• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rock, Paper Shotgun will no longer cover PAX...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kinda feels like they are just trying to get controversy brewing again. I mean it's two weeks after PAX Prime ended. This stuff has died down pretty much and now with this I wonder how many people on both sides of the issue are going to go back to arguing.

Also I'm not finished but do they ever touch on the fact that there were death threats issued? They cover pretty well the PA guys and their position but if they don't cover both sides that's pretty shitty. Regardless of them not being a reporting website, countless people will read this and take it as news. All sides should be presented.
 
Manu said:
These kind of posts make it sound like Mike is some kind of activist bigot who goes out of his way to attack other people. I don't think that's the case at all.
Click to expand...

he is a person with some good beliefs and some bad beliefs like anyone else

the problem is that he has trouble containing himself and when he is called out on the shitty things he said he shows no signs that he is actually trying to learn from his mistakes and become a better person.

i have patience for people who fuck up, god knows i've said and done some hurtful things that sometimes keep me up at night, but when someone shows a pattern of negative behavior and no indication that they care to change it for the better i think it's ok to write them off.
 
aeolist said:
no, this is false equivalency again. we should expect more from people in positions of power and influence, especially if they run a convention based around the idea of creating a safe space for marginalized minorities.
Click to expand...

Not false in the least.

PAX is if anything about creating a space for gamers to get together, and enjoy gaming. What was said a couple of years ago on the internet speaks very little to that. The fact that they have gone out of their way to have inclusive panels apparently means nothing to a lot of the people in this thread, and I find that to be a shame.

Expecting people to be anything other than human I always find to be a horrible excercise in disappointment. These guys are who they have always been. To expect them to be different people now that they have money and influence seems fairly absurd. Not going to PAX if you want to and can, because of that, when year on year the attempts of being inclusive increase, as does from all accounts inclusivity as a whole, seems self defeating.
 
TheBaronOfNA said:
Dunno. I think you know, but I been in many forum debates to know when someone is not willing to concede that being smug about being right is not an argument or a good value when you are trying to genarete debate.

So yeah, I hope you don't dissmis it. But in any case...
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about me, we are talking about Walker. Why does my dismissal or otherwise of anything matter to your assessment of what he posted? And again, where was I being smug?
 
Zukuu said:
Can't say I can agree with RPS, or the whole "blame PA" thing.

They won't be missed by PAX, yet they miss out crucial PAX news. Won't be going in their favor.
Click to expand...

RPS typically contact developers directly for coverage/previews/reviews, including indie devs which they've done forever. I don't think it'll affect them or their dev relationships that much.
 
aeolist said:
you seriously think that one article containing an announcement (among other, more substantial things) that RPS won't cover PAX anymore will generate more pageviews and ad money than every PAX article they would have done for years to come?

can you sell me some of whatever it is you're smoking
Click to expand...

You're assuming they will even keep it up for "years to come"

I would be willing to bet by this time next year PAX will have "changed their ways" just enough for them to cover it again. Or it will be "the crusader for all that is good at RPS have decided we would do better to show our faces than to pout and go home while almost nobody notices"

If you don't think this isn't at least partially a contrived media stunt from a fledgling gaming site, then you're incredibly naive.
 
silkysmooth said:
Kinda feels like they are just trying to get controversy brewing again. I mean it's two weeks after PAX Prime ended. This stuff has died down pretty much and now with this I wonder how many people on both sides of the issue are going to go back to arguing.

Also I'm not finished but do they ever touch on the fact that there were death threats issued? They cover pretty well the PA guys and their position but if they don't cover both sides that's pretty shitty. Regardless of them not being a reporting website, countless people will read this and take it as news. All sides should be presented.
Click to expand...

Well now we are pretty aware that they aren't a legitimate news source so there is that. At least their agenda is out in the open now.
 
