When ever I think about corruption in gaming journalism I don't think of a game dev getting publicity from a journalist friend. I more so think of people posting selfies of themselves kissing PS4s at a Sony press event (just an example). Or when I'm looking at a review on a site that is covered in adds for the game i'm reading the review on. Also look at all the "swag" unboxings on youtube from people in the business that they get from the publishers. But on the other hand all this anti gamer stuff a lot of these sites put out kinda feels like a personal attack on me as i call my self a gamer.
Context only particularly matters when you're talking about seeing the whole thing. You don't need to play Senran Kagura to see what's wrong with it, but it makes sense to be fair and see the context in which it uses its stripping and not just isolated clips (though it is the same level of awful in either one).
Not that this really matters because the "Anita takes all this stuff out of context! She's never even seen the games she's talking about!" stuff is bullshit, anyway. The entire point of the kickstarter was for her to get this:
She obviously didn't use these for footage.
Look, as nasty as the sources are (which is why I'm not going to post links), it's been proven that a lot of her video clips were taken off of other videos. And she didn't credit her sources, either.
I don't know how many of the games in those stacks she's played, but for whatever reason, she didn't use her own gameplay as sources for the videos.
is ISIS the new godwin law or what
I agree that not attributing your sources is shitty. That and the thing she did with the artist were both bad.
is ISIS the new godwin law or what
They've been discussing it for a while. We're part of the Shame Cycle. Or the Anti-expression cycle. There was a graph that made no sense explaining it. But neogaf was on the bad side.
Yeah that was a hot mess and LW's abuse of Britain's amazingly awful libel laws was a major ethics scandal. Unfortunately that got highjacked by a crowd of mysoginists also and Rab felt he had to walk away.he was around during that time. i was a lurker back then. i don't remember the specifics but i remember reading his general feelings of disgust about lauren wainwright's complaint that got florence fired/asked to step down.
It's funny, I view 8chan as the outcasts from normal 4chan. That's saying something. /v/ got so sick of seeing gg threads they just kicked them out. By the way of permanent bans that is.
Even if you aren't particularly convinced by Anita's videos or see flaws in how she conducts her argument (as I do), the backlash against her sort of makes her point for her. I guess the one negative consequence of precipitating this is that the gamergate advocates think that their common shared passion is videogames, when really what they have in common is that they're all assholes.
I feel like people outside the gaming space that don't already have preconceived notions of videogames understand this for what it really is, because this brand of misogyny and hate is so common and "basic" that they should be able to recognize it.
It's funny, I view 8chan as the outcasts from normal 4chan. That's saying something. /v/ got so sick of seeing gg threads they just kicked them out. By the way of permanent bans that is.
Lol is that actually true? I saw that thread and thought it was made up.
I honestly think the majority of v don't care. I remember there was a thread where someone was making a big deal out of a gaming on the 3ds for using gender equal wording and terms. Meanwhile there was a video game Waifu thread with double the posts and images.
My opinion of course. I don't see how someone can care so much over a non issue
It's 2014 for crying out loud
Nah, what actually happened is the owner of 4chan got brainwashed over a weekend at the regular SJW cult meeting, and decided to obey his feminist overlords.
Literally Wu
Lol is that actually true? I saw that thread and thought it was made up.
I honestly think the majority of v don't care. I remember there was a thread where someone was making a big deal out of a gaming on the 3ds for using gender equal wording and terms. Meanwhile there was a video game Waifu thread with double the posts and images.
My opinion of course. I don't see how someone can care so much over a non issue
It's 2014 for crying out loud
well 8chan is more than those GGers
Literally Wu said the same thing in a stream but 8chan was made in 2013 and it's just a normal 2chan style board
it's a pun, some GG people who thinks that GG should just ignore people like quinn, brianna and anita often say "ignore those Literally Wu people and focus on etc etc"
well 8chan is more than those GGers
Literally Wu said the same thing in a stream but 8chan was made in 2013 and it's just a normal 2chan style board
Referring to her as "literally Wu" comes off as incredibly dismissive and disrespectful - you might as well say "she's not even worthy of discussion LOL"
I know 8c refer to her as such but it's a shitty term for any woman in the industry.
Referring to her as "literally Wu" comes off as incredibly dismissive and disrespectful - you might as well say "she's not even worthy of discussion LOL"
I know 8c refer to her as such but it's a shitty term for any woman in the industry.
Insisting there should be no political stances in video games is inherently a political stance.
No, this is a terrible thing. Context matters, and any critic who criticizes a piece of media based on YouTube clips or TV Tropes write-ups is doing it wrong. Would you trust a film theorist who writes about films he has never seen? Or a TV critic who doesn't actually watch the shows he reviews? I sure as hell wouldn't.
Look, as nasty as the sources are (which is why I'm not going to post links), it's been proven that a lot of her video clips were taken off of other videos. And she didn't credit her sources, either.
I don't know how many of the games in those stacks she's played, but for whatever reason, she didn't use her own gameplay as sources for the videos.
Referring to her as "literally Wu" comes off as incredibly dismissive and disrespectful - you might as well say "she's not even worthy of discussion LOL"
I know 8c refer to her as such but it's a shitty term for any woman in the industry.
Posted? Storify showing that GG is just the newest version of years old harrasment.
Is their anyone who still believes that GG is about corruption? It's just the latest cover for years of anti-feminist and misogynist garbage spewed by the same people.
Ah, I really really don't want to get too deep into a talk of feminism cause we're really not supposed to in this thread. But the "male gaze" is still a thing in third wave. Game characters have no agency of their own. They don't choose what to wear. The designer chooses for them. Soo, in real life, whatever a woman wears, she's doing it because she wants to, it's her own choice, she has the agency, and if she wants to attract men, or women, or just wants to feel attractive for herself, it's her own business, and all about her. Her agency should be respected. But as mentioned, in games, there is no agency, and this is expanded into other media, the way a woman is displayed often isn't about the women at all, it becomes about men. Her very image becomes about men being attracted to her. About turning on dudes. She's reduced to an extension of what the dudes want. The "male gaze" thing isn't a criticism of what men are attracted to, it's about content makers trying so hard to satisfy the male gaze, as if that's the most important concern. So the question isn't "what's wrong with the male gaze?" it's "why is the male gaze so important?" In real life, women like sex, too, they want it, and not just to please men, but to please themselves. But so rarely is sex actually about the woman, and when women make sex about them... it often results in horrible names.Based on what I've read there seems to be a difference in how 2nd and 3rd wave feminists view sexuality, with 2nd being more strident and 3rd more open. For example with prostitution, the 2nd wave having a strong anti-prostitution position (that the women are mostly/all victims) while 3rd thinks it's possible women could willingly want to be sex workers and they should be legally, morally defended.
I'm definitely more aligned with 3rd but I find Anita to be more like the 2nd when it comes to sexual imagery. I just don't get the criticism that basically boils down to men aren't supposed to enjoy attractive female characters. Or that female characters being scantily-clad is that big of a deal. It is if that's the only way women are portrayed, which is often (maybe mostly?) true, but criticism of the ''male gaze'' as if men can choose what they are/aren't attracted to is to me also criticism of ''female gaze'' and I don't know why either is wrong. Maybe I haven't read enough to determine the best position though, idk.
Anyway that's a little off topic but that's what I was talking about and the vibe I got off of Anita's videos.
They found a populist message of "Bad ethics are bad" and it was a really convenient way to garner support.
Honestly, as terrible as they can be, it was a pretty smart way to see their agenda of harassment gain support.
They found a populist message of "Bad ethics are bad" and it was a really convenient way to garner support.
Honestly, as terrible as they can be, it was a pretty smart way to see their agenda of harassment gain support.
I just don't get the criticism that basically boils down to men aren't supposed to enjoy attractive female characters. Or that female characters being scantily-clad is that big of a deal.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/08/videogames-are-for-everybody/The calls for dropping feminist issues because "games should be about fun, not politics" rubs me seriously in the wrong way. Yes, gaming SHOULD be fun. For everyone. This is what it is all about: people who ruin the fun to other people.
It's easy to ignore issues if you just attach the suitable words to them to make them insignificant. Females complaining about harassment, well, that's feminism then, innit? We don't like feminism, do we? Feminism is politics, and who cares about politics? We just want to have fun and you keep bringing up these boring things like feminism and politics that have nothing to do with me.
I won't deny there are likely a lot of sexists in GG.
Though I think you are conflating women and feminists. You can be anti feminism without being anti women, as evidenced by existing women anti feminists.
I don't think it's a right to silence feminists or anyone.
well this goes well beyond a polite disagreement.
yeah gamergate sure is a nice polite consumer rights movement.
I've been discussing with a dev who's pro GG and I'm still trying to wrap my head around the mindset and way of thinkingPosted? Storify showing that GG is just the newest version of years old harrasment.
Is their anyone who still believes that GG is about corruption? It's just the latest cover for years of anti-feminist and misogynist garbage spewed by the same people.
Ah, I really really don't want to get too deep into a talk of feminism cause we're really not supposed to in this thread. But the "male gaze" is still a thing in third wave. Game characters have no agency of their own. They don't choose what to wear. The designer chooses for them. Soo, in real life, whatever a woman wears, she's doing it because she wants to, it's her own choice, she has the agency, and if she wants to attract men, or women, or just wants to feel attractive for herself, it's her own business, and all about her. Her agency should be respected. But as mentioned, in games, there is no agency, and this is expanded into other media, the way a woman is displayed often isn't about the women at all, it becomes about men. Her very image becomes about men being attracted to her. About turning on dudes. She's reduced to an extension of what the dudes want. The "male gaze" thing isn't a criticism of what men are attracted to, it's about content makers trying so hard to satisfy the male gaze, as if that's the most important concern. So the question isn't "what's wrong with the male gaze?" it's "why is the male gaze so important?" In real life, women like sex, too, they want it, and not just to please men, but to please themselves. But so rarely is sex actually about the woman, and when women make sex about them... it often results in horrible names.
As for Anita's videos, you'll notice a few themes. Agency, passivity vs activity, and the women's roles in relation to men. Women being passive sexualized background object to better tell the story of men. Women being a prize to be won in a battle between two men. A woman being harmed just to make one man look evil and give the other man a reason to fight him. A female character who's essentially only a female version of the male character. The male character being the default, the female character being an extension of the male. All these things things have something in common. The women's existence isn't about herself, but about how her existence relates to the male characters. A big part of feminism is to drive the point home that women's existence isn't just a support role to the men in the world. They have their own independent existence.
So back to sex objects in games, while not bad in moderation, when it's sooo prevalent, it tells people a few things. It tells people that games are told from the male perspective, even when it's a female character, it's still made in such a way that it's for men. Hell, even lesbians are usually told in a way to be about the men playing the game. This will serve to drive many women away because it's so rarely about them. It also tells people that even if games are for men, that they should expect women to be objects for their gratification in games at such an extreme prevalence. Perpetuating the idea that women are there for men. So I don't believe Anita has a problem with the scantily clad women in games because she hates sex, but because the sex is being owned lock stock and barrel by the men.
well this goes well beyond a polite disagreement.
yeah gamergate sure is a nice polite consumer rights movement.
I've been discussing with a dev who's pro GG and I'm still trying to wrap my head around the mindset and way of thinking
First, there's the insistence that Zoe was banging journalists to get better reviews, "sleeping her way to the top". I pointed out that 4 of the 5 were developers, not journalists, and Grayson only gave DQ a short mention in an article about a Greenlit batch. And the notion of "sleeping to the top" just didn't make sense to me. The top of what? The list of best freeware games ever? This isn't some expensive game where reviews mean more revenue. It's a free game in a super niche genre
Two, turns out "to the top" isn't about money, but networking. The proof is how her circle of friends that came to her aid. How there was no outrage back in December (DQ on Greenlight) but now everyone releases Gamers Are Dead articles and turns the harassment story into a big thing. Basically, Grayson, with his connections and journalist friends, decide to focus on Zoe and the harassment, due to his past relationship with her.
Three, a chat room for "discussing what to cover and what not go cover, shaming others for not covering things the way you see fit" isn't professional and is illegal.
I mean I respect the dev and appreciate his work, but I just don't understand the rationale. I checked and there was media coverage of the Zoe/DQ/Greenlight incident, but I'd say the fact that this time there's bomb threats, etc., and a public banner for people to rally behind, is the cause of the increased coverage compared to then
I mean I respect the dev and appreciate his work, but I just don't understand the rationale. I checked and there was media coverage of the Zoe/DQ/Greenlight incident, but I'd say the fact that this time there's bomb threats, etc., and a public banner for people to rally behind, is the cause of the increased coverage compared to then
(snipped)
The mentality of someone who thinks 'A doesn't agree with me, I'll shame them by saying his close personal friend B who died recently would agree with me' is just beyond my comprehension.well this goes well beyond a polite disagreement.
yeah gamergate sure is a nice polite consumer rights movement.
snip.
i honestly don't know why she is even involved. i only know she made a game for iOs, i would leave her alone if i was a GGer
she said that herself, it was "literally who" but she changed it into "literally wu". nothing offensive
All of them in a house. Lock it. Set it on fire.
#FishWasRight
I did notice that mentality in some of the comments, especially this oneA general feeling I've seen long before GG amongst friends that have anti-"SJW" feelings is that there's an enormous issue of "undeserved merit".
In their eyes one of the biggest crimes in the industry is getting exposure you "don't deserve".
A lot of the narrative used around people like anita/zoe stems down to this:
- they don't really believe what they're saying, they just want attention.
- they sleep around for attention.
- they actively try to get harassed to get attention.
It's honestly kind of like the narrative often voiced by republicans who seem to genuinly believe they'd have an easier time if they were a minority. (Mitt Romney outright said this at least once.)
"What the hell would even be the point in harassing her? To get her "out of the industry"? Why? She wasn't "anything" until this. She made ONE freaking game, and most agree it's not even that great."
well this goes well beyond a polite disagreement.
yeah gamergate sure is a nice polite consumer rights movement.
(stuff)
This refers to stuff from a couple of pages ago, but I love how people don't see a problem with telling Anita what her videos should be like. I mean it's not like she provided an example of her work, and promised to make more videos just like them if people helped fund them.
Oh... sorry... that's exactly what happened.
I'd be pretty annoyed (as would all the people who kickstarted her I'd imagine) if she produced a different product to the one she promised.