech, and even more so someone who might have gotten exposure due to Undeserved Privilege of being not a late-20's angry white guy; this is their dream, and the bright interconnected future of the internet has not made it one iota more accessible for them. But it has made the people who do get the golden ticket much more vulnerable.

 

[Ri'Orius]

And that's the thing: for any passionate gamer out there, how could growth possibly be seen as a bad thing? When the strides games have made over recent decades now means we have rich stories and characters that appeal to many, and where critics like Sarkeesian are able to analyse them from a basis of respect for their capacity to positively influence - and NOT from a Jack Thompson-esque form of moral panic as seems to be the reaction - to simply highlight areas of weakness. What exactly is there to fear from such introspection? That games might feature actual people as they are in reality? "They're trying to take over our culture!!!" Which brings up the question of what, and whose, culture is this, exactly? The culture that's incorporated mainly Japanese, American, and European developers who have come up with games of vast variety, and yet is somehow threatened by more diversity?

Growth could be a bad thing if it involves appealing to a wider or different audience. Just like old-school FPS fans object to regenerating health, old-school Zelda fans object to Skyward Sword's ridiculous level of handholding, or practically everyone objects to Farmville-style F2P business models. If the industry tries to appeal to other people, then it's not trying as hard to appeal to the core audience.

I'm also not sure where you're getting that impression of Sarkeesian's work. I've only watched the Tropes videos, but they haven't struck me as coming "from a basis of respect." To me they've just seemed like a list of "In Mario you rescue a princess. In Zelda you rescue a princess. Deus Ex HR has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Red Dead Redemption has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Grand Theft Auto has prostitutes, and you can kill them."

Maybe I'm projecting or being overly sensitive, but when I see that I think that her goal is to change games I like to appeal more to other people. But... I like rescuing princesses. It's simple and easy, plus the structure of Mario and Zelda games has some far-reaching nostalgia. I like seeing gritty slums populated with thugs, hobos and hookers. I like knowing that, if I choose, I can push the button to kill NPCs. And while I didn't play the game, I thought it was hilarious that RDR had a trophy for tying a woman to the railroad tracks, something Sarkeesian specifically pointed out as troubling.

Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism. She puts together a collage of things she views as problems. Which can put people who don't view them as problems on the defensive.

That's where I'm coming from, at least. The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)

 

[Neoriceisgood]

Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism.

"Criticism performed with the intention to harm someone, derogate and destroy someone’s creation, prestige, reputation and self-esteem."

I don't see it.

 

[SmZA]

.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Reactionaries appropriating totems and icons of past progression to obfuscate present issue. Ever was it so.

 

[plagiarize]

The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)

Well I mean that's the whole crux of what makes the comparison invalid. Zoe Quinn *appeals* to game designers to make games differently. She makes a series of videos she posts on her own youtube channel.

That's just criticism. You can agree. You can disagree... but there's nothing immoral about it, or wrong with it, or wrong with game journalists agreeing or disagreeing with it either.

Jack Thompson attacked gamers. He attacked game developers. He tried to get sales of games restricted by laws. He wanted to put people in prison for selling violent games. He directly insulted me and many other people.

We shouldn't just knee jerk react to anyone who criticizes games. We were right to react when Jack Thompson tried to *censor* gaming... but Anita is excercising her freedom of speech, politely and appropriately.

If you're scared people might listen to her and make different kinds of games... that doesn't give you any grounds for anything other than responding in kind as to why you think her points are wrong and encouraging developers *not* to make the changes she's advocating.

Circling the wagons because someone criticized gaming regardless of whether the criticism is valid or baseless... that's absolutely not something we want to do.

 

[JackDT]

Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism. She puts together a collage of things she views as problems. Which can put people who don't view them as problems on the defensive.

That's where I'm coming from, at least. The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)

If you make a video collage of quicktime events and say, "Quicktime events in games are annoying and break my immersion." are you the "Jack Thompson" of quicktime events? No. You're a critic posting a video on youtube.