TheBaronOfNA said:
Of course, what defines hostile and oppressive is not as clear at times. Not everyone are in this threads to troll or use straw men. I'm not saying that we need to tolareta everything, but that radicalized self rightness tend to degenerate in another things that would be less than 'nice'.
Click to expand...
I agree, but there's a fine line between exercising one's conscience and giving in to wholesale self-righteousness. Sometimes there's justification to be angry. And there's nothing especially "radical" about what RPS or John Walker have said. Their opinions are about as centrist and mainstream as they come--even if their taste in games isn't.
 
NathanMcMahon said:
No I understood perfectly. [...] relating a small grassroots story to one of the largest video game events deserving proper news coverage is a bit disingenuous and and not remotely relatable.
Click to expand...
I didn't do that, I compared coverage of one grassroots organization to coverage of another grassroots organization with a completely different objective.

My point is that all news organizations determine coverage based on what they perceive to be their mission and purpose, their ethics and their values. They have to, there is not enough income (or in terms of printed works, space, or in terms of TV, airtime) to cover everything. Your only point is concern-trolling that RPS should have made their bias implicit vs explicit, which goes against another journalistic ethic: transparency.
 
Good on them for taking a step forward in changing the gaming community's language!

Meanwhile, on Dota and X-Box Live servers . . .
 
GetemMa said:
You're assuming they will even keep it up for "years to come"

I would be willing to bet by this time next year PAX will have "changed their ways" just enough for them to cover it again. Or it will be "the crusader for all that is good at RPS have decided we would do better to show our faces than to pout and go home while almost nobody notices"

If you don't think this isn't at least partially a contrived media stunt from a fledgling gaming site, then you're incredibly naive.
Click to expand...

haha ok i'm done
 
because of dickwolves?

Someone find a picture of them of one of the staff eating chick-fil-a and thus staunchly supporting anti-gay laws
 
I didn't read the post yet, but to me, it seems like they're losing out on potentially important coverage to make a point, which I can respect, but I feel like it's probably going to do the site more harm than the good it causes (which is an overstatement anyway, it's not going to do them a ton of harm, but people RPS fans looking for coverage miss out).

I would think the better course of action would be to cover the event, but make your opinions on the dickwolves/gender stuff clear any time it's relevant to do so.
 
aeolist said:
he is a person with some good beliefs and some bad beliefs like anyone else

the problem is that he has trouble containing himself and when he is called out on the shitty things he said he shows no signs that he is actually trying to learn from his mistakes and become a better person.

i have patience for people who fuck up, god knows i've said and done some hurtful things that sometimes keep me up at night, but when someone shows a pattern of negative behavior and no indication that they care to change it for the better i think it's ok to write them off.
Click to expand...

Thats a good point and fair.

I think PAX is bigger than PA, but still need PA as its face for better or worse. But yeah, you have a interesting point at saying that the face of PAX should not be a childish asshole that makes constant fuck ups.

That is a perspective than didn't saw as clearly. But gives the controversy another facet that is more complicated than "let ask him to go away".
 
The problem with taking stands like this is that when you do, you're forgetting that you yourself have your own downsides. There's not a single person on Earth that doesn't have their own faults, but when you go out there and judge others for theirs, you're forgetting this fact. Usually when I see something like what Mike did, I file that fact away in my head and then quickly remember that there's shit I've done in my life or will do that others aren't going to particularly like. If it's bad enough that it would force me to make a business decision like that I would never go to PAX, then I quietly don't go to PAX. I don't post on Facebook or Twitter that I'll never go to PAX again. I don't get a billboard and advertise it. I have zero expectation that everyone out there needs to agree with every singe belief and viewpoint that I have (or even any of them). Even if I happened to meet a person who did, I wouldn't particularly care. I don't need to change others and I don't need them to change me and I don't need others to agree with me to feel good about myself.

Mike has certainly made mistakes in this whole thing, but I don't agree it is the Internet's job to make him pay for it. In the end, he is the one who has to live with himself. That being said, it's well within people's rights to react this way to what Mike has said/done. Whether they should or not is a different story, I guess, when you take into account that those judging probably have plenty to be judged on themselves.

I guess what I don't like seeing, though, is this guy being crucified when he's also done a lot of good in his life with his charities. He has his faults, but I would venture to say he's also probably done more good than a lot of the people quick to judge him.
 
jschreier said:
Principles? I love RPS, and I think they do great work, but boycotting an event isn't exactly a journalistic value.
Click to expand...

It's not like they're copying press releases and posting unsourced rumours as news like your site is known for doing. They're making a decision on a conflict between their personal principles and journalistic ones, I'm pretty sure any journalistic body who actually has principles has to make tough calls on conflicts like this.
 
PA has made some idiotic statements, no doubt, but was the Dickwolves thing really that bad? People losing their shit over something like that in an industry that produces killing simulators seems a bit strange to me.
 
Some of the responses in here astound me, RPS has been a major PC gaming site for years, renown for covering and giving exposure to Indie titles. Patrick Klepek almost decided to go there instead of Giantbomb after his G4 stint.

I guess most of the people unaware of the site are console only gamers?
 
bishopcruz said:
It's closer to certain people have a strict definition on what is racist, sexist, etc. If you don't agree with that exactly, you are thus a horrible person.

That's where I honestly see most complaints about political correctness coming from.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Political correctness is inherently a negative term.
 
The handling of the situation has been bad, but the original Dickwolves joke was pretty funny IMO. Using the word "rape" is not 100% evil 100% of the time.
 
conman said:
I agree, but there's a fine line between exercising one's conscience and giving in to wholesale self-righteousness. Sometimes there's justification to be angry. And there's nothing especially "radical" about what RPS or John Walker have said. Their opinions are about as centrist and mainstream as they come--even if their taste in games isn't.
Click to expand...

Is not so much about their opinions and more about their attitude. And yeah, there are times when there is no need to justifications to be angry, but that doesn't mean that everyone will understand why you are angry.

My issue is in how they convey the message they want to convey. But in the end, I agree that they have the right to report what they want to report.
 
DiscoJason said:
The problem with taking stands like this is that when you do, you're forgetting that you yourself have your own downsides. There's not a single person on Earth that doesn't have their own faults, but when you go out there and judge others for theirs, you're forgetting this fact. Usually when I see something like what Mike did, I file that fact away in my head and then quickly remember that there's shit I've done in my life or will do that others aren't going to particularly like. If it's bad enough that it would force me to make a business decision like that I would never go to PAX, then I quietly don't go to PAX. I don't post on Facebook or Twitter that I'll never go to PAX again. I don't get a billboard and advertise it. I have zero expectation that everyone out there needs to agree with every singe belief and viewpoint that I have (or even any of them). Even if I happened to meet a person who did, I wouldn't particularly care. I don't need to change others and I don't need them to change me and I don't need others to agree with me to feel good about myself.

Mike has certainly made mistakes in this whole thing, but I don't agree it is the Internet's job to make him pay for it. In the end, he is the one who has to live with himself. That being said, it's well within people's rights to react this way to what Mike has said/done. Whether they should or not is a different story, I guess, when you take into account that those judging probably have plenty to be judged on themselves.

I guess what I don't like seeing, though, is this guy being crucified when he's also done a lot of good in his life with his charities. He has his faults, but I would venture to say he's also probably done more good than a lot of the people quick to judge him.
Click to expand...

I am now envisioning a picture Bible illustration of Jesus saying Let he who is without sin cast the first stone and a man with RPS logo for a head throwing a boulder at a PA logo head.
 
dark10x said:
PA has made some idiotic statements, no doubt, but was the Dickwolves thing really that bad? People losing their shit over something like that in an industry that produces killing simulators seems a bit strange to me.
Click to expand...

It's Gabe's modus operandi to make some insulting or ignorant comment, get mad when someone calls them out on it and then issue a non-apology in the style of 'Well, I'm sooo sorry you had to get mad, you easily offended emos. I'm just me!'. The Dickwolves concept didn't even faze me personally and I read the comic regularly but it's a clear pattern for him.
 
Carcetti said:
It's Gabe's modus operandi to make some insulting or ignorant comment, get mad when someone calls them out on it and then issue a non-apology in the style of 'Well, I'm sooo sorry you had to get mad, you easily offended emos. I'm just me!'. The Dickwolves concept didn't even faze me personally and I read the comic regularly but it's a clear pattern for him.
Click to expand...

But do you see how people call him out? I keep saying this, but it's not like they did so respectfully. Accusations of bigotry is just as offensive.
 
I've honestly never understood the controversy, but RPS is more than within their rights (and druthers) to skip out and explain why with civility, like they have.
 
webkatt said:
because of dickwolves?

Someone find a picture of them of one of the staff eating chick-fil-a and thus staunchly supporting anti-gay laws
Click to expand...
Well, specifically because of the ongoing dialogue, not because of the original strip.

Though, I wonder how many of these bandwagon cause types would be fighting for the rights of people to have incestuous relationships if PA made fun of incest.
balohna said:
The handling of the situation has been bad, but the original Dickwolves joke was pretty funny IMO. Using the word "rape" is not 100% evil 100% of the time.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much the stance of anyone who can look at this critically without emotion clouding things.
 
Nymphae said:
I didn't read the post yet, but to me, it seems like they're losing out on potentially important coverage to make a point, which I can respect, but I feel like it's probably going to do the site more harm than the good it causes (which is an overstatement anyway, it's not going to do them a ton of harm, but people RPS fans looking for coverage miss out).

I would think the better course of action would be to cover the event, but make your opinions on the dickwolves/gender stuff clear any time it's relevant to do so.
Click to expand...

I think the best course of action would be to cover actual pertinent news that comes out of the event, vs simply being PR for "the people's convention." They have no obligation to promote PAX, but there's an argument to be made that they're doing their readers a disservice if boycotting the event leads to actual announcements etc unmentioned (this obviously won't happen). Coverage of cons is mainly regurgitating press conferences, regurgitating press releases, giving diplomatic hands-on impressions of carefully-crafted demos, and inumerable cosplay galleries. One or two of those are arguably actual news. Previews and hands-ons are almost completely useless outside of providing a marketing spike. From a journalistic perspective the most useful thing about attending is reportage on panels that outside of a few big names no one cares to read about.

mkenyon said:
I wonder how many of these bandwagon cause types would be fighting for the rights of people to have incestuous relationships if PA made fun of incest.
Click to expand...

...that would imply you think people are upset because they're fighting for the rights of people to be raped?
 
Carcetti said:
It's Gabe's modus operandi to make some insulting or ignorant comment, get mad when someone calls them out on it and then issue a non-apology in the style of 'Well, I'm sooo sorry you had to get mad, you easily offended emos. I'm just me!'. The Dickwolves concept didn't even faze me personally and I read the comic regularly but it's a clear pattern for him.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't really disagree with that assessment.

IMO that's not a good reason at all to boycott the event though.
 
Their loss. PAX is pretty awesome. People think Phil Fish is a complete tool and he says some stupid stuff but that doesn't stop people on this forum from loving FEZ.

Just like the PA guys are free to say and believe whatever they want as long as PAX and Childs Play keep doing what they're doing. I'm tired of all this hypocrisy recently.
 
APF said:
...that would imply you think people are upset because they're fighting for the rights of people to be raped?
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't.
aeolist said:
this is pretty goddamn offensive
Click to expand...
Misogyny is a big buzzword right now, and there's a lot of people who are getting on board because it's easy to understand. This is the exact type of fight they're going for. We can go around in circles and talk about this very specific instance, but this is very much a child of the larger issue of sexism. Rape culture doesn't exist in a society free of sexism.

They're absolutely correct in trying to remove it from society. But it's just one social fight, not really a principle. The principle would be non-interference and complete social equality.

I suppose it's not fair of me to focus on those who might not be totally genuine in being upset about the whole situation. I acknowledge that.
Loctope said:
Fledgling usually refers to inexperience, which doesn't apply to RPS at all. I'm not sure you understand that word.
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
aeolist said:
this is pretty goddamn offensive
Click to expand...

To heavily play devil's advocate here, if an incestuous relationship didn't have the goal of reproduction, in what way is it less valid than those within the spectrum of LBGT identities and relationships? What specific admonitions of the one couldn't also apply to the other?

(Just for context, I understand the stretch of the reasoning, but I'm curious about the response)
 
ArjanN said:
Well, I don't really disagree with that assessment.

IMO that's not a good reason at all to boycott the event though.
Click to expand...

The face of one of the most popular companies in video game culture is essentially encouraging their (immature internet) audience to look down vulnerable minorities such as transgendered folk and rape victims because they're clearly just being overly sensitive about these trivial issues. When the rest of the company does nothing to stop him I think it's a pretty good reason to boycott the company.
 
Nymphae said:
I didn't read the post yet, but to me, it seems like they're losing out on potentially important coverage to make a point, which I can respect, but I feel like it's probably going to do the site more harm than the good it causes (which is an overstatement anyway, it's not going to do them a ton of harm, but people RPS fans looking for coverage miss out).

I would think the better course of action would be to cover the event, but make your opinions on the dickwolves/gender stuff clear any time it's relevant to do so.
Click to expand...

but is there an aim to do PAX harm?

i mean, stretch out the hypothetical that such is the pull of RPS that the types who would previously have put on the numerous gender/LGBT orientated PAX panels all withdraw their support, with the intellectually challenging indies soon following suit.

the result being the one top tier gaming expo which goes out of its way to accommodate these kinds of progressive and difficult conversations is now stripped of them and any awareness they bring. serving only to further entrench all previously held viewpoints and increase hostility.
 
Gestault said:
To heavily play devil's advocate here, if an incestuous relationship didn't have the goal of reproduction, in what way is it less valid than those within the spectrum of LBGT identities and relationships? What specific admonitions of the one couldn't also apply to the other?

(Just for context, I understand the stretch of the reasoning, but I'm curious about the response)
Click to expand...
Precisely.
crowphoenix said:
Can you please clarify this, because you're not making a whole lot of sense here.
Click to expand...
Go back a page, right above where you asked.
 
mkenyon said:
No it wouldn't.

Misogyny is a big buzzword right now, and there's a lot of people who are getting on board because it's easy to understand. This is the exact type of fight they're going for. We can go around in circles and talk about this very specific instance, but this is very much a child of the larger issue of sexism. Rape culture doesn't exist in a society free of sexism.

They're absolutely correct in trying to remove it from society. But it's just one social fight, not really a principle. The principle would be non-interference and complete social equality.

I suppose it's not fair of me to focus on those who might not be totally genuine in being upset about the whole situation. I acknowledge that.

Yep.
Click to expand...
So, because more people are becoming involved and taking a stance, they're bandwagon jumpers? Are you trying to say that the majority of people supporting RPS are just looking for a reason to argue?
 
Spirit of Jazz said:
The face of one of the most popular companies in video game culture is essentially encouraging their (immature internet) audience to look down vulnerable minorities such as transcended folk and rape victims because they're clearly just being overly sensitive about these trivial issues. When the rest of the company does nothing to stop him I think it's a pretty good reason to boycott the company.
Click to expand...

You probably mean "transgendered" and no, that's not what happened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Based news : Atari is no longer a French company, main HQ will now be located in Luxembourg
21
254
AJUMP23 replied
[Verge] Ayaneo says selling its Windows gaming handheld ‘is no longer sustainable’
26
235
DeepEnigma replied
Shotgun-O-Rama: Buckshot Fantasy - Doom Mod Madness
Retro Trailer Indie 
0
118
IbizaPocholo replied
Unofficial Paper Mario PC port is in the works
11
337
Grenseal replied
Costco no longer sells Xbox consoles and games
10 11 12 13 14
674
7K
RetroGamingUK replied
Top Bottom