 

[endless dave]

As has been said (by others), over and over and over: Anita almost bends over backwards to say "Games with these tropes can be and often are fun and enjoyable and good games" but that employing them is lazy and exploitative, and it would behoove the industry to try and think a little outside the box more often, if mostly to broaden who the games appeal to, because the video game playing demographic is broadening.

There has never been talk of boycotts or censorship or making sure these tropes are never used by penalty of death. It's cultural criticism. It's mild, entry level cultural criticism at that. It's not a new thing people do with popular media. And having to explain that so often is making me just not care about engaging with this whole thing anymore

 

[Ayt]

Was this article posted?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...ideas-and-words-of-gamergate/article21146512/

False flags

Awkward things. Like, say, the threat of a “Montreal Massacre style” killing at a lecture given by a woman who still insists on making videos analyzing tropes in video games from a feminist perspective, despite numerous requests that she die. Clearly this threat and the plethora of other threats directed toward women involved in gaming are part of a massive covert opp designed to distract from the most pressing concern facing humanity: video-game reviews with which Gamergaters disagree.

Gamers

The last line of defence against the feminist dystopia we all know is coming if women are allowed to make YouTube videos in which they question the wisdom of going into battle wearing a chain-mail bikini.

SJW

Social-justice warrior. A pejorative term for anyone even slightly nicer than you.

Balance

You agreeing with me.

Discussion

Me shouting. You listening.

 

[Devolution]

As has been said (by others), over and over and over: Anita almost bends over backwards to say "Games with these tropes can be and often are fun and enjoyable and good games" but that employing them is lazy and exploitative, and it would behoove the industry to try and think a little outside the box more often

There has never been talk of boycotts or censorship or making sure these tropes are never used by penalty of death. It's cultural criticism. It's mild, entry level cultural criticism at that. It's not a new thing people do with popular media. And having to explain that so often is making me just not care about engaging with this whole thing anymore

The boycott I've seen so far is GGers organizing to boycott Borderlands 2.

But it's SJWs that are going to take games away and censor artists.

 

[andymcc]

Growth could be a bad thing if it involves appealing to a wider or different audience. Just like old-school FPS fans object to regenerating health, old-school Zelda fans object to Skyward Sword's ridiculous level of handholding, or practically everyone objects to Farmville-style F2P business models. If the industry tries to appeal to other people, then it's not trying as hard to appeal to the core audience.

I'm also not sure where you're getting that impression of Sarkeesian's work. I've only watched the Tropes videos, but they haven't struck me as coming "from a basis of respect." To me they've just seemed like a list of "In Mario you rescue a princess. In Zelda you rescue a princess. Deus Ex HR has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Red Dead Redemption has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Grand Theft Auto has prostitutes, and you can kill them."

Maybe I'm projecting or being overly sensitive, but when I see that I think that her goal is to change games I like to appeal more to other people. But... I like rescuing princesses. It's simple and easy, plus the structure of Mario and Zelda games has some far-reaching nostalgia. I like seeing gritty slums populated with thugs, hobos and hookers. I like knowing that, if I choose, I can push the button to kill NPCs. And while I didn't play the game, I thought it was hilarious that RDR had a trophy for tying a woman to the railroad tracks, something Sarkeesian specifically pointed out as troubling.

Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism. She puts together a collage of things she views as problems. Which can put people who don't view them as problems on the defensive.

That's where I'm coming from, at least. The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)

If we look at the film industry as a parallel, while there are many films that have moved away from using women as props or as carrots on stick to motivate the heroic, male protagonist, the old trope is very strong and alive still.

 

[endless dave]

The boycott I've seen so far is GGers organizing to boycott Borderlands 2.

But it's SJWs that are going to take games away and censor artists.

1. I was talking about Anita

2. Citation fucking needed

 

[Morrigan Stark]

It's classic deflection and minimization of what is quite obviously a larger cultural and sociological problem, and telling people to stop talking about it serves literally no purpose other than to shift the attention away from the actual problem (harassment, death threats, rampant misogyny, downright sociopathic behavior) and instead put the onus of responsibility onto the group being targeted as if they're the ones doing something wrong. It's essentially "Stop caring about something that affects you because I'm such a self-absorbed dipshit that I don't want to hear about it and you talking about is inconvenient for me." Why should anyone accede to that request? What is to be gained from it? Has any social problem in the history of anything ever been solved by ignoring it and wishing it would go away?

Funny how no one ever tells these people, "Ignore the feminists, and they'll go away. By making a big deal out of this, you're only giving them more ammunition."

And it's doubly funny because it's true; Sarkeesian is now headlining the NY Times. XD Good job at silencing her, idiots.

Growth could be a bad thing if it involves appealing to a wider or different audience. Just like old-school FPS fans object to regenerating health, old-school Zelda fans object to Skyward Sword's ridiculous level of handholding, or practically everyone objects to Farmville-style F2P business models. If the industry tries to appeal to other people, then it's not trying as hard to appeal to the core audience.

I'm also not sure where you're getting that impression of Sarkeesian's work. I've only watched the Tropes videos, but they haven't struck me as coming "from a basis of respect." To me they've just seemed like a list of "In Mario you rescue a princess. In Zelda you rescue a princess. Deus Ex HR has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Red Dead Redemption has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Grand Theft Auto has prostitutes, and you can kill them."

Maybe I'm projecting or being overly sensitive, but when I see that I think that her goal is to change games I like to appeal more to other people. But... I like rescuing princesses. It's simple and easy, plus the structure of Mario and Zelda games has some far-reaching nostalgia. I like seeing gritty slums populated with thugs, hobos and hookers. I like knowing that, if I choose, I can push the button to kill NPCs. And while I didn't play the game, I thought it was hilarious that RDR had a trophy for tying a woman to the railroad tracks, something Sarkeesian specifically pointed out as troubling.

Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism. She puts together a collage of things she views as problems. Which can put people who don't view them as problems on the defensive.

Unbelievable. You literally claim her criticism is "destructive" because she criticizes... things that you like.

That's where I'm coming from, at least. The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)

How is the comparison wrong aside from the very crucial difference? Really?

 

[andymcc]

1. I was talking about Anita

2. Citation fucking needed

I posted a bunch of tweets about the boycott several pages back.

Boycotting Borderlands because of its "progressivism" is, for some reason, reminding me of the dumbasses that organized a "national day of gluttony" at Chick-Fil-A to support their homophobia.

 

[plagiarize]

As has been said (by others), over and over and over: Anita almost bends over backwards to say "Games with these tropes can be and often are fun and enjoyable and good games" but that employing them is lazy and exploitative, and it would behoove the industry to try and think a little outside the box more often, if mostly to broaden who the games appeal to, because the video game playing demographic is broadening.

There has never been talk of boycotts or censorship or making sure these tropes are never used by penalty of death. It's cultural criticism. It's mild, entry level cultural criticism at that. It's not a new thing people do with popular media. And having to explain that so often is making me just not care about engaging with this whole thing anymore

Right. Zoe advocates change in videos she posts on her own youtube channel. That's it. Jack Thompson worked with any politician that would listen to him in order to try to get laws passed restricting the sales of video games. He literally tried to censor gaming.

If Anita was arguing that games should be banned because they encourage sexist positions, I'd absolutely stand against her, because it's not enough to demonstrate that games make you more sexist (or aggressive, naturally). You can't ban something for encouraging a particular position (like violence solves problems... or women are sex objects) even if you don't like that position.

Jack was trying to do that. Anita wasn't. One was absolutely against free speech, and the other wasn't.

GamerGate don't want certain speech in video games or in the gaming press. They don't want discussion of certain topics in game reviews.

What side do you think a free speech advocate is going to take in this mess?

 

[zeldablue]

It looks like mercedes-benz has removed their advertising campaign from gawker because of what sam wrote on his twitter account.

Hahaa...Okay they deserved that one.

No need to throw insults at mobs